Talk:Metaphor: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Anthony.Sebastian
imported>Bruce M. Tindall
(→‎Tenor and vehicle: new section)
Line 20: Line 20:


::Thank ''you'' for the initial feedback, and for the compliment on the rewrite. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 03:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
::Thank ''you'' for the initial feedback, and for the compliment on the rewrite. [[User:Anthony.Sebastian|Anthony.Sebastian]] 03:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
== Tenor and vehicle ==
What would you think about adding the terms "tenor" and "vehicle" as synonyms for "target" and "source" in this article? I've always heard those terms rather than the ones that are currently in the article -- are "target/source" used more in linguistics, while "tenor/vehicle" are used more in literary studies, maybe?
It might also be useful to the reader to explain where each pair of terms comes from, and in what contexts they are used. I know (from the New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics) that I.A. Richards introduced, or re-introduced, or resurrected, "tenor and vehicle" in 1936 in his "Philosophy of Rhetoric," but I am ignorant about the other terms (and that reference book doesn't tell me anything about them).  [[User:Bruce M. Tindall|Bruce M. Tindall]] 20:37, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:37, 31 October 2009

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
Addendum [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition Expression directing the mind to understand and experience one kind of thing in terms of another. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup categories Linguistics, Biology and Literature [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

Intoduction

I find the Intro to Metaphor a bit too abbreviated. I'd like it if it explained more, perhaps exemplified, and if it introduced the broader context of metaphor. Perhaps it needs to wait for the article to develop first. Personal opinions. --Anthony.Sebastian 03:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Jakobson

It seems to me that any discussion of metaphor really should include a discussion of the rather specialized way in which Roman Jakobson talks about metaphor (in opposition to metonymy). Not that I'm really qualified to do so, of course...

I just looked at the WP metaphor article, and they don't have any discussion of Jakobson either. If we did it, it would be one way our article could be made more useful than WP's.

Brian P. Long 04:12, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Lede paragraph

I'm not a college undergraduate, the person for whom, supposedly CZ is being written, but a college grad, in English, moreover, and I think that this lede para *may* be suitable for a doctoral dissertation (meaning that it's essentially unreadable and incomprehensible), but certainly not for a general purpose encycl. Sorry to whoever wrote it -- I'm sure you meant well, but it *really* needs major restructuring.... Hayford Peirce 03:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

You take my breath away, or knock me over with a feather, so excellent is the rewrite! Thanks! Hayford Peirce 15:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the initial feedback, and for the compliment on the rewrite. Anthony.Sebastian 03:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Tenor and vehicle

What would you think about adding the terms "tenor" and "vehicle" as synonyms for "target" and "source" in this article? I've always heard those terms rather than the ones that are currently in the article -- are "target/source" used more in linguistics, while "tenor/vehicle" are used more in literary studies, maybe?

It might also be useful to the reader to explain where each pair of terms comes from, and in what contexts they are used. I know (from the New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics) that I.A. Richards introduced, or re-introduced, or resurrected, "tenor and vehicle" in 1936 in his "Philosophy of Rhetoric," but I am ignorant about the other terms (and that reference book doesn't tell me anything about them). Bruce M. Tindall 20:37, 31 October 2009 (UTC)