D
Sino-US English Teaching, ISSN 1539-8072
January 2014, Vol. 11, No. 1, 25-39
DAVID
PUBLISHING
Three-Dimensional World of Similes in English Fictional Writing
Nino Kirvalidze
Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
The paper offers a three-dimensional linguosemiotic study of similes, which implies integral analysis of their
semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic aspects. Such an approach to the study of similes is quite new as they have
been hitherto considered either from a literary viewpoint as one of the stylistic expressive means of language or in
the philosophy of language in correlation with metaphor. The three-dimensional linguosemiotic methodology of
research has enabled us: (1) to reveal the cognitive, psychological, and metaphorical essence of similes and work
out the invariant conceptual model which remains unchanged throughout their structural-semantic variation in the
text; (2) to single out pragmatic features of similes, the set of which defines their linguistic status as a
language-in-use construct, i.e., textual phenomenon; (3) to study the denotational-cognitive aspect of similes
pointing out the parameters according to which similes have been differentiated into semantic types and subtypes;
and (4) to generalize the syntactical aspect of similes and define the set of their structural modifications in the text
conditioned both by the intralinguistic regularities and by pragmatic factors. Therefore, we have worked out an
interdisciplinary theory of similes implying the synergy of the data of linguistic, literary, cognitive, and
psychological studies.
Keywords: associative perception, metaphorical mapping, pragmatic features, semantic and structural types of
similes
Introduction: Research Methodology
The present paper is devoted to the complex study of similes aiming to reveal their linguosemiotic
peculiarities. Similes have been studied so far either from a literary viewpoint as one of the stylistic expressive
means of language based on associative perception and mapping of the world (Enkvist, 1973; Galperin, 1977;
Leech & Short, 1981; Kukharenko, 1988; Esser, 1993) or in the context of philosophy of language in correlation
with metaphor (Aristotle, 1954; Black, 1962; Davidson, 1979; Wierzbicka, 1990; Tirrel, 1991; Ortony, 1993;
Todd & Clarke, 1999; Chiappe & Kennedy, 2000; Utsumi, 2007, and others).
Different from them, we offer a three-dimensional linguosemiotic analysis of similes focusing on the
integral study of their semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic aspects. This methodology of simile is very much in line
with Honeck, who, reviewing the state of metaphor research in 1980, remarked that what was needed was to go
beyond semantics and develop a contextual approach which involved “a delicate integration of word-sense,
syntactic form, pragmatic context, speaker-listener relationship, and goals, over time” (p. 42). Such an approach
Nino Kirvalidze, professor, Department of Arts and Sciences, Ilia State University.
26
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
to the study of similes has enabled us to reveal multinatural essence of similes and define them as language-in-use
constructs, the sign status of which varies from a phrasal level to that of a microtext.
The Cognitive, Psychological, and Metaphorical Essence of Simile: Its Invariant Model
One of the universal ways of the world perception is the comparison of one object (a thing or an event) with
another aiming to point out their common and differential features that leads to further penetration into the
essence of the TO (target object) enabling it to be viewed from a new angle. Such a comparative cognition of
reality is verbally explicated either in ordinary comparisons or in a figure of speech called simile. Both of them
represent two diverse processes. Scholars claim that comparison implies the characterization or description of a
TO by bringing it into contact with another one belonging to the same ontological class of things with the purpose
of establishing the degree of their sameness or difference. Comparison takes into consideration all the properties
of the two objects, focusing on the one that is compared (Israel, Harding, & Tobin, 2004, pp. 123-124). Similes
differ from ordinary comparisons. The subject matter, i.e., the TO in similes is characterized through comparison
with another, ontologically heterogeneous object, which results in creating a new subjective image, different
from the original. A simile excludes all the properties of the compared objects except the one which is common to
them (Galperin, 1977, p. 167; Miller, 1993, p. 373). For instance: “The boy is as clever as his mother” is an
ordinary comparison, boy and mother belonging to the same ontological class of objects—human beings whereas
in the textual fragment from Hemingway’s novel For Whom the Bell Tolls (1995), given below, the subject
matter is described with the help of simile:
Thy hair grows now all over thy head the same length like the fur of an animal and it is lovely to feel and I love it
very much and it is beautiful and it flatters and rises like a wheatfield in the wind, when I pass my hand over it. (p. 375)
In this example, the author describes one of the main characters, Maria’s hair, in an expressive, emotive way,
comparing it with such heterogeneous classes of things as the fur of an animal and a wheatfield in the wind, thus
figuratively mapping its wild beauty in a simile.
Similes embody associative poetical cognition of the object world based on the author’s subjective-evaluative
perception of the world and his/her individual gift for metaphorical mapping. Accordingly, we define the linguistic
status of a simile as that of a language-in-use, i.e., textual construct of pragmatic nature in which the TO is
metaphorically determined via comparing it with another, heterogeneous object, fixed as an image in the
speaker’s/writer’s consciousness. This conditions the referential difference of the lingual units involved in the
simile: the name, nominal phrase, or any other verbal construct denoting the TO is always referentially concrete
while the lingual unit, denoting the RO (related object) is devoid of such potential and has only a general meaning.
Accordingly, we define the invariant model of similes (SIM.) as a three-componential structure, in which the TO is
qualified through its metaphorical comparison with a RO via the P comp. (comparative predicate). It can be
expressed symbolically as follows: SIM. → TO—P comp.—RO. We consider this model as a conceptual invariant
of similes as it remains unchanged throughout their structural-semantic variation in the text.
When discussing the invariant model of similes, we find it necessary to review its informational aspect within
the framework of Functional Sentence Perspective Theory which implies providing the addressee with new
information about the subject matter (Daneš, 1974; Firbas, 1992). From the viewpoint of linguistic pragmatics, the
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
27
informative structure of a sentence is always addressee-orientated, i.e., information is regarded as “given” (theme)
or “new” (rheme) only from the addressee’s viewpoint. We assume that in similes both the target and the ROs
represent “given” information—the former being introduced in the text before the simile is realized, and the latter
conveying even older information, for it exists as an image in the consciousness of both the addresser and the
addressee, constituting their social-cultural background knowledge. Therefore, the new information, representing
the semantic nucleus of a simile, is the comparison of its components, which results in creating a new image of the
subject matter. This can be illustrated by Example (1) from Steinbeck’s The Chrysanthemums (1987):
Example (1) -What’s them plants, ma’am?
-Oh, those are chrysanthemums, giant whites and yellows, I raise them every year, bigger than
anybody around here.
-Kind of a long stemmed flower? Looks like a quick puff of colored smoke?—he asked.
-That’s it. What a nice way to describe them. (p. 176)
Subjectivity and Pragmatic Features of Similes
The research has shown that similes are characterized by pragmatic features of modality, evaluation,
transparency, and expressiveness, the set of which forms the notion of subjectivity in language. In modern
communicatively orientated linguistics, the concept of subjectivity has broadened its meaning implying
intersubjectivity and interactionality that are of the speaker/the writer and the listener/the reader.
When considering the pragmatic category of modality, scholars usually distinguish between two parts of
the sentence: the dictum, i.e., what is said, and the modus, i.e., modality, that is, how it is said. Modality
implies the speaker’s cognitive, emotive, evaluative, and/or volitive attitude about what is said. The idea of
differentiating a sentence into dictum and modus was first suggested by Swiss scholar Bally (1955). It found
its further development at the utterance level in the Theory of Speech Acts worked out by Austin (1962),
Searle, Kiefer, and Bierwish (1983), and at the textual level in the works by Russian linguists Galperin (1981)
and Kukharenko (1988).
In fictional writing, the author’s subjective modality interacts with his/her communicative intention. This
paper is based on the statement according to which any literary text, irrespective of its genre or trend, represents
a unique and aesthetic image of the world, created by the author according to their communicative intention and
modality, i.e., their individual vision of the world. Hence, the subjective (i.e., intention and modality) acts as an
organizing axis of a literary work, for, in expressing their vision of the world, the author represents reality in the
way that they consider to be most fitting. However, being the product of the author’s imagination, a literary work
is always based upon objective reality, for there is no source that feeds the imagination other than objective
reality. A literary work, with similes in it, is thus an image of a target fragment of extralinguistic reality, arranged
and mapped in accordance with the author’s subjective modus (Kirvalidze & Kobakhidze, 2006, p. 137).
We carried out a comparative analysis of similes in the works by British and American authors with different
styles and outlooks, and came to the conclusion that all the similes reflect the author’s subjective modality via their
aesthetic-philosophical and metaphorical vision of the world and individual style of writing in general. Besides, in
the process of writing, the author takes into account the type of the literary work, its characters, the epoch, when it
was created, etc.. The comparative analysis of the similes in Warren’s novel All the King’s Men (1996) and
28
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
Capote’s story The Grass Harp (1980) has shown that similes in the former depict the objective reality in gloomy
and dark colors, while in the latter they are very soft and romantic (see Examples 2-3).
Example (2) Warren’s All the King’s Men
(a) It (the word) had disturbed like an itch that comes when your hands are full and you can’t
scratch.
(b) They had worked over his face until it looked like uncooked hamburger.
(c) My brain felt as juiceless as an old sponge left out in the sun for a long time.
(d) I got out of bed very carefully handling myself with awestruck care as though I were a
basket of eggs.
(e) In the town like Mason City… time gets tingled in its own feet and lies down like an old
hound and gives up the struggle.
Example (3) Capote’s The Grass Harp
(a) The answer, a little while in coming was fragile as the flight of a moth.
(b) “You cold?” Dolly said, and I wiggled closer, she was good and warm as the old kitchen.
(c) Sunmotels lilted around like yellow butterflies.
(d) I loved those love collected inside me like a bird in a sun-flower field.
(e) It was almost morning, beginning light was like a flowering foliage at the windows.
Another pragmatic category of similes, which participates in the process of metaphorical mapping together
with the author’s subjective modality, is evaluation. In the arts, and especially in fictional writing, analogy and
contrast are ways of imaginative cognition. The author both contraposes and juxtaposes heterogeneous objects
and in that way reveals the good and the evil, the beautiful and the ugly, the just and the unjust in life. In respect
to similes, we adhere to the following general types and forms of evaluation offered by Wolf (1985): (1) rational
and emotional-expressive; (2) comparative and absolute; and (3) De dicto and De re forms. We consider that the
rational type of evaluation, which is based on the objective qualities of a thing, is realized only in ordinary
comparisons while the emotional-expressive evaluation, reflecting the author’s subjective-metaphorical vision
of things, finds its realization in similes. The same can be said about the second binary opposition of evaluation,
i.e., its absolute and comparative forms. It is evident that only the latter finds its realization in similes. As for the
De dicto and De re forms of evaluation, they are realized in similes in different ways: The former is always
explicit as far as it evaluates only the TO, while the latter, which concerns the whole utterance, is only implied in
it and can be reconstructed whenever necessary. Let us analyze the following textual segment by the different
parameters of evaluation: “Gregory Brabazon, notwithstanding his name, was not a romantic creature. He was a
short, very fat man, as bald as egg” (Maugham, 1992, p. 20). In this example, the author first gives a rational
evaluation of the main character in an absolute form with the help of the qualitative adjectives short and very fat
denoting his objective features, while in the concluding part of the text this form of evaluation is converted into
an emotional-expressive one with the help of the simile—“He was as bald as egg”—in which the author
emphasizes the smoothness and absolute hairlessness of Gregory’s head, giving thus an expressive final touch to
the main hero’s verbal portrait. As for the De dicto form of evaluation, it is explicitly given in the phrase
“Gregory was as bald as egg” while De re form, which is of ironical nature, is only implied in it: “[It was bad,
that] Gregory was as bald as egg”.
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
29
As for the transparency and expressiveness of similes, we consider them as addressee-orientated
intersubjective pragmatic categories. The category of transparency implies such verbal presentation of similes
that helps to eliminate ambiguity and ensure their correct inferring, while the category of expressiveness serves to
produce an adequate aesthetic-emotional effect on the reader. Within the framework of the
anthropocentristic-communicative paradigm of linguistic thought, a literary text is studied via intersubjectivity as
a communication of the author with the reader. However, the existence of the relationship the author—the
text—the reader should not automatically give grounds for the assumption that what the author has conveyed in
his/her work passes on to the reader naturally and easily. In other words, reading does not necessarily result in the
reader’s direct perception of what the author has conveyed in the work. Making sense of a text is an act of
interpretation. It is dynamic and procedural by nature as it emphasizes the mental activities of the reader who is
engaged in building the world of the text which is based on his/her background knowledge of the world in general
(Beaugrande & Dressler, 1981, p. 153). The reader has to activate such knowledge and make inferences in order
to adequately interpret how the author’s ideas and aesthetic vision of things are realized in the text. And if the
reader succeeds in doing this, text analysts consider it as the reader’s “virtual meeting” with the writer (Kirvalidze,
2008, p. 18). The study of similes has shown that the higher the degree of unexpectedness of the author’s
metaphorical associative vision and mapping of the world in similes is, the more difficult it is for the reader to
penetrate into the subtleties of the aesthetic message encoded in them by the author. Correspondingly, the author
finds it necessary to expand the motivation of the comparison, which partly conditions the structural complication
of similes. Example (4) from Red (1995) by Maugham serves to illustrate this:
Example (4) The coconut trees came down to the water’s edge. Not in rows, but arranged with an ordered
formality. They were like a ballet of spinsters, elderly but playful, standing in unnatural
attitudes with the affected graces of a bygone age. (p. 37)
Simile Versus Metaphor
The relationship between metaphor and simile has been a controversial topic in linguistics, philosophy,
psychology, or rhetoric. Some authors, from Aristotle to present times, adopt a classical view of metaphor (the
comparison approach), claiming that metaphors represent reduced forms of simile as both of them are variants of
a unique (or very similar) conceptual process of analogy (Aristotle, 1954; Gentner, 1983; Gentner & Bowdle,
2001; Chiappe & Kennedy, 2000). In other words, metaphors are viewed as similes with an elliptic like and both
“tropes” are treated as equivalent analogy devices. Other authors give arguments and evidence in favor of a
different conception of metaphor and simile (Black, 1962; Davidson, 1979; Glucksberg & Keysar, 1990;
Wierzbicka, 1990; Ortony, 1993; Aisenman, 1999; Israel et al., 2004; Utsumi, 2007). We share their opinion that
similes are cognitively and discursively different from metaphors, although they are obviously related. We also
adhere to Israel et al.’s (2004) hypothesis that “the difference between metaphor and simile may have less to do
with the kinds of properties they map than with the mapping process itself” (p. 132).
We claim that both metaphor and simile are based upon an analogy and a traceable similarity between two
things which are otherwise entirely dissimilar. Metaphor suggests the process of equating two heterogeneous
objects or events, thus having synthetic and diffusive semantics, which determines simultaneous realization of
two different meanings. Simile, on the other hand, suggests two different simultaneous processes, as it brings
30
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
together and at the same time separates two heterogeneous objects. Hence, the TO in similes only resembles the
RO and is by no means equated to it, both of them maintaining their originality and independence.
The contextual-semantic study of the following structural elements in similes—like/to look like, as, as if, as
though, to seem—has enabled us to regard like as the universal marker of comparison for the English language since
it is most frequently used, establishing the relation of similarity between heterogeneous objects. Almost the same
meaning is conveyed by the verb to seem, which, according to our research, is least frequently used in these verbal
constructs. For example: “The overloaded tree-house gave an evil creak. From my vantage point its tenants seemed
a single creature, a many-legged, many-eyed spider” (Capote, 1980, p. 98). The language marker as establishes the
relation of qualitative analogy between the compared objects. For example: “Mrs. Dundee saw the long white face
of Mr. Markham, thin and smooth as a piece of worn soap” (Hudson, 1978, p. 44). As for the two-component
markers of comparison as if and as though, we consider them as synonyms, the first part of them as equating two
heterogeneous events, while the other part if/though rejects the equation due to the meaning of condition, implied in
it. Besides, these structural elements are capable of merging two heterogeneous events so that both of them could
maintain independence of their predications, realized in different clauses (see Examples 5-6).
Example (5) Verena was leaning a hand on Amos Legrand’s head as if he were a walking stick. (Capote,
1980, p. 99)
Example (6) Catherine tugged at my head as though it were an apple latched to an unyielding bough.
(Capote, 1980, p. 35)
The absence of a formal indication of comparison in the metaphor makes the analogy it is based on more
subtle to perceive. This difference between simile and metaphor leads some scholars to the belief that metaphor is
more emotional and consequently more expressive, that it is restricted to more literary style, while simile is
believed to be more logical and therefore better fitted to lend precision to the expressed thought due to which it
can be used in any type of style even in the most prosaic (e.g., Sosnovskaya, 1974, p. 84). We think that this
assertion cannot be readily accepted, because both poetical similes and poetical metaphors are individual
subjective creations and the degree of their expressiveness depends entirely upon the unexpectedness and
freshness of the discovered association.
Semantic Typology of Similes
We base semantic typology of similes on their propositional configuration which is analysed in terms of the
argument-predicate relations of symbolic logic, worked out by Fillmore (1968). According to Fillmore’s theory,
the organizing kernel of the proposition is reperesented by a predicate whose semantics determines its argument
configuration, while each argument is characterized by its semantic role (i.e.,“deep case”) in relation to the
predicate (Fillmore, 1968, pp. 45-47). Such an approach to the concept of proposition enables us to determine
those semantic parameters on the basis of which we single out four main semantic types of similes: extensional,
intensional, panoramic, and generalizing similes.
Extensional Similes
Extensional similes describe the TO according to its external data through its comparison with another
heterogeneous object on the basis of intensification of their common feature which serves as a motivation for the
comparison (see Example 7):
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
31
Example (7) Salvatore had hands enormous and strong as legs of mutton, coarse and hard from constant toil,
but when he bathed his children, holding them so tenderly, drying them with delicate care,
upon my words, they were soft as flowers. (Maugham, 1988, p. 24)
In the process of perceiving the world, the speaker focuses his attention either on discrete things or on events and
situations. Accordingly, we differentiate similes into semantically simple and complex types. We define simple
similes as constructs, orientated on the associative perception of discrete entities, while complex similes are based on
the synthetic perception of the world, juxtaposing and comparing two heterogenous events or situations that turns the
simile into a polypropositional structure. For example: “Then the Boss put one hand out to touch her, like a bear,
touching something with a clumsy exploratory paw” (Warren, 1996, p. 216). One of the structural peculiarities of
polypropositional similes is that each of the propositions under the comparison has its own predicate (the
above-given example serves as an illustration to it). Yet, the analysis of literary texts has revealed a number of similes
in which the predicate in the related proposition, being identical with the one in the target proposition, can be made
partly or fully implicit, represented correspondingly by a verbal substitute or a zero predicate (see Examples 8-9):
Example (8) Sugar-boy sat over in a corner holding a glass between both hands. Out of the glass he would
take little finicking sips, after each sip lifting his head up the way a chicken does when it drinks.
(Warren, 1996, p. 327)
Example (9) The plum pudding quite melted in one’s mouth and Amy revelled in jellies like a fly (0) in a
honeypot. (Alcott, 1990, p. 173)
Intensional Similes
Intensional similes (from Lat. intensio “inner strength or force”) describe the TO according to its inner or
mental state. The concept “inner states” implies both human psychic constants and situationally-determined
changeable emotions (Lurie, 1979). Accordingly, in intensional similes the subject matter, semantically
represented either by the experiencer (i.e., an argument denoting a human being in some mental state or
experiencing some emotions) or a partitive1 of the experiencer, always denotes a human being directly or
indirectly via some innate qualitative features (see Examples 10-11):
Example (10) Melanie was as simple as earth, as good as bread, as transparent as spring water. (Mitchell,
1979, p. 89)
Example (11) When I heard her voice on the telephone that night, my heart took a little leap and kerplunk
like a frog into a lilypond. (Warren, 1996, p. 294)
Very often intensional similes describe human beings via their feelings, emotions and mood.
Correspondingly, the TO in such similes is represented by qualitative abstract nouns, such as love, smile, horror,
courage, pleasure, panic, sadness, nostalgia, mood, excitement, thought, look, voice, laughter, and so forth
which create a stable sphere of intensionality in the English language (see Example 12):
Example (12) She said in an aghast whisper: “I kissed his hand!” beginning to laugh, screaming with
laughter, trying herself to deaden the sound by putting her hand over her mouth, the laughter
spilling between her fingers like vomit. (Warren, 1996, p. 147)
1
An “argument-partitive” denotes only part of the whole, semantically representing a split subject, the phenomenon which is
based on part-whole relations (Lyons, 1977, pp. 311-317).
32
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
The analysis of literary texts has enabled us to single out intensional similes of zeugma type with a
lexically identical predicate both in the target and related propositions. The zeugma effect is created by the
verbal predicate which in one proposition is used in its primary, direct meaning, while in the other it is
metaphorically used in its transferred, figurative meaning. For example: “He spilled his greatness like you spill
a liquid when the bottle breaks” (Warren, 1996, p. 239). In this example, to spill in the target proposition (He
spilled his greatness) is used in its figurative meaning metaphorically, materializing the meaning to lose one’s
greatness accidentally, while in the compared proposition like you spill a liquid when the bottle breaks this
word realizes its literal meaning.
Panoramic (Background) Similes
Panoramic (background) similes are used to designate different natural phenomena, events, or situations
against the background of which the plot of the narrative develops. The main peculiarity of these similes lies in
the fact that the subject matter in them is represented by, so-called, “argument-elementive” indicating an
unanimate active doer of some action, or a thing in some state, such as natural forces or phenomena, celestial
bodies, parts of the universe, etc. (e.g., the sun, the moon, the sky, rivers, oceans). Accordingly, the TO in this
kind of similes is expressed either by astronyms, hydronyms, floronyms or phenomonyms (i.e., names, denoting
different natural phenomena). We differentiate this type of similes into dynamic and static subtypes, the former
being realized with the help of verbs denoting action, whereas the latter is based on the qualitative adjectival or
verbal static predication (see Examples 13-14).
Example (13) Dynamic background similes: The sun bounced like a ball against the clouds and the park
seemed ready to jump and take off. (Hudson, 1978, p. 39)
The creeks crook their way down into the little river that crawls through the woods like a
green alligator. (Capote, 1980, p. 56)
Example (14) Static background similes: It was a feathery rain fine as gauze curtain. (Stone, 1976, p. 101)
The Montana sunset lay between two mountains like a gigantic bruise from which dark
arteries spread themselves over a poisoned sky. (Fitzgerald, 1979, p. 34)
Generalizing Similes
Generalizing similes semantically proceed from the fore-text, logically summing up the described situations
and events via their generalization and subjective evaluation. Hence, the TO in generalizing similes is
semantically polypropositional represented by the indexical it which refers anaphorically to the chain of
described situations and events, previously identified in the text (see Example 15):
Example (15) I thought Catherine was dead. She looked dead. Her face was grey, the part of it that I could
see. Down below, under the light, the doctor was sewing up the great long forceps-spread,
thick-edged wound. Another doctor in a mask gave the anaesthetic. Two nurses in masks
handed things. It looked like a drawing of the Inquisition. (Hemingway, 1997, p. 234)
In this textual fragment from Hemingway’s novel Farewell to Arms (1997), the indexical it refers back to
the described situation as a whole rather than one specific situation conveyed in each sentence, constituting
the microtext.
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
33
Structural Types of Similes
Having studied the syntactical aspect of similes in emotive literary texts, we came to the conclusion that
similes vary structurally in the text, and this is mostly conditioned by the set of pragmatic factors of
intersubjectivity and interactionality. The analysis of similes showed that they can vary according to the author’s
communicative intention and subjective modality as well as under the influence of the addressee-orientated
categories of transparency and expressiveness. As a result, we have singled out seven structural types similes the
analysis of which we offer below.
Analytical and Synthetic Similes
Analytical similes are realized in a three-componential structure, having for its central component a P comp.
through which the heterogeneous objects are brought together within the conceptual model (see Examples 16-17):
Example (16) His mouth was perfect like a Cupid’s bow. (Hardy, 1986, p. 47)
Example (17) The sun hid behind the great torn leaves of the plantain and then shot a gold ray like
outstretched paw of a Persian cat. (Maugham, 1995, p. 49)
Synthetic similes are represented only by two components, the language markers of comparison like and
look like having merged with the name, denoting the RO. This causes the change of their linguistic status from
that of a functional word to a suffixal morpheme which reduces a three-componential structure of simile to an
attributive syntagma. Here are some examples of synthetic similes (see Examples 18-22):
Example (18) The raftlike tree-house seemed to be floating over the vaporish waters. (Capote, 1980, 102)
Example (19) She saw a fresh flowerlike face. (Christie, 1988, p. 281)
Example (20) Rosemary put her arm round those thin, birdlike shoulders of the girl. (Mansfield, 1988, p. 266)
Example (21) Three little spiderlike steps were all Fenella saw. (Mansfield, 2011, p. 215)
Example (22) There were brown cliffs with deep green lakes in the hollows and flat blade-like trees that
waved from root to top. (Woolf, 2011, p. 192)
We consider all these examples as a synthetic structural type of similes that can be reconstructed in an
analytical form if necessary. For example: “The tree-house seemed to be floating over the vaporish waters like
a raft”, “She saw a fresh face that looked like a flower”, and so forth. The results of our research have
confirmed that analytical similes significantly outnumber synthetic ones, emphasizing once again the
analyticity of the English language structure.
Ordinary and Inverted Similes
In ordinary similes the TO stands in pre-position to the RO (For example: “All the Tarleton girls were as
unruly as colts and wild as March hairs” (Mitchell, 1979, p. 55)) whereas in inverted similes, due to the
dislocation of their components, it is the RO that precedes the TO, the motivation of the comparison being
syntactically emphasized, thus adding more expressiveness to the simile (see Examples 23-25).
Example (23) Indeed, like gulls resting on a ship’s mast, they were sitting in the absolute tower of the tree.
(Capote, 1980, p. 69)
Example (24) Like an inspired frog, Riley hopped and caught hold of one of the sheriff’s dangling boots.
(Capote, 1980, p. 53)
Example (25) Dull as a flower, Stephany sat down on a stone. (Hardy, 1986, p. 89)
34
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
Patent and Latent Similes
We define as patent those similes in which the comparative predication is always explicitly realized by a
three-componential structure. For example: “The rain had thickened like a deepening scale of piano notes, it
struck its blackest chord and drummed into a downpour that did not at once reach us” (Capote, 1980, p. 77). In
opposition to patent similes, we define as latent those similes in which the comparison of heterogeneous objects is
only implied, being represented in a reduced form by an attributive syntagma that can be reconstructed in a simile,
when necessary (see Examples 26-28).
Example (26) So pretty she was, so self-possessed. She frightened him. Those cornflower-blue eyes, the turn
of that creamy neck, her delicate carves. (Galswarthy, 1974, p. 76)
Example (27) Scarlett’s thick black eyebrows slanted upward, cutting a startling oblique line in her
magnolia-white skin. (Mitchell, 1979, p. 5)
Example (28) Harwey Klausner was a whole head taller than Michael and had apple-red cheeks. (Tushnet,
1978, p. 18)
The italicized attributive syntagmas in the above-given examples can be treated as latent forms of similes as
they can be reconstructed in the three-componential sturcture of similes: “Those cornflower-blue eyes” = Those
eyes that were as blue as cornflowers; “her magnolia-white skin” = Her skin was as white as magnolia; and
“apple-red cheeks” = cheeks, that were as red as an apple. The research has revealed that the comparative
predication can be made implicit mostly in those similes in which the TO is qualified according to some color.
We consider that such a reduction is quite natural as the information implied in an attributive syntagma is not
communicatively relevant since it constitutes the shared part of the background knowledge of the communicants
(i.e., the auther and the reader).
Mono- and Polyrelated Similes
This kind of structural opposition of similes is based on the number of the ROs participating in the
comparison. Accordingly, in monorelated similes, the TO is characterized via its comparison with only one
RO while in polyrelated similes the number of ROs increases resulting in multiple emphasis of the feature, the
author focuses on. It should be noted that the degree of expressiveness of polyrelated similes depends upon
the number of the ROs: The more their number in the simile is, the more expressive and dynamic the simile
becomes. In the textual fragment below from Galsworthy’s In Chancery (1974), the author depicts in a most
expressive way the feeling of relief mingled with shame and anger, Soames experiences after he has divorced
Irene and decided to marry Annette. In order to emphasise the need of rest and peace of mind that Soames
lacks, the author uses a prolonged simile, introducing into the text one by one heterogeneous objects of wide
range by comparison with which the vital importance of rest and peace of mind is metaphorically stated (see
Example 29).
Example (29) Rest—peace! Let a poor fellow rest! Let not worry and shame and anger chase like evil
night-birds in his head! Like those doves perched half-sleeping on their dovecot, like the furry
creatures in the woods on the far side, and the simple folks in their cottages, like the trees and
the river itself, whitening fast in twilight, like the darkening cornflower-blue sky where, stars
were coming up – let him cease from himself and rest! (Galsworthy, 1974, p. 227)
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
35
Mono- and Polymotivated Similes
In the former type, there is only one common property that serves as a motivation for the comparison
realized in a simile, while in the latter the number of such properties increases, being explicated mostly by
adjectives (see Examples 30-32).
Example (30) Then I walked straight out of the door and across the long reception room over the carpet
which was deep and soft as the turf of a shaven lawn in spring. (Warren, 1996, p. 248)
Example (31) Judge Cool clutched his fists and they were hard and hairy as coconuts. (Capote, 1980, p. 54)
Example (32) He was thin, tall and straight as a steel rod. (Chandler, 1983, p. 114)
Retardant (Delayed) Similes
The structural peculiarity of this kind of similes is conditioned by the fact that the figurativeness of the
comparison is revealed not directly in the comparative predication, but later. In such cases, the TO of the
comparison is primarily introduced into the text by the quantifier “something” which, due to its general
meaning, identifies the TO in an abstract way as a representative of the class of things (in its wide sense)
without its individualization. Hence, the figurativeness of the comparison is realized later, only after
introducing into the text a taxonomic name or nominal phrase which designates the TO and makes the
meaning of the quantifier concrete, thus turning the comparison into a simile. Accordingly, we define a
retardant simile as a textual phenomenon, characterized with double expressiveness that is marked both
lexically and syntactically (see Example 33).
Example (33) A doctor came out followed by a nurse. He held something in his two hands that looked like a
freshly skinned rabbit and hurried across the corridor with it and through another door. I went
down to the door he had gone into and found them in the room doing things to a new-born
child. (Hemingway, 1997, p. 234)
Example (33) shows that the structure of the retardant simile is split as the first part represents an ordinary
comparison (something… that looked like freshly skinned rabbit), which acquires transparency and figurativeness
later, after bringing into the text a taxonomic nominal phrase (a new-born child) that concretizes the meaning of
the quantifier something and converts the ordinary comparison into a simile, logically inferreing that it was a
new-born child that looked like a freshly skinned rabbit. This logical conclusion is only implied in the given text.
But there are cases when the identification of the TO, introduced by the quantifier something, is explicated
emphatically with the help of a special identifying construction (see Example 34).
Example (34) Trembling all over, I stole to the window. There, pattering up and down the asphalt path, was
something white, that would bounce like a ball or take short flights like a bird or glide slowly
like a wraith. Then realization came to my disordered mind—it was Eustace in his white night
shirt. (Forster, 1988, p. 226)
We consider this textual segment as a microtext represented by a retardant simile with a split structure. It is
only in the final identifying construction (it was Eustace in his white night shirt), that the reader finds out that
something, that would bounce like a ball or take short flights like a bird or glide slowly like a wraith, was Eustace.
We think that the use of retardant similes and the introduction of the subject matter into the text with the help of
the quantifier manifests not only the author’s metaphorical associative mapping of the world but his
36
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
communicative strategy as well, which is aimed at stimulating the reader’s interest to get the information
necessary for the identification of the TO as fast as possible.
Similes With an Extended Motivation
Extension of a motivation in similes is partly conditioned by such addressee-orientated factors as the
transparency and expressiveness of an utterance. It has already been mentioned, that we view similes via
intersubjectivity according to which the speaker/the author not only focuses on the metaphorical mapping of the
world in similes but, while doing it, he/she takes into account the factor of the addressee. Accordingly, in cases
when the degree of the associative metaphorical vision of the TO is rather unexpected and subjective the author
finds it necessary to expand and explain in details the features that serve as a motivation for such a poetical
characterization of the subject matter. The research has enabled us to differentiate similes with an extended
motivation into three subtypes: (1) similes with a detached motivation, (2) similes with a detached allusive
motivation, and (3) frame-structured similes.
In the first subtype of similes with an extanded motivation, the author considers it necessary to extend the
motivation of the comparison and single it out in a detached structure in order to ensure the transparency of the
aesthetic message conveyed in the simile (see Example 35).
Example (35) Cora Jenkins was one of the least of the citizens of Melton. She was what people referred to
when they wanted to be polite, as a Negress. She had been in Melton for forty years. Born
there. Would die there probably. She worked for the Studevants, who treated her like a dog.
She stood it. Had to stand it: Cora was like a tree—once rooted, she stood, in spite of storms
and strife, wind and rocks, in the earth. (Hughes, 1990, p. 257)
This microtext is devoted to Cora Jenkins, the main character of the story. From the very beginning, the
author depicts her character sketch in a most impressive way employing different lexical and syntactical
strategies which embody both Cora’s direct, i.e., objective, and metaphorical associative characterization.
While doing it, the author uses two similes. We consider the first of them (they treated her like a dog) to be trite.
Being a commonly reproduced lexical unit, it does not represent any difficulties for the perception. Hence, any
reader can make correct inferences concerning the humiliation Cora had to endure. Yet she stood it because,
according to the author’s subjective evaluative vision, she was like a tree. The similarity between these two
heterogeneous objects brought together is metaphorically explicated in a detached construction—once rooted,
she stood, in spite of storms and strife, wind and rocks, in the earth—emphasizing such features of Cora as her
vitality, adaptability and endurance.
The second subtype of similes with an extended motivation is based on an allusive comparison. In order to
characterize the TO, the author brings it against some heterogeneous object or event from mythology, the Bible,
folklore, or literary sources, emphasizing the feature that stands for the motivation for such comparison. The full
impact of an allusion and the idea it is employed to suggest, depends upon the cultural background knowledge of
the reader which enables them to penetrate deeper into the subtleties of the aesthetic message encoded in the
simile by the author. The knowledge and experience stored in our minds being different, the author finds it
necessary to extend the allusive motivation in a detached form, thus creating a new image of the subject matter
via his associative vision of the world (see Example 36).
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
37
Example (36) There is nothing women love so much as the drunkard, the hellion, the roarer, the reprobate.
They love him because, they—women, I mean are like the bees in Samson’s parable in the
bible. They like to build their honeycomb in the carcass of a dead lion.
Out of the strong shall come forth sweetness. (Warren, 1996, p. 332)
In this textual segment, the author metaphorically characterizes women who love rough and reprobate men
only, because they expect ardent love and acute pleasure and emotions from them. On the basis of this feature of
women, i.e., their passion and craving for such men, the author associates them with the bees in Samson’s parable
that liked building their honeycomb in the carcass of a dead lion. The motive for bringing together women and the
bees from Samson’s parable being only implied within the simile structure, the author finds it necessary to single
it out in a new line in a detached construction, syntactically and graphically emphasizing its logical
importance—out of the strong shall come forth sweetness.
The third subtype, i.e., frame-structured similes consist of three parts that are interconnected semantically
and structurally: (1) the introductory part where the simile is introduced for the first time; (2) the middle part
which explains and extends the motivation of the associative comparison manifested in the simile; and (3) the
final, concluding part in which the initial simile is repeated, thus framing and binding the textual fragment into
the structural whole (see Example 37).
Example (37) I sat down and then an invisible door on the far side of the room slid open and a man stepped
through and the door closed behind him. I looked him over. He might have been thirty-five or
sixty-five. He was ageless. His eyes were deep, far too deep. They were depthless drugged
eyes of the somnambulist, that were like the well I read about once. It was nine hundred
years old, in an old castle. You could drop a stone into it and wait. You could listen and wait
and then you would give up waiting and laugh and then just as you were ready to turn away a
faint, minute splash would come back up to you from the bottom of the well, so tiny, so remote
that you could hardly believe a well like that were possible. And his eyes were deep like that
well. (Chandler, 1983, p. 114)
This microtext represents a description of the main character. The author depicts his verbal portrait, focusing
on his depthless drugged eyes of the somnambulist that were most striking and appealing in his appearance. To
emphasize their depthlessness, the author compares the main character’s eyes with the well he read about once.
He employs a frame structured simile which consists of three semantically interrelated segments. In the initial
part, the simile is introduced for the first time—“They were depthless drugged eyes of the somnambulist, that
were like the well I read about once”. The use of the definite article before the noun, denoting the RO (the well) in
the structure of the simile, implies that the speaker’s metaphorical association focuses on a concrete well and
situation that constitute part of his cultural background knowledge and this information is explicated in the
phrase—I read about once. Taking into account the factor of the addressee, the author considers it necessary to
describe the well and depict in an impressive and extended way the details which substantiate the statement
conveyed in the simile, thus making it transparent for the inferring. After such an extension of the motivation the
reader is likely to lose the thread of the initial simile, so the author repeats it in the final part of the microtext,
logically and syntactically binding the textual segment into a frame structure.
38
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
Conclusions
Thus, the three-dimensional linguosemiotic research of similes in English fictional writing has enabled
us to reveal their semantic, structural-syntactic, and pragmatic features on the basis of which we define the
sign essence of similes as that of language-in-use, i.e., textual constructs of pragmatic nature, embodying the
author’s subjective associative metaphorical vision and mapping of the world. The variety of the semantic
types of similes worked out in the paper manifests their nominative (designative) diapason, reflecting the
author’s aesthetic-evaluative cognition and mapping of the real world, while the taxonomy of their structural
modifications serves to demonstrate the changeability of the sign status of similes, ranging from a phrasal
level to that of a microtext.
References
Aisenman, R. A. (1999). Structure-mapping and the simile-metaphor preference. Metaphor and Symbol, 13(1), 45-51.
Alcott, L. (1990). Little women. London: Holland Enterprizes Ltd..
Aristotle. (1954). Rhetoric. (W. R. Roberts Trans.). New York: Modern Library.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. London: Oxford University Press.
Bally, C. (1955). General linguistics and problems of French linguistics (in Russian). Moscow: Nauka.
Beaugrande, R. A., & Dressler, W. (1981). An introduction to text linguistics. New York: Longman.
Black, M. (1962). Models and metaphors: Studies in language and philosophy. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Capote, T. (1980). The grass harp. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Chandler, R. (1983). Farewell, my lovely. Moscow: Raduga Publishers.
Chiappe, D. L., & Kennedy, J. M. (2000). Are metaphors elliptical similes?. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29(4), 371-398.
Christie, A. (1988). Finessing the King. English short stories of the 20th century. Moscow: Raduga Publishers.
Daneš, F. (1974). Functional sentence perspective and the organization of the text. In F. Daneš (Ed.), Papers on functional sentence
perspective (pp. 106-128). Prague: Academia.
Davidson, D. (1979). What metaphors mean. In S. Sacks (Ed.), On metaphor (pp. 29-45). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Enkvist, N. E. (1973). Linguistic stylistics. The Hague: Mouton.
Esser, J. (1993). English linguistic stylistics. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Fillmore, C. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach, & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 1-88). New York: Holt,
Reinehart and Winston.
Firbas, J. (1992). Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fitzgerald, S. (1979). The diamond as big as ritz. Selected short stories. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Forster, E. (1988). The story of panic. English short stories of the 20th century. Moscow: Raduga Publishers.
Galperin, I. R. (1977). Stylistics (2nd ed.). Moscow: Higher School Press.
Galperin, I. R. (1981). Text as the object for linguistic studies (in Russian). Moscow: Nauka.
Galsworthy, J. (1974). In chancery. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 145-170.
Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B. (2001). Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 16, 223-247.
Glucksberg, S., & Keysar, B. (1990). Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity. Psychological Review, 97, 3-18.
Hardy, T. (1986). A pair of blue eyes. U.S.: St. Martin’s Press Inc..
Hemingway, E. (1995). For whom the bell tolls. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Hemingway, E. (1997). Farewell to arms. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Honeck, R. P. (1980). Figurative language and cognitive science—Past, present, and future. In R. Honeck, & R. Hoffman (Eds.),
Cognition and figurative language (pp. 28-45). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hudson, H. (1978). The tenant. Eleven American stories. Moscow: International Relations.
Hughes, L. (1990). Cora unashamed. Modern American short stories. Moscow: Progress Publishers.
Israel, M., Harding, J. R., & Tobin, V. (2004). On simile. In M. Achard, & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Language, culture, and mind
(pp. 123-135). Stanford: CSLI Publications.
THREE-DIMENSIONAL WORLD OF SIMILES IN ENGLISH FICTIONAL WRITING
39
Kennedy, J. M., & Chiappe, D. L. (1999). What makes a metaphor stronger than a simile?. Metaphor and Symbol, 13(1), 63-69.
Kirvalidze, N. (2006). The author’s modality and stratificational structure of a literary text in modern English. International
Refereed Multidisciplinary Scientific Journal, 1(January-June), 195-200.
Kirvalidze, N. (2008). A university course in text linguistics. Tbilisi: Ilia State University Press.
Kirvalidze, N., & Kobakhidze, S. (2006). Metaphorical thought and similes (in Georgian). Tbilisi: Ilia State University Press.
Kukharenko, V. (1988). Text interpretation (in Russian). Leningrad: Prosveshchenje.
Leech, G., & Short, M. (1981). Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. London: Longman.
Lurie, Y. (1979). Inner states. Mind, LXXXVIII, 241-257.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mansfield, K. (1988). A cup of tea. English short stories of the 20th century. Moscow: Raduga Publishers.
Mansfield, K. (2011). The voyage. In Ch. Dolley (Ed.), The Penguin book of English short stories. London: Penguin Books Ltd..
Maugham, W. S. (1988). Salvatore. English short stories of the 20th century. Moscow: Raduga Publishers.
Maugham, W. S. (1992). The razor’s edge. In W. S. Maugham (Ed.), Stories. Tbilisi: Arili Publishers.
Maugham, W. S. (1995). Red. In W. S. Maugham (Ed.), Selected stories. Tbilisi: Ganatleba.
Miller, G. (1993). Images and models, similes and metaphors. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 357-400).
New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mitchell, M. (1979). Gone with the wind. New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Ortony, A. (1993). The role of similarity in similes and metaphors. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 342-356).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J., Kiefer, F., & Bierwish, M. (1983). Speech act theory and pragmatics (Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy). Dordrecht,
Boston, and London: Dordrecht Reidel Publishing Company.
Sosnovskaya, V. B. (1974). Analytical reading. Moscow: Higher School.
Steinbeck, J. (1987). The Chrysanthemums. In D. Hall (Ed.), To read fiction. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc..
Stone, I. (1976). Immortal wife. New York: Pocket Books, Inc..
Tirrell, L. (1991). Reductive and nonreductive simile theories of metaphor. The Journal of Philosophy, 7, 337-358.
Todd, Z., & Clarke, D. D. (1999). When is a dead rainbow not like a dead rainbow? Investigating differences between metaphor and
simile. In L. Cameron, & G. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 249-268). New York: Cambridge University
Press.
Tushnet, L. (1978). The Klausners. Eleven American stories. Moscow: International Relations.
Utsumi, A. (2007). Interpretive diversity explains metaphor-simile distinction. Metaphor and Symbol, 22, 291-312.
Warren, R. P. (1996). All the king’s men. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House.
Wierzbicka, A. (1990). Comparison-gradation-metaphor. In N. D. Arutjunova (Ed.), Theory of metaphor (pp. 133-152) (in Russian).
Moscow: Progress.
Wolf, E. (1985). Functional semantics of evaluation (in Russian). Moscow: Nauka.
Woolf, V. (2011). Kew gardens. In Ch. Dolley (Ed.), The Penguin book of English short stories. London: Penguin Books Ltd..