literal and figurative language

Literal usage confers meaning to words, in the sense of the meaning words have by themselves,{{cite book |last1=Jaszczolt |first1=Katarzyna M. |last2=Turner |first2=Ken |title=Meaning Through Language Contrast. Volume 2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ToPN1kTaBMUC&pg=PA141 |access-date=20 December 2012 |year=2003 |publisher=John Benjamins Publishing |isbn=978-1588112071 |pages=141–}} for example as defined in a dictionary. It maintains a consistent meaning regardless of the context,{{cite book |last=Glucksberg |first=Sam |title=Understanding Figurative Language:From Metaphor to Idioms: From Metaphor to Idioms |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=rKX7qcQerLcC |access-date=20 December 2012 |year=2001 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0195111095}} with the intended meaning of a phrase corresponding exactly to the meaning of its individual words.{{cite book |last=Harley |first=Trevor A. |title=The Psychology of Language: From Data to Theory |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yKbAhoSFcbwC&pg=PA293 |access-date=20 December 2012 |year=2001 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-0863778674 |pages=293–}} On the other hand, figurative use of language (a later offshoot being the term figure of speech{{cn|date=February 2025}}) is the use of words or phrases with a meaning that does make literal sense but that encourages certain mental associations or reflects a certain type of truth,{{cite book |last1=Montgomery |first1=Mar |last2=Durant |first2=Alan |last3=Fabb |first3=Nigel |author4=Tom Furniss |author5=Sara Mills |author5-link=Sara Mills (linguist) |title=Ways of Reading: Advanced Reading Skills for Students of English Literature |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BhrYfYdHuN8C&pg=PA117 |access-date=23 December 2012 |year=2007 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-0415346337 |pages=117–}} perhaps a more artistically presented one.

{{main|Figure of speech}}

Uses of figurative language, or figures of speech, can take multiple forms, such as simile, metaphor, hyperbole, and many others.{{cite book|last1=Montgomery|first1=Martin|last2=Durant|first2=Alan|last3=Fabb|first3=Nigel |author4=Tom Furniss |author5=Sara Mills|title=Ways of Reading: Advanced Reading Skills for Students of English Literature|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=BhrYfYdHuN8C&pg=PA117|access-date=3 April 2013|date=2007|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0203597118|pages=117–}} Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of Literature says that figurative language can be classified in five categories: resemblance or relationship, emphasis or understatement, figures of sound, verbal games, and errors.{{cite book|author=Merriam-Webster, inc.|title=Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of Literature|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eKNK1YwHcQ4C|access-date=23 April 2013|year=1995|publisher=Merriam-Webster|isbn=978-0877790426|page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=eKNK1YwHcQ4C&pg=PA415 415]}}

A simileOrigin: 1350–1400; Middle English < Latin: image, likeness, comparison, noun use of neuter of similis similar. {{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/179881|work=simile, n.|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Simile}} is a comparison of two things, indicated by some connective, usually "like", "as", "than", or a verb such as "resembles" to show how they are similar.Kennedy, X. J., and Dana Gioia. An Introduction To Poetry. 13th ed. Longman Pub Group, 2007. p. 594.

: Example: "His cheeks were like roses, his nose like a cherry.../And the beard on his chin was as white as the snow." (emph added)—Clement Clark Moore{{cite book|last1=Terban|first1=Marvin|last2=joi|first2=Giulio Maestro|title=It Figures!: Fun Figures of Speech|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Gk_Le0B46BEC&pg=PT12|access-date=23 December 2012|year=1993|publisher=Houghton Mifflin Harcourt|isbn=978-0395665916|pages=12–}}

A metaphorOrigin: 1525–35; < Latin metaphora < Greek metaphorá a transfer, akin to metaphérein to transfer. See meta-, -phore{{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/117328|work=metaphor, n.|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Metaphor}} is a figure of speech in which two "essentially unlike things" are shown to have a type of resemblance or create a new image. The similarities between the objects being compared may be implied rather than directly stated.{{cite book|last=Miller|first=Carol Rawlings|title=Irresistible Shakespeare: 6 Sensational Scenes from Favorite Plays and Dozens of Fun Ideas That Introduce Students to the Wonderful Works of Shakespeare|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qT3BC2CH1LoC&pg=PA25|access-date=23 December 2012|date=2001|publisher=Scholastic Inc.|isbn=978-0439098441|pages=25–}} The literary critic and rhetorician, I. A. Richards, divides a metaphor into two parts: the vehicle and the tenor.I. A. Richards, The Philosophy of Rhetoric (New York: Oxford University Press, 1936), 119–127.

: Example: "Fog comes on little cat feet"—Carl Sandburg{{cite book|last=Fandel|first=Jennifer|title=Metaphors, Similes, And Other Word Pictures|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bfWu6bCwRLcC&pg=PA30|access-date=3 April 2013|date=2005|publisher=The Creative Company|isbn=978-1583413401|pages=30–}} In this example, “little cat feet” is the vehicle that clarifies the tenor, “fog”. A comparison between the vehicle and tenor (also called the teritium comparitionis) is implicit: fog creeps in silently like a cat.

An extended metaphor is a metaphor that is continued over multiple sentences.{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/extended-metaphor|publisher=Dictionary.com|title=Extended Metaphor}}{{cite book|last=Oliver|first=Mary|title=Poetry Handbook|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fuBHMccJx6UC&pg=PA103|access-date=6 March 2013|year=1994|publisher=Houghton Mifflin Harcourt|isbn=978-0156724005|pages=103–}}

: Example: "The sky steps out of her daywear/Slips into her shot-silk evening dress./An entourage of bats whirr and swing at her hem, ...She's tried on every item in her wardrobe." Dilys Rose{{cite book|last1=Liddell|first1=Gordon F.|last2=Gifford|first2=Anne|title=New Scottish poetry|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eQRs8Uz6480C&pg=PA131|access-date=3 April 2013|date=2001|publisher=Heinemann|isbn=978-0435150983|pages=131–}}

Onomatopoeia is a word designed to be an imitation of a sound.Origin: 1570–80; < Late Latin < Greek onomatopoiía making of words = onomato- (combining form of ónoma name) + poi- (stem of poieîn to make; see poet) + -ia -ia{{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/131486|work=onomatopoeia, n.|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Onomatopoeia}}

: Example: “Bark! Bark!” went the dog as he chased the car that vroomed past.

PersonificationOrigin: 1745–55; personi(fy) + -fication{{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/141506|work=personification, n.|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Personification}} is the attribution of a personal nature or character to inanimate objects or abstract notions, especially as a rhetorical figure.

: Example: "Because I could not stop for Death,/He kindly stopped for me;/The carriage held but just ourselves/And Immortality."—Emily Dickinson. Dickinson portrays death as a carriage driver.{{cite book|last=Moustaki|first=Nikki|title=The Complete Idiot's Guide to Writing Poetry|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RdH3hvXEIB8C&pg=PT146|access-date=23 December 2012|date=2001|publisher=Penguin|isbn=978-1440695636|pages=146–}}

An oxymoron is a figure of speech in which a pair of opposite or contradictory terms is used together for emphasis.Origin: < post-classical Latin oxymoron, figure of speech in which a pair of opposed or markedly contradictory terms are placed in conjunction for emphasis (5th cent.; also oxymorum) < ancient Greek ὀξυ-oxy- comb. form1+ μωρόςdull, stupid, foolish (see moron n.2).{{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/135679|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Oxymoron}}

: Examples: Organized chaos, Same difference, Bittersweet.

A paradox is a statement or proposition which is self-contradictory, unreasonable, or illogical.Origin: < Middle French, French paradoxe (1495 as noun; 1372–74 in plural paradoxesas the title of a work by Cicero; paradoxon (noun) philosophical paradox in post-classical Latin also a figure of speech < ancient Greek παράδοξον, especially in plural παράδοξαStoical paradoxes, use as noun of neuter singular of παράδοξος (adjective) contrary to received opinion or expectation < παρα-para- prefix1+ δόξαopinion (see doxology n.), after ancient Greek παρὰ δόξαν contrary to expectation{{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/137353|work=paradox, n.|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Paradox}}

: Example: This statement is a lie.

Hyperbole is a figure of speech which uses an extravagant or exaggerated statement to express strong feelings.Origin: < Greek ὑπερβολήexcess (compare hyperbola n.), exaggeration; the latter sense is first found in Isocrates and Aristotle. Compare French hyperbole (earlier yperbole).{{cite web|url=http://www.oed.com.nuncio.cofc.edu/Entry/90286|work=hyperbol e, n.|publisher=Oxford English Dictionary|title=Hyperbole}}

: Example: They had been walking so long that John thought he might drink the entire lake when they came upon it.

Allusion is a reference to a famous character or event.

: Example: A single step can take you through the looking glass if you're not careful.

An idiom is an expression that has a figurative meaning often related, but different from the literal meaning of the phrase.

:Example: You should keep your eye out for him.

A pun is an expression intended for a humorous or rhetorical effect by exploiting different meanings of words.

: Example: I wondered why the ball was getting bigger. Then it hit me.

Commentators have often noted (and sometimes criticized) how the word literally itself is very commonly now used non-literally to intensify the meaning of a sentence (as in "I literally died of laughter", where clearly the speaker did not die). Far from this being a recent development, however, this usage goes at least as far back as the 19th century. Frances Brooke's 1769 novel The History of Emily Montague was used in the earliest Oxford English Dictionary (OED) citation for the figurative sense of literally; the sentence from the novel used was: "He is a fortunate man to be introduced to such a party of fine women at his arrival; it is literally to feed among the lilies."{{Cite web |url=http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=5914 |title = Language Log » Frances Brooke, destroyer of English (Not literally)}} This citation was also used in the OED's 2011 revision.

Prior to the 1980s, the "standard pragmatic" model of comprehension was widely believed. In that model, it was thought the recipient would first attempt to comprehend the meaning as if literal, but when an appropriate literal inference could not be made, the recipient would shift to look for a figurative interpretation that would allow comprehension.{{cite book|last=Katz|first=Albert N.|title=Figurative Language and Thought|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lSxhb_fZLx0C&pg=PA166|access-date=20 December 2012|year=1998|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0195109634|pages=166–}} Since then, research has cast doubt on the model. In tests, figurative language was found to be comprehended at the same speed as literal language; and so the premise that the recipient was first attempting to process a literal meaning and discarding it before attempting to process a figurative meaning appears to be false.{{cite book|last1=Eysenck|first1=Michael William|last2=Keane|first2=Mark T.|title=Cognitive Psychology: A Student's Handbook|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=22ZWi-LVLDcC&pg=PA369|access-date=20 December 2012|year=2005|publisher=Taylor & Francis|isbn=978-1841693590|pages=369–}}

Beginning with the work of Michael Reddy in his 1979 paper "The Conduit Metaphor", many linguists now deny that there is a valid way to distinguish between a "literal" and "figurative" mode of language.{{cite book |last=Ortony |first=Andrew |title=Metaphor and Thought |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QiJRvuXA_VcC&pg=PA204 |access-date=20 December 2012 |year=1993 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0521405614 |pages=204–}} Nevertheless, work has continued on making such a distinction.

For example:

{{cite book

|last1 = Steen

|first1 = Gerard J.

|last2 = Dorst

|first2 = Aletta G.

|last3 = Herrmann

|first3 = J. Berenike

|last4 = Kaal

|first4 = Anna

|last5 = Krennmayr

|first5 = Tina

|last6 = Pasma

|first6 = Tryntje

|year = 2010

|title = A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU

|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=I6CLpwAACAAJ

|series = Converging evidence in language and communication research, ISSN 1566-7774, volume 14

|publisher = John Benjamins Publishing Company

|isbn = 9789027239044

|access-date = 2 May 2025

}}

{{Div col|colwidth=30em}}

• Biblical literalism
• Connotation (semiotics)
• Denotation (semiotics)
• Denotation
• Figures of speech
• Frances Brooke
• Imagery
• Linguistics
• Metaphor
• Metonymy
• Phatic expression
• Philosophy of language
• Rhetoric
• Semantics
• Semiotics
• Signified and signifier

{{Div end}}

{{Reflist|2}}

• [http://www.slate.com/id/2129105/ The Word We Love To Hate. Literally.] from Slate Magazine
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20140602073659/http://humanities.byu.edu/rhetoric/Figures/Figures-Overview.htm Figures of Speech] from Silva Rhetoricae
• [http://www.minerva.mic.ul.ie/vol4/metaphor.html/ Metaphor and Meaning] from Minerva – An Internet Journal of Philosophy. An account of how metaphor provides new perspectives, deepens understanding, and is a major tool of linguistic development.

Category:Semantics

Category:Conceptual distinctions