Assignment : Paper No. 109 Literary Theory & Criticism and Indian Aesthetics

 Paper - 109 : Literary Theory & Criticism and Indian Aesthetics 

Topic : Metaphor as a Cognitive Tool: Richards’ Influence on Modern Linguistics and Literary Theory

---

Personal Information 

Name : Shruti Sonani

Batch : M.A ,Sem - 2 (2024-2026)

Enrollment number:  5108240033

E - mail address : shrutisonani2@gmail.com

Table of Contents

1. Abstract

2. Introduction

3. Richards’ Influence on Modern Linguistics

• Metaphor and the Science of Meaning

• Connection to Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT)

4. I. A. Richards’ Theory of Metaphor

• The Tenor and Vehicle Model

• Metaphor as an Instrument of Thought

5. Richards’ Critique of Aristotle’s View on Metaphor

6. Definition and Uses of Metaphor According to Richards

• General Definition of Metaphor

• Three Levels of Metaphor

7. The Limits of Metaphor and Figurative Language

• Richards’ View on Metaphorical Failure

• Whalley’s Concept of “Pointing” vs. “Ringing” Metaphors

• Sense Metaphor vs. Emotive Metaphor

8. The Cognitive Power of Metaphor

9. Conclusion

Abstract

I. A. Richards revolutionized the study of metaphor, influencing both literary and linguistic fields. His seminal work on the flexibility and contextual nature of meaning laid the foundation for modern semantics. Richards’ ideas anticipated the insights of later scholars such as Charles Peirce, Ludwig Wittgenstein, and George Lakoff, shaping theories of metaphor as cognitive tools. This paper explores Richards’ contributions, focusing on his Tenor and Vehicle model, his critique of Aristotle’s view on metaphor, and his argument that metaphor structures both language and thought. Additionally, the paper examines his categorization of metaphor, the limits of figurative language, and his broader influence on contemporary linguistic theories.

Introduction

Metaphor has long been regarded as a poetic and rhetorical device, but I. A. Richards’ work transformed this perspective by demonstrating its foundational role in language and thought. Richards argued that all language is inherently metaphorical, challenging classical notions that metaphor was merely an artistic embellishment. His development of the Tenor and Vehicle model provided a structural framework for understanding how metaphors function, influencing both literary theory and linguistic studies.

Richards' impact extends beyond traditional literary analysis, connecting with modern linguistic theories such as Charles Peirce’s semiotics and Ludwig Wittgenstein’s concept of language games. His insights directly influenced George Lakoff and Mark Johnson’s Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), which posits that metaphor is central to human cognition and that abstract concepts are understood through concrete metaphors.

This paper explores Richards’ theories in depth, covering his critique of Aristotle’s view on metaphor, his definitions and classifications of metaphor, and the cognitive power of metaphor in shaping perception. It also addresses the limitations of metaphor and figurative language, distinguishing between different types of metaphors, including Whalley’s “pointing” vs. “ringing” metaphors and Richards’ division of sense and emotive metaphors. Ultimately, this study underscores how Richards laid the groundwork for modern discussions on the intersection of language, cognition, and metaphor.

Richards’ Influence on Modern Linguistics

1. Metaphor and the Science of Meaning

Richards’ work laid the foundation for modern semantics by highlighting the flexibility and contextual nature of meaning. His approach was later expanded by:

• Charles Peirce’s semiotics, which emphasizes the interpretative process of signs.

• Ludwig Wittgenstein’s language games, which argue that meaning depends on use rather than inherent definitions.

Richards’ ideas helped linguists move beyond fixed definitions and recognize how metaphor structures understanding in various discourses​.

2. Connection to Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT)

Richards’ insights directly influenced George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, who developed Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) in Metaphors We Live By (1980). According to CMT:

• Metaphor is central to human cognition rather than just a feature of language.

• Everyday thinking is metaphorically structured.

• Abstract concepts are understood through concrete metaphors.

For example, the “ARGUMENT IS WAR” metaphor (e.g., “He attacked my position”) demonstrates how language structures our conceptual framework​.

Richards was one of the first theorists to analyze metaphor as a fundamental cognitive process, paving the way for modern linguistic and cognitive studies.(Brown)

I. A. Richards’ Theory of Metaphor

1. The Tenor and Vehicle Model

Richards developed a dual-structure model of metaphor, which became foundational in literary and linguistic studies. He argued that metaphor consists of two components:

1. Tenor – the subject or idea being described.

2. Vehicle – the image or concept used to describe the tenor.

For example, in the metaphor “Time is a thief”:

• The tenor is time (the abstract concept being described).

• The vehicle is thief (the image that conveys meaning).

Richards’ model demonstrated that metaphors do more than embellish language; they structure thought and shape perception​. This was a major shift from classical rhetoric, where metaphor was viewed merely as a decorative trope.

2.  Metaphor as an Instrument of Thought

Richards argued that metaphor is not just a linguistic expression but a cognitive tool. He believed that:

• Meaning is not fixed but constructed through metaphorical associations.

• Metaphor helps us understand abstract or unfamiliar ideas by relating them to familiar concepts​.

• Meaning emerges from context, as opposed to being inherent in words.

His perspective anticipated modern theories of cognition, particularly those that emphasize the role of metaphor in shaping human perception and reasoning. (Brown)

Richards’ Critique of Aristotle’s View on Metaphor

Richards challenges Aristotle’s claims about metaphor:

1. Aristotle’s View: "Metaphor is a mark of genius and cannot be taught."

• Richards: All language is metaphorical, and metaphor can be learned.

2. Aristotle’s View: "Metaphor is a special, exceptional linguistic feature."

• Richards: Metaphor is the foundation of all language and thought.

3. Aristotle’s View: "Metaphor involves an eye for resemblances."

• Richards: Everyone has an "eye for resemblances" because language itself is metaphoric.

Thus, metaphor is not exclusive to poets but is universal to human cognition.(Bilsky)

Definition and Uses of Metaphor According to Richards

Richards defines metaphor in three different ways:

(i) General Definition of Metaphor

• Metaphor is the "carrying over of a word from its normal use to a new use."

• It compounds different uses of a word, giving us "two ideas for one."

• Example:

• “The lamp throws light on the page”—Here, "throws" is a metaphor because it normally describes a physical action (e.g., throwing an object) but is used for light emission.

• Richards rejects the idea that metaphor is merely an embellishment or ornamentation in language.

(ii) Three Levels of Metaphor

Richards uses the term "metaphor" in three different senses based on its scope:

1. First Sense (Unrestricted, Broadest Scope)
   
   

• All language and all thought are metaphorical.

• Thinking is sorting, and sorting is inherently metaphoric (i.e., recognizing and categorizing objects is a metaphorical process).

• Example: Recognizing a lamp requires remembering previous lamps, meaning we metaphorically link them together.

• Language is built on metaphor since words derive meaning from past associations.

2. Second Sense (Restricted, Partially Metaphoric Language)
   
   

• Some words, which appear literal, actually have metaphorical origins.

• Example: “Throwing light”—we recognize that the verb “throw” has been metaphorically transferred.

• This includes dead metaphors (metaphors that have lost their figurative quality due to long usage).

3. Third Sense (Creative or “Live” Metaphors)
   
   

• These involve new, striking comparisons that actively shape meaning.

• Example: T. S. Eliot’s metaphor—"The evening sky is like a patient etherized upon a table."

• Unlike conventional metaphors, these require interpretation and evoke complex emotions. (Bilsky)

 The Limits of Metaphor and Figurative Language

While powerful, metaphor has limits and potential failures:

• Dead Metaphors: Overuse leads to loss of figurative force (e.g., “the leg of a table”).

• Paradoxical Metaphors: Some metaphors resist logical analysis (e.g., “Life is death”).

• Not all metaphors are "true"—some serve purely emotional or rhetorical functions.

Richards' View on Metaphorical Failure

• A metaphor must "work" within its context—its success depends on whether it creates meaning effectively.

• Whalley’s Concept of “Pointing” vs. “Ringing” Metaphors:

• Pointing metaphors: Simple comparisons (e.g., “sharp as a knife”).

• Ringing metaphors: Evoke deep conceptual and emotional resonance. (Bontekoe)

Sense Metaphor vs. Emotive Metaphor

Richards categorizes metaphors into two types based on their function:

• Sense Metaphor: Based on physical resemblance (e.g., calling someone a “swine” because they look like a pig).

• Emotive Metaphor: Based on emotional resemblance (e.g., calling someone a “swine” to convey disgust).

Since metaphor evokes emotion, poets use it to express attitudes and feelings indirectly. (Bilsky)

The Cognitive Power of Metaphor

• Richards argues that metaphor is fundamental to cognition because:

• All thought is metaphoric—we categorize new experiences using past references.

• All language is metaphoric—words carry previous associations that shape their meaning.

• This challenges Aristotle’s view that metaphor is a unique gift of poets—Richards believes everyone uses metaphor constantly. (Bilsky)

All thought is metaphoric:

Richards suggests that whenever we encounter new experiences, we understand them by relating them to things we already know. This process of categorizing new ideas based on past references is inherently metaphoric. For example, when we say “time is money,” we are understanding the abstract concept of time through the more familiar, tangible idea of money.

References : 

Bilsky, Manuel. “I. A. Richards’ Theory of Metaphor.” Modern Philology, vol. 50, no. 2, 1952, pp. 130–37. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/435560. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.

Bontekoe, Ron. “The Function of Metaphor.” Philosophy & Rhetoric, vol. 20, no. 4, 1987, pp. 209–26. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/40237519. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.

Brown, Stuart C. “I. A. Richards’ New Rhetoric: Multiplicity, Instrument, and Metaphor.” Rhetoric Review, vol. 10, no. 2, 1992, pp. 218–31. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/465482. Accessed 15 Mar. 2025.