Interpretive Diversity as a Source of Metaphor-Simile Distinction

In this paper, we argue that the metaphor form of a comparison (i.e., a topic-vehicle pair) is preferred over, and more comprehensible than, the simile form when the interpretive diversity for that comparison is high. Interpretive diversity refers to the richness of the figurative meaning of a comparison; it is high to the extent that more features or properties are related to the figurative meaning and their values of salience are more uniformly distributed. We tested this claim through three experiments. Experiment 1 examined preference for the metaphor form and found that, as the interpretive diversity of the features shared by the topic and the vehicle increased, the metaphor preference increased as well. Furthermore, interpretive diversity was found to have a greater effect on metaphor preference than topic-vehicle similarity, which Chiappe and Kennedy (2001) claimed was a source of metaphor preference. Experiment 2 assessed familiarity of topic-vehicle pairs and demonstrated that interpretive diversity was more important in determining the metaphor preference of less familiar pairs than that of familiar pairs. Experiment 3 addressed comprehension of metaphors and similes and found that metaphors were comprehended more easily than similes when the interpretive diversity of the figurative meaning is high. These findings provide empirical evidence in favor of our argument and suggest that metaphor-simile distinction is better explained by interpretive diversity.