Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach
The study investigates the relationship between syntactic structure and metaphor features – quality, aptness, familiarity, and comprehensibility – using metaphorical expressions collected from Serbian poetry. Although metaphor research has traditionally focused on nominal forms like ‘A is B,’ this s...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Group
2025-12-01
|
| Series: | Cogent Arts & Humanities |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311983.2025.2497937 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850153329504550912 |
|---|---|
| author | Ivana Mitić Aleksandra Janić Mitić Dušan Stamenković |
| author_facet | Ivana Mitić Aleksandra Janić Mitić Dušan Stamenković |
| author_sort | Ivana Mitić |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The study investigates the relationship between syntactic structure and metaphor features – quality, aptness, familiarity, and comprehensibility – using metaphorical expressions collected from Serbian poetry. Although metaphor research has traditionally focused on nominal forms like ‘A is B,’ this study explores more complex syntactic structures, and includes Subject + Predicate (SP), Subject + Predicate (Aux. + Nominal) (SCopP), Subject + Predicate + Object (SPO), and Subject + Predicate + Adverbial (SPA). The study involved 140 participants who rated 76 metaphorical expressions across the four metaphor features. Findings suggest that complex structures (SPO and SPA) scored higher in quality and aptness than simpler ones (SP and SCopP), challenging the predominance of nominal metaphors in research. However, simpler structures were rated as more familiar, potentially reflecting their syntactic simplicity. Comprehensibility was not influenced by syntactic complexity, likely due to participants’ linguistic proficiency. The results indicate that syntactic structure can affect metaphor perception and suggest that reliance on nominal forms in metaphor research may overlook the richness of more complex syntactic realisations. This study confirms the importance of considering syntax in metaphor research and highlights the potential for diverse syntactic patterns to enrich our understanding of metaphor processing and interpretation. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a3aeb73123e443b8a33c43bbb172f2aa |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2331-1983 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-12-01 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis Group |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cogent Arts & Humanities |
| spelling | doaj-art-a3aeb73123e443b8a33c43bbb172f2aa2025-08-20T02:25:44ZengTaylor & Francis GroupCogent Arts & Humanities2331-19832025-12-0112110.1080/23311983.2025.2497937Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approachIvana Mitić0Aleksandra Janić Mitić1Dušan Stamenković2Faculty of Philosophy, University of Niš, SerbiaFaculty of Philosophy, University of Niš, SerbiaSchool of Culture and Education, Södertörn University Stockholm, Huddinge, SwedenThe study investigates the relationship between syntactic structure and metaphor features – quality, aptness, familiarity, and comprehensibility – using metaphorical expressions collected from Serbian poetry. Although metaphor research has traditionally focused on nominal forms like ‘A is B,’ this study explores more complex syntactic structures, and includes Subject + Predicate (SP), Subject + Predicate (Aux. + Nominal) (SCopP), Subject + Predicate + Object (SPO), and Subject + Predicate + Adverbial (SPA). The study involved 140 participants who rated 76 metaphorical expressions across the four metaphor features. Findings suggest that complex structures (SPO and SPA) scored higher in quality and aptness than simpler ones (SP and SCopP), challenging the predominance of nominal metaphors in research. However, simpler structures were rated as more familiar, potentially reflecting their syntactic simplicity. Comprehensibility was not influenced by syntactic complexity, likely due to participants’ linguistic proficiency. The results indicate that syntactic structure can affect metaphor perception and suggest that reliance on nominal forms in metaphor research may overlook the richness of more complex syntactic realisations. This study confirms the importance of considering syntax in metaphor research and highlights the potential for diverse syntactic patterns to enrich our understanding of metaphor processing and interpretation.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311983.2025.2497937metaphorsyntaxfeaturessyntactic structureSerbianpsycholinguistics |
| spellingShingle | Ivana Mitić Aleksandra Janić Mitić Dušan Stamenković Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach Cogent Arts & Humanities metaphor syntax features syntactic structure Serbian psycholinguistics |
| title | Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach |
| title_full | Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach |
| title_fullStr | Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach |
| title_full_unstemmed | Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach |
| title_short | Relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features: An empirical approach |
| title_sort | relating metaphor syntax to metaphor features an empirical approach |
| topic | metaphor syntax features syntactic structure Serbian psycholinguistics |
| url | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/10.1080/23311983.2025.2497937 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ivanamitic relatingmetaphorsyntaxtometaphorfeaturesanempiricalapproach AT aleksandrajanicmitic relatingmetaphorsyntaxtometaphorfeaturesanempiricalapproach AT dusanstamenkovic relatingmetaphorsyntaxtometaphorfeaturesanempiricalapproach |