Metaphor

A metaphor is a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another to suggest a likeness between them. From Greek metafo'ra, which means to transfer from one place to another.

Metaphor is related to, but different from analogy:

"there is a definite distinction between analogy and metaphor - analogy is aspectual whereas metaphor is holistic. However, since any 'whole' can at times be an aspect of a greater whole then it can be used in an analogous form and this can cause confusion in one is not aware of the levels of analysis". (Lofting, 2001)

Examples of metaphors from Library and Information Science (LIS) are: Architecture (e.g., document architecture or information architecture; "atlas of science" (or "map of knowledge", both are geographical metaphors);  "berry picking"; "browsing/grazing"; "the conduit metaphor; container (used about documents); "gap-bridging; "memory institution"; mirror (science or knowledge representation as a mirror of nature); semantic distance; "tree of knowledge" (with "branches" and "roots"); world brain and universe of knowledge". 

The word library is often used metaphorically, for example, about computer files. Different metaphors are, on the other hand, used about libraries. Nan Dahlkild (in progress) identified four metaphor's in the historical discourses about libraries in Denmark, "the library as a home" (about 1900-1927), "the library as a temple of knowledge" (about 1927-1939), "the open library space" (about 1939-1980) and "the library as a square" (about 1980-2000).

When metaphors are used in, for example, titles of documents, they may cause problems for information retrieval. The psychologist who wants information about "nightmares" do not want information about international crises which are metaphorically termed 'nightmares'. In domains where the use of metaphors flourish, there is thus a greater need for controlled vocabularies.

Some researchers go very far in the use of metaphors in their research. In investigating humanist researchers use of information sources, Harriet Lönnqvist compared the researchers with animal species:

 "Seven types of research processes became crystallized within the four relevant disciplines:

1. The Fly. The chaotic, intuitive and dynamic research process.

2. The Sphinx Moth. Questions and conclusions develop from philosophizing and wondering.

3. The Bee. A systematic and material fixated research process triggered by the driving wheel.

4. The Geometrid Moth. The science approach.

5. The Mole. The traditionalist's research process.

6. The Mockingbird. The text analytic research process.

7. The Spider. The research process of the problem solver.

The various types of research processes have been given metaphorical names in order to increase the comprehension of them . . ." (Lönnqvist, 2003, p. 293-294).

In addition Lönnqvist (2003, p. 296-299) develops five types of information seekers:

1. The Snooper.

2. The Confident Collector.

3. The Gourmet.

4. The Shotgun Shooter.

5. The Elitist.

Heinström (2002) also uses metaphors about information seekers: Fast Surfers, Broad Scanners, and Deep Divers.

Turchetti, Capocci & Gagliasso (2002, 123) finds that in the changing epistemological conditions in the post-Fordist way of production and its "big science" may imply that metaphorical thinking becomes more important:

For instance, deduction is not anymore dominant in reasoning, and a wide range of approaches to scientific thinking emerge. Among others, abduction, analogy and metaphor plat a significant role allowing the emergence of narrative explanations, particularly in process-based scientific reasoning." (Turchetti, Capocci & Gagliasso, 2002, 123).

Mey (2006) considers metaphor as a kind of activity. Contrary to what has been suggested in the literature, metaphors neither belong exclusively to the domain of abstract reasoning (such as by analogy; Max Black), nor are they merely linguistic and/or psychological processes (of cognition; George Lakoff). Metaphors do not originate and live in the brain only, neither do they exclusively belong to some conceptual domain from which they can establish relations to other domains, or blend with them. Metaphors are primarily pragmatic activities. In my contribution, I will concentrate on the pragmatics of what is called 'embodiment': while metaphors represent, respectively support or illustrate, an activity that is performed by the total human being, the body part of the metaphoric deal is often neglected. Yet, as many researchers in the humanities and the sciences have shown, the role of the body in solving problems through appropriate metaphoring cannot be overestimated. An embodied perspective on thought, and especially on metaphor, will allow us to form a better understanding of the things we do with words, when we use words to do things.

Literature:

Boyd, R. (1993). Metaphor and theory change: What is metaphor a metaphor for? In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed., pp. 481-532). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davidson, D. (1978). What Metaphors Mean. Critical Inquiry, 5(1), 31-47. Excerpt: http://www.uchicago.edu/research/jnl-crit-inq/issues/v5/v5n1.davidson.html

Debatin, B (1995/1997).*Précis of* The Rationality of Metaphor: An Analysis Based on the Philosophy of Language and Communication Theory. (Die Rationalität der Metapher. Eine sprachphilosophische und kommunikationstheoretische Untersuchung Berlin, De Gruyter: 1995, 381 p.) http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~debatin/english/Books/Diss.htm

Heinström, J. (2002). Fast Surfers, Broad Scanners, and Deep Divers. Personality and Information Seeking Behavior. Åbo: Åbo Akademis Förlag.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lofting, C. (2001). Analogy vs. Metaphor. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ddiamond/analog.html (Visited 24-06-2008).