simile, gradability, quality, quantity, linguistic worldview, formula


This paper attempts to shed some light on the problem of correlation of such ontological categories as quality, quantity and relation in similes. The matter in question is significant since it relates to the problem of anthropocentrism in language. It shows the speaker’s attitude to the information encoded in a simile by consciously choosing a vehicle via measuring a tenor’s salient feature against an implied abstract scale of objects, notions, phenomena, etc. that possess a particular quality to a certain extent. The nature of the ground of simile is described to be gradable, capable of being subjectively measured from the perspective of the speaker’s environmental perception. The gradability of a shared feature shown as a scale of potential vehicles lends itself to the interpretation as a fragment of the linguistic worldview displaying a range of scale markers typical of a certain linguistic community in a certain historical period of time. The polar opposite notions on an implied scale are depicted to represent a (proto/stereo) type and an anti-(proto/stereo)type typical of certain linguo-cultural domains in a particular fragment of a linguistic worldview. By moving from the explanatory examples to the analysis of empirical material the author concludes that the categories of quantity, quality and relation are intrinsic in every simile and manifest themselves in the choice of a tenor-vehicle pair that do not exist within simile other than in relation to each-other. The material described in the article serves as an evidence of language dependence on historical and social parameters. The paper explains the mechanism of creation of the congruous and ironic similes according to the universal process of simile formation where the unity of quantity, quality and relation are the key factors of its existence.



Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Mariana Oleniak, Vasyl` Stus Donetsk National University

Mariana Oleniak is a PhD, associate professor of the Department of Theory and Practice of Translation, dean of the Faculty of Foreign Languages of Vasyl` Stus Donetsk National University



  1. Barnden, J. (2015). Metaphor, Simile, and the Exaggeration of Likeness. Metaphor and Symbol, 30 (1), 41-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2015.980692
  2. Bodujen de Kurtene, I. A. (1963). Kolichestvennost' v jazykovom myshlenii. Izbrannye trudy po obshhemu jazykoznaniju (T. 2) [Quantitaniveness in language thinking. Selected works on general linguistics (Vol. 2)]. (pp. 311-324). Moscow, USSR: AN SSSR.
  3. Bondarko, A.V. (1996). Teorija funkcional'noj grammatiki. Kachestvennost'. Kolichestvennos' [Theory of functional grammar. Qualitativeness. Quantitativeness.]. SPb., Russia: Nauka.
  4. Caws, P. (1993). Yorick's World: Science and the Knowing Subject. Berkeley Los Angeles Oxford.
  5. Di Paolo, E., Cuffari, E., & De Jaegher, H. (2018). Linguistic Bodies: The Continuity Between life and Language. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  6. Duncombe, M. (2015). Aristotle’s Two Accounts of Relatives in Categories7. Phronesis, 60 (4), 436-461. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685284-12341292
  7. Espersen, O. (1958). Filosofija grammatiki [Philosophy of grammar]. Moscow, USSR: Izdatel'stvo inostr. lit.
  8. Filik, R., Howman, H., Ralph-Nearman, C., & Giora, R. (2018). The role of defaultness and personality factors in sarcasm interpretation: Evidence from eye-tracking during reading. Metaphor and Symbol, 33 (3), 148-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1481258
  9. Giora, R., Cholev, A., Fein, O., & Peleg, O. (2018). On the superiority of defaultness: Hemispheric perspectives of processing negative and affirmative sarcasm. Metaphor and Symbol, 33 (3), 163-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1481259
  10. Godbee, K., Porter, M. (2013). Comprehension of sarcasm, metaphor and simile in Williams syndrome. International Journal of Language and Communication Disorders, 48 (6), 651-665. https://doi.org/ 10.1111/1460-6984.12037
    | |
  11. Hood, P. M. (2004) Aristotle on the Category of Relation. University Press of America.
  12. Il'ichjov, L., Fedoseev, P., Kovaljov, S., & Panov, V. (1983). Filosofskij enciklopedicheskij slovar' [Philosophical encyclopaedic dictionary]. Moscow, USSR: Sov. jenciklopedija.
  13. Lei, Z. (2016). Metaphor and Intercultural Communication. Andreas Musolff, Fiona MacArthur, and Giulio Pagani (Eds.). Metaphor and Symbol, 31 (4), 260-263. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2016.1223464
  14. Long, R. (2007). Aristotle on the Category of Relation (review). Journal of the History of Philosophy, 45 (1), 149-150. https://doi.org/10.1353/hph.2007.0014
  15. Musolff, A.; MacArthur, F. & Pagani, G. (Eds.). (2014). Metaphor and Intercultural Communication. London, UK; New Delhi, India; New York, NY; Sydney, Australia: Bloomsbury.
  16. Nauta, L. (2007). Lorenzo Valla and the rise of humanist dialectic. Retrieved from http://www.rug.nl/staff/l.w.nauta/valla-cambridge.pdf.pdf
  17. Oleniak, M. (2018). Semantic representation of similes (based on the Ukrainian, English and Polish languages). Topics in Linguistics, 19(1), 18-32. https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2018-0002
  18. Panfilov, V. Z. (1977). Filosofskie problemy jazykoznanija: gnoseologicheskie aspekty [Philosophical problems of linguistics: gnoseological aspects.]. Moscow, USSR: Nauka.
  19. Remijsen, B. (2014). The study of tone in languages with a quantity contrast. Language Documentation and Conservation, 8, 672-689. Retrieved 25 November 2018 from http://hdl.handle.net/10125/24620
  20. Shvachko, S. (2007). Zasobi kvantifіkacії: lіngvokognіtivnі aspekty [Means of quantification: linguocognitive aspects]. Sumy, Ukraine: SumDU.
  21. Sommer, E. (2013). Similes Dictionary. Detroit, US: Visible Ink Press.
  22. Sweet, H. (1872). King Alfred’s West-Saxon Version of Gregory’s Pastoral Care. London: Trübner & Co.
  23. Wilstach, F. J. (2017). A Dictionary of Similes (Classic Reprint). London, UK: Fb&c Limited.




How to Cite

Oleniak, M. (2019). DIALECTIC INTERACTION OF QUANTITY, QUALITY AND RELATION IN SIMILE DOMAIN. Advanced Education, 6(12), 134–141. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.153366