Abstract

In this paper I inquire into the problems of similes. Since the age of Aristotle similes have been considered inferior to metaphors as a rhetorical skill. Nevertheless, it is apparent that artistic possibilities immanent in similes deserve to be reevaluated. Similes are skills of rhetoric that compare two objects by using words which express explicitly a comparison. Similes are divided into two groups according to whether there is some point of commonality or not between a pair of words laid in a figurative relation. To paraphrase the similes without commonality by applying the theory of Saussure, these kinds of similes cut out the ossified "langue" afresh. In this process our experiences also can acquire a renewal. On the other hand, in paraphrasing similes with commonality by applying the theory of Jacobson, such similes bring forth an image different to the visual one because of the interaction of the two images, the one perceived and the other selected by the writer. In this way we realize that our experiences consist of language. I verify my opinion by referring to some poetical real works. These examples of the poetical and epistemological functions that similes can perform testify as one of the reasons this kind of rhetoric in poetry exists