Journal of Pragmatics 151:103-117 (2019)

Fabrizio Macagno
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Maria Rossi
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Metaphors can be used as crucial tools for reaching shared understanding, especially where an epistemic imbalance of knowledge is at stake. However, metaphors can also represent a risk in intercultural or cross-cultural interactions, namely in situations characterised by little or deficient common ground between interlocutors. In such cases, the use of metaphors can lead to misunderstandings and cause communicative breakdowns. The conditions defining when metaphors promote, and hinder understanding have not been analyzed in detail, especially in intracultural contexts. This study proposes an analysis of metaphors identified within an Italian corpus of diabetes care interviews. Through a coding scheme capturing the types and the probative weights of the linguistic evidence that can be used to detect misunderstandings, the communicative effectiveness of metaphors is indirectly assessed. The quantitative and qualitative analyses show a positive correlation between metaphor use and problematic understanding. A more detailed scrutiny of the interlocutors’ roles and topics of the metaphors points out that most of the problematic metaphors are used by patients, while most of the problematic ones used by providers concern non-clinical matters. These results can be explained as resulting from incorrect presumptions of common ground between the interlocutors.
Keywords metaphors  misunderstanding  medical communication  pragmatics  evidence
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Metaphor.Max Black - 1955 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 55:273-294.
Intercultural Pragmatics.Istvan Kecskes - 2013 - Oxford University Press USA.
More About Metaphor.Max Black - 1977 - Dialectica 31 (3‐4):431-457.
Grounding in Communication.Herbert H. Clark & Susan E. Brennan - 1991 - In Lauren Resnick, Levine B., M. John, Stephanie Teasley & D. (eds.), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition. American Psychological Association. pp. 13--1991.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

How Can Metaphors Communicate Arguments?Fabrizio Macagno - 2020 - Intercultural Pragmatics 3 (17):335-363.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Metaphors in Scientific Language.Fred Van Besien - forthcoming - Communication and Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Quarterly Journal.
A Clash of Competing Metaphors.Michael Bradie - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (5):887-887.
Thinking About Embedded Metaphors.Malcolm Keating - 2015 - Journal of Pragmatics 88:19-26.
Pain and its Metaphors: A Dialogical Approach. [REVIEW]Stephen Loftus - 2011 - Journal of Medical Humanities 32 (3):213-230.
Metaphors as models: Towards a typology of metaphor in ancient science.Marcel Humar - 2021 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 43 (3):1-26.
Metaphors for Illness in Contemporary Media.M. Hanne & S. J. Hawken - 2007 - Medical Humanities 33 (2):93-99.
Metaphoric Confinement of Information.Marek Hetmański - 2015 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 40 (1):161-178.
Data as Oil, Infrastructure or Asset? Three Metaphors of Data as Economic Value.Jan Michael Nolin - 2019 - Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society.


Added to PP index

Total views
66 ( #171,913 of 2,499,038 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
66 ( #11,982 of 2,499,038 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes