Introduction
There are hundreds of ways to express a simple feeling while there can be many a meaning to a single word. Alone or in a sentence, one word can go beyond its initial meaning, shapeshift into a new thought, and convey a different message. Wonderfully, the only way to figure it out is to go beyond the literal. This paper aims to present the various layers of understanding text from the literal to the metaphorical.
Strictly Speaking: the trouble with being too literal
Perhaps the best way to begin the discussion is to clearly define first the meaning of literal. The lexicon defines literally as “belonging to letters.” Even more, it says literal interpretation then, integrates an approach that refers to the actual words in their ordinary meaning and not going beyond the facts. In this sense, it is confined to just the customary usage.
To stick then, to this “literal” definition of literal, means to negate all other possibilities where a word may be used. Somehow, it poses a limiting threat to the language as well as to communication in general. Imagine then, how stories would be written, or even mere conversations are heard! In this limiting almost unbelievable nature, do we then see the importance of figurative speech and how the use of metaphors can bring words to flourish and extend beyond their literal meaning and usage?
The Meaning of Words
The best way to understand this predicament is to cite a concrete example, and that in this case, a word. For instance, the word BATTLE. What immediately comes to mind at the mere mention of the word? In the dictionary, the word is both verb (to battle) and a noun (a battle). But to the common man, it may not occur as a verb for the instant image/meaning that comes to mind is a most likely war or fight rather than to engage In combat. Yet, in verifying its literal meaning it already lends itself to two different connotations. Incorporating this same word in a sentence or phrase can create more layers and shades of meaning. As in for instance: to emerge from life’s battles or off to battle we go.
As we go from word to phrase, to sentence, the meaning becomes complex, and context is taken into account and therefore brings us to the different kinds of interpretation. At the mere mention of the word battle, an image or picture comes to mind without the influence of context. This is referred to as first-thought meaning.
Then there is also flat interpretation wherein the word is embedded in a phrase or sentence and yet the meaning of the word remains as the first thought meaning. The third kind of interpretation is the historical-grammatical interpretation which allows meanings that are intended by the authors and have a space for allusions and open-ended language. (Poythress, 1987)
In this light, meaning is dependent on how a person eventually would process the way he communicates –whether to stick to the normal, plain, and literal meaning of words or apply it to allusions and unusual usage. The fact of the matter is that he can communicate the relevant meaning in that context.
Conclusion
Whatever kind of interpretation a word or its meaning may be classified into, the most significant fact of the matter is that it can put into light what meaning it wants to convey. According to philosopher Noam Chomsky, though used metaphorically, these words may be grammatically unsound, and yet, it still is a full-fledged conditional linguistic nonetheless.
Another point worth mentioning is that in fact, there are complementary elements to literal and metaphorical ways to words.
“…there is a literal meaning for words treated as if it were the rock-bottom anchorage to which all other meanings are tethered in order for them to stray away from it.” (McCanles,1976)
Thus, words seemingly may go way, way far and beyond their literal meanings but in truth, its literal meaning is the path that leads the way and takes it to the imaginary/figurative level. Ironically, without knowing its exact, accurate, and plain translations, we can get lost in the figurative world of words.
References
Poythress, Vern (1987) Understanding Dispensationalists. Web.
McCanless, Michael (1976), The Literal and the Methaphorical: Dialectic or Interchange.