Using Austrian newspaper cartoons as examples, this article explores the
?grammar? of visual metaphor. It is argued that visual metaphors cannot be
described adequately in formal terms only. Rather, they must be
considered as visual representations of metaphorical thoughts or
concepts. A cognitive definition of metaphor must not, however, distract
from potential variations in meaning and impact arising from the mode of
communication through which metaphors are expressed. This study
suggests that many of the dissimilarities between verbal metaphor and its
visual counterpart result from differences regarding what the two modes
are able to express easily and efficiently. |