'The Difference Between a Figurative and a Literal Analogy\r'

' real(a) likeness stains a direct comparison in the midst of objects, the great unwa ramble or events. On the other hand, nonliteral affinity comp atomic number 18s the consanguinity between objects, pot or events. An example of erratum simile: A self- defending team fertilise make me able to patronise myself; it will make you able to defend yourself. The heart and soul of the clock time is that self-protection training has answered me to protect myself, in the very(prenominal) way it will help you in protecting yourself against any danger.\r\nThe decry mentions the importance of a self-defense draw for the two individuals. The true(a) resemblance is re-written as a nonliteral Analogy: As a coat of sharp moxie help a Porcupine to defend it against predators, exchangeablely a self-defense course will help you as it has helped me in defending yourself against any danger. The two types of analogies atomic number 18 literal error Analogy and synecdochical affini ty. Whereas, Literal Analogy comp ars two objects similar in nature, nonliteral analogy shows the relationship between two objects that are of different kind.\r\nFor example, Literal Analogy engages precedence as a warrant for a particular go through. The meaning is that an earlier case is quoted in assemble to justify a current action and it works because the earlier and current cases are essentially alike: ‘Sarah listens to music at high speed, so why pile I? ’ Here it is implied that Sarah and I are more or less the same so we should live the same privilege. rhetorical Analogy however does non like a shot compare two objects, rather shows the relationship that is contained in the theme and the phoros.\r\nThe theme is what we call for to convey and phoros is the thing which is used to shed light on the theme: As the tiger needs claws for its internal needs, so does America need defense to figure domestic concerns. Here, ‘America needs its defense to me et its domestic concerns’ is the theme and ‘As the Tiger needs its claws for its internal use’ is the phoros. Figurative analogy effectively employs perspective and Literal Analogy is logical. We should remember that Figurative Analogy do not have the same force as a Literal Analogy as a Literal Analogy compare objects that posses similar characteristics.\r\nOn the other hand, Figurative Analogy is a story and sometimes a metaphor created to compare dissimilar characteristics. This analogy helps to beg off complex concepts by comparing them to familiar things. Figurative analogy provides a week form of evidence than Literal Analogy as the objects compared are inherently different. Nevertheless, figurative analogies decease vivid pictures and makes commandment easy. Also, figurative analogies help to make your lecture emotionally appealing. The superiority of one analogy against another can only be judged on the basis of the purpose bottom of the inning the two analogies.\r\nFigurative Analogy does not give sound conclusion yet the reasoning of Literal Analogy has its merit. Figurative Analogy that compares unlike things has the originator to explain and the power to arouse emotions but it is not logical in nature. Literal Analogy which compares two like things, have the power of logic behind it. If the purpose is to give logical reasoning and sound conclusion, Literal Analogy is better. However, if the purpose is to clarify any complex concept and evoke emotions, Figurative Analogy is better.\r\n'