Explanation
A simile illuminates a subject through an explicitly marked comparison. Expressions such as like or as keep the two domains recognisably distinct while inviting readers to follow selected similarities between them. In “Memory lay like dust upon every sentence,” not every property of dust is transferred; fine deposition, pervasive presence, and traces of elapsed time may matter. The figure therefore does not assert complete identity but offers a guided proposal for examination. It can make abstract experience perceptible, slow attention, and open new inferences. Its cognitive force also depends on limits: careful analysis identifies which features carry across, where the comparison breaks, and what evaluations the chosen source domain may introduce without notice.
Movement of thought
1. An object or experience first remains abstract, difficult to perceive, or insufficiently differentiated in its properties. 2. Discourse explicitly places a second experiential domain beside it and marks the proposed similarity with a comparison signal. 3. Readers select transferable features and perceive the initial subject from a new and more tangible perspective. 4. A counter-test seeks properties that do not transfer and asks whether the bridge illuminates or misleadingly suggests identity. 5. The domains separate again, but the initial subject retains a structure and colouring gained through the comparison.
Scientific use case
Rhetoric, cognitive linguistics, and literary studies can annotate comparison markers, source and target domains, and selected features. Reception studies test which inferences readers form and where cultural image knowledge is required.
Example
“The unspoken question stood like an open door between them.” The comparison makes accessibility and obstruction visible at once without equating a question with a door.
Counterexample
“The memory was faint” directly attributes a property and does not place a second experiential domain beside memory. Without a marked bridge of similarity, there is no simile.
Distinction
Distinguish simile from metaphor as commonly unmarked transfer, analogy as structural correspondence, and example as a concrete instance. Simile signals comparison and proposes only relevant, limited similarity.
Effect on thought and perception
Simile makes elusive experience tangible while retaining the difference between compared domains, thereby keeping the transfer open to examination.
Resonance
Two separate fields of experience answer one another across an explicitly visible bridge without surrendering their distinct character.
Cite this entry
Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Simile“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-HAR10-0005. ATLAS 260, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-HAR10-0005The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.
Historical background
The historical handbook separates a stated comparison from a metaphorical representation. Bullinger’s evaluative preference for one form over another is part of his rhetorical judgement, not a general law of literary effectiveness. More important for the Atlas is the demand that the point of likeness be recoverable. A comparison selects an aspect; it does not transfer every property of its source to its target. The 1898 discussion also shows how interpretation can go wrong when figurative wording is treated as a literal identity or when an incidental resemblance is made to carry too much explanatory weight. English simile and German Gleichnis belong to partly overlapping teaching traditions, but this source alone cannot demonstrate that their full ranges coincide. The historical witness anchors the English rhetorical distinction; a bilingual comparison must still identify the particular sense being compared.
How conceptual history changes the analysis
Comparison reveals selected resemblance, not complete identity.