After reading “See Through Words” once again, I found only a few things left to annotate, relate too, or explain. I feel as though my first run through of reading and annotating I tried to be very thorough, not leaving much left the second time around. I still enjoyed reading again, finding a few new things, or looking at previous notes to see if I still think of it the same, or if there is anything else to add. There were a few things when reading initially that I needed to clarify, yet none the second time. Yet knowing those new definitions for reading the second time definitely helped me get through the article faster & understand better.
I first had to look up when Erard says “the metaphors were hewn from their minds”. By hewn, Erard meant that people think that metaphors by famous writers were cut or shaped, from their minds. To me I think this means that the writers just had those metaphors sitting in their minds, instead of designing and crafting it to mean something special. Again, this is something I disagree with. I feel like metaphors aren’t things just lying there waiting to be discovered. They are crafted for certain reasons which Erard reflects on later. To help with understanding or clarification. Even for influencing or persuasion in some cases.
Later on I also had to search for a word which I had never seen before. It turns out there is such thing as “psycholinguistic research” which can be useful for metaphor designers. In simple terms, psycholinguistics is the psychology of language and how humans use/process it. This scientific study can clearly be useful in many different situations. It can help companies to make metaphors or to use certain language that can help them sell ideas/products. It can also help to craft some of the metaphors that Erard mentions, with use of synonyms, or “dual reference” as Glucksberg calls it. Metaphors are clearly a way to communicate harder more abstract concepts through simpler means.
