Abstract :
Aptness, defined as how the vehicle is well able to cover the salient features of the
tenor (e.g., oil is like liquid gold vs. a train is like a worm), is claimed to be an
important factor in the preference for metaphors over similes, or vice versa. This
study was an attempt to test for the supposed correlation between the perceived
degree of aptness and a priori stylistic preference for metaphors and similes by
Iranian L2 learners. Participants, aged 20-25, were selected from 80 EFL Translation
undergraduates. In the first place, they were asked to read 2 alternative lists of the
same sentences (lists A and B) and to rate each sentence as to its appropriateness by
filling in a number between 2 endpoints of 1 (very inappropriate) and 7 (very
appropriate). In the second place, they were invited to consider the 2 alternative
forms of the same sentence and to say which one they preferred: the metaphor or the
simile form. Results revealed no such strong or moderate relationship between the
perceived mean aptness ratings and the mean preference scores for the simile and
metaphor versions (r = -0.014 for the metaphors; r = 0.014 for the similes). All
things considered, the perceived degree of aptness failed to predict the stylistic
preference for metaphors and similes. This comes to the rejection of the validity of
the claim put forth by Chiappe and Kennedy (1999) regarding the predictive power
of aptness to inform the preference of metaphors and similes by Iranian L2 learners.
