Abstract Charles Peirce provided a few, but interesting we believe, remarks about metaphor. Aristotle on the other hand developed a theory of metaphor that, to this day has been, and still is, influential (even though his theory, especially within recent years, also has been heavily criticized, e.g., by Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press). Factor, Lance R. 1996. Peirce’s definition of metaphor and its consequences. In Vincent Colapietro & Thomas Olshewsky (eds.), Peirce’s doctrine of signs: Theory, applications, and connections, 229–235. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter, as one of very few scholars, makes a comparison between Peirce and Aristotle. Factor claims that Peirce’s definition of metaphor and its consequences undermine and overturn Aristotle’s theory. We do not believe that Factor is right; and this is due to Factor’s misinterpretation of key elements within Aristotle’s theory. We rather believe that Peirce and Aristotle, in fact, have central ideas in common concerning metaphor; perhaps, in particular, when it comes to the function of metaphor. Hence, both see, for example, metaphor as a cognitive mechanism. The article tries to develop this argument.

中文翻译：

---

皮尔斯，亚里斯多德，隐喻–以及对Factor的评论

摘要查尔斯·皮尔斯（Charles Peirce）提供了一些关于隐喻的有趣观点，但我们相信。另一方面，亚里士多德发展了一种隐喻理论，该隐喻理论至今仍是有影响力的（尽管他的理论，尤其是近年来的理论也受到了拉科夫，乔治和马克·约翰逊的严厉批评）。 1980年，《我们赖以生存的隐喻》（芝加哥：芝加哥大学出版社）。Factor，Lance R.，1996年。Peirce对隐喻的定义及其后果。在文森特·科拉皮特罗（Vincent Colapietro）和托马斯·奥尔谢夫斯基（Thomas Olshewsky）（合编）中，皮尔斯的符号学说：理论，应用和联系，229–235。柏林/纽约：木桐·德·格鲁特（Mouton De Gruyter）是为数不多的学者之一，对皮尔斯（Peirce）和亚里斯多德（Aristotle）进行了比较。因素声称皮尔斯的隐喻定义及其后果破坏并推翻了亚里士多德的理论。我们认为因素不正确；这是由于因素对亚里士多德理论中关键要素的误解。我们宁愿相信，皮尔斯和亚里士多德实际上在隐喻方面有共同的中心思想。也许，尤其是涉及到隐喻的功能。因此，例如，两者都将隐喻视为一种认知机制。本文试图发展这种观点。