【正文】 nm on lit e r acy devi ce i n fi ct i on, t hough it i s m or e m onl y used in poetr y whil e simi l e is m or e monl y used i n prose. A metaphor em phasi zes ri ch suggest iveness i n the dif f er ences bet ween t he t hings par ed and the r ecognit ion of sur pri si ng but unsuspected sim il ar it ies. Cl eant h Br ooks uses the t er m “f unct ional m et aphor ” t o descri be the way i n whi ch t he met aphor is able t o have “r ef er ent ial ” and “emoti ve” char act er isti cs, and t o go beyond t hose char act er i sti cs t o be e a di rect m eans i n it sel f of represent ing a t r ut h i nm uni cable by ot her m eans. When a m et aphor per f or ms t hi s f uncti on, i t is behavi ng as a sym bol . But a sym bol dif f er s fr om a m et aphor i n t hat a m et aphor evokes an obj ect i n or der t o il lustrat e an i dea or demonst r at e a qual it y, wher eas a symbol embodi es t he i dea or the qual it y. Al egory An al legor y i s a stor y i n whi ch persons, places, act i ons, and t hings are equat ed wi th m eani ngs t hat li e outsi de of t he st ory i tself . Thus i t r epr esent s one t hi ng in t he gui se of anot her —an abst r acti on i n t he f orm of a concr et e im age. A cl ear exam ple i s t he ol d Ar ab fable of t he fr og and scor pi on, who m e one day on t he bank of t he Nil e, whi ch they both want ed to cr oss. The fr og off ered t o f er r y t he scor pi on over on hi s back, pr ovi ded t he scor pi on pr omi sed not t o sti ng hi m. The scor pi on agr ed so l ong as t he fr og woul d pr omi se not t o drown hi m. The m ut ual pr omi se exchanged, t hey cr ossed t he ri ver. On t he f ar bank t he scorpi on st ung t he f rog m or t al y. “Why di d you do that?” cr oaked t he f r og, as he lay dyi ng. “Why?” repli ed t he scorpi on. “We ?r e bot h Arabs, ar en? t we?” I f we subst it ute f or the f rog a “Mr. Goodwil l ” and f or the scor pi on “Mr. Tr eacher y” or “Mr. Two face”, and we m ake t he ri ver any r i ver, and f or “We? r e bot h Ar abs” we subst it ute “We? r e bot h men,” we can m ake the f abl e i nt o an al legory. I n a si mpl e al legory, char act er s and ot her i ngredients of ten st and f or ot her defi nit e meani ngs, whi ch ar e oft en abst ract i ons. We have met such a character i n t he l ast chapt er : Fai th i n Hawt hor ne? s “Young Goodm an Brown. ” A cl assi cal al egor y i s the m edi eval pl ay Everyman, whose pr ot agoni st r epr esents us al , and who, deser ted by f alse fr i ends nam ed Ki nddr ed and Goods, faces t he j udgm ent of God a pani ed onl y by a f ait hf ul fr iend cal ed Good Deeds. In John Bunyan?s Pil grim ’s Progress, t he pr ot agoni st, Chri st i an, st r uggl es al ong t he dif fi cul t r oad t owar ds sal vat ion, m eet i ng al ong t he way wi t h such persons as Mr. Wor l dl y Wi sem an, who di rect s him i nt o a f ort abl e pat h ( a wr ong t ur n) , and t he r esident of a t own cal ed Fai r Speech, am ong t hem a hypocr it e nam ed Mr . Faci ng bot h ways. One m oder n i nst ance i s Geor ge Or wel l? s Anim al Farm, i n whi ch ( am ong it s doubl e meani ngs) bar nyar d anim al s stand f or hum an vi ct im s and t otali t ar ian oppressor s. Al legory at tempt s t o evoke a dual i nt erest , one in t he events, char act er s, and set ti ng present ed, and t he ot her i n t he i deas t hey ar e i nt ended t o convey or t he si gni fi cance t hey bear . Sym bol di f er s f rom al l egor y, accor di ng t o Col eri dge, i n that in al egor y t he obj ect i ve r efer ent evokes is wit hout val ue until i t acquir es fi xed m eani ng fr om i ts own par ti cul ar st ruct ur e of i deas, whereas a sym bol i ncl udes perm anent obj ect ive value, independent of t he m eani ngs t hat i t m ay suggest . In a br oad sense, al st or i es ar e sym boli c, t hat i s, t he wr it er l ends t he char act er s and their acti ons some speci al si gni fi ca nce. Of course, t his i s t o thi nk of sym bol i n an extr em ely br oad and i ncl usi ve way. For t he usual pur pose of r eadi ng a st ory and under standi ng it , t her e i s pr obably l it tl e poi nt in l ooki ng f or symboli sm i n ever y wor d, i n ever y sti ck or st one, i n ever y st ri ki ng f o a m at ch, i n ever y mi nor charact er. But t o ref use t o t hi nk about t he sym boli c meani ngs woul d be another way t o m isr ead a st or y. So to be on t he alert f or sym bol s when readi ng f icti on is per haps wi ser t han t o i gnor e them . How, t hen, do we r ecogni ze a sym bol i n fi ct i on when we meet i t ? For t unatel y, t he st or ytel er oft en gi vens t he sym bol part icular em phasi s. It m ay be m ent i oned r epeatedly t hr oughout t he st ory。 / The holy t im e is qui et as a nun, ” t he second li ne i s hi ghl y fi gur ati ve whil e t he f ir st l i ne evokes a l it eral im age. We consi der an i mage, whet her l it er al or f i gur at ive, to have a concr et e r ef erent i n t he object i ve worl d and to f unct i on as im age when it powerf ull y evokes t hat r ef er ent 。 Petal s on a wet, bl ack bough. 地鐵車站 人群 粉面 幽靈 黝濕 枝頭 花瓣 I mager y, a rat her vague cr it ical t erm cover ing t hose uses of l anguage in a l it erar y wor k that evoke sense—im pressi ons by lit eral or fi gurati ve reference t o percept i bl e or ?concrete? obj ect s, scenes, acti ons, or st ates, as disti nct f r om t he l anguage of abstr act ar gum ent or exposit ion. The i magery of a l it erary work t hus prises the set of im ages t hat i t uses。 it m ay even be i ndi cat ed i n t he ti tl e (“Ar aby, ” “Bar n Bur ni ng, ” “A Cl ean, Wel l Light ed Pl ace”). At t im es, a cr ucial sym bol wi l open a st or y or end i t. Unl ess an object , act , or character is gi ven som e speci al em phasis and im por t ance, we m ay gener al l y feel saf e in t aki ng it at f ace value. But