Figurative Language versus Literal Language - Essay Example

As such, this brief analysis will work to understand and describe each of these different types of language as well as proscribe the correct circumstances that call for their respective use. Literal language, as the name implies, denotes a very basic and conceptual explication of a given topic or issue. In this way, the subject matter is approach in a direct and front-on way. Furthermore, nuances of meaning are usually not left up to the reader to expand upon. In this way, literal language has an advantage over figurative language in the way it can convey the basic rudiments of a situation; however, its largest drawback is the fact that it can often bore the reader with a detail oriented and un-nuanced approach that figurative writing oftentimes does not.

However, it is important to note that regardless of whether one is using figurative or literal language, the same conventions of grammar and semantics apply as both forms must be polished and professionally employed to bring about a specific and desired effect on the intended audience. Figurative writing on the other hand is not intended to directly convey a specific meaning to the reader. As its very name announces, the purpose of figurative writing is to explain a given point or subject to the reader based on previously attained information or cultural/situational/religious knowledge that also has been previously obtained.

In this way, figurative writing is oftentimes able to leave out large parts of explanation and leave this to the reader to interpret as he/she sees fit. Moreover, this form of language is especially appreciated when a person is reading an account of a situation and would like to understand it through a combination both of the writer’s intended style as well as the cultural norms/mores that they have come in contact with during their life. In this way, figurative writers are able to explain a more nuanced approach to the reader that is not so dependent on actual hard facts to explain a given thought process or idea to the reader/listener.

Likewise, it is necessary to note that figurative writing can employ aspects of literal writing without diminishing its overall effectiveness. However, the same luxury cannot be afford to literal communication as even the incorporation of a small amount of figurative meaning weakens the construct and proves it not to be a literal form of communication. In this way, figurative writing often employs the use of similes, metaphors, personifications, alliterations, onomatopoeia, and hyperbole in order to convey its desired meaning.

Such a broad and varied means of conveyance means that figurative language can take a host of forms that literal language cannot. Although it is tempting to refer to figurative language as merely confined to the written word, this is hardly the case. The fact of the matter is that figurative language is equally used in spoken form as well. One need only consider the levels of nuance that are displayed during one of the recent presidential debates to understand that both candidates have employed figurative language and devices to evoke responses within the electorate without having to directly state the intended goal (Deely 2006).

By using popularly understand means to describe a secondary or tertiary point, the candidates, as well as many others who employ this style, are able to evoke levels of