"Out of curiosity, has anyone out there read Lakoff & Johnson's "Metaphors
we
> live by"?

Actually, I have read the book and it is informative, but dated. It doesn't
address the issue of metaphors in UIs which are very different from language
based metaphors, which is why they often fail.

Language metaphors are constructed when speakers have violated one of the
Gricean Maxims listed below. In order for communication to happen, speakers
and listeners all have to agree implicitly to the Gricean Maxims below and
assume that they are true for everyone. Language metaphors happen when the
bridging of two literal meanings create an implicit or non-literal meaning
because the literal sense of the message is ambiguous or untrue. The act of
combining the two literal meanings is the understanding or the work of
decoding the metaphor. If users aren't given a motivation to decode a new
combination of meanings or an ambiguity, the metaphor will fail.

Briefly, Grice states that when people are presented with a message- verbal
or written, they attempt to understand it because they assume the following
is always true of every communication.
1. Communication is a cooperative endeavor; the message is intended to be
understood
2. Quality; the message sender by virtue of taking the effort to send the
message believes it worthy of understanding
3. Relevance; each message is relevant to the situation or topic- it is not
random.
4. Manner; each message is a clear contribution free of ambiguity and
obsequiousness.
Grice, H. P. (1996). Logic and Conversation, in Readings in Language and the
Mind. Ed. by Geirsson, H. & Losonsky, M. Blackwell Publishing. pp 124-125.

 In order for people to do this work for symbolic metaphors, the symbol must
motivate people in some way. The motivation can be implicit-trying to get
the UI to perform in a certain way or pressure from other users to
understand the UI. But the point is that people will not try to
automatically decode a symbolic metaphor with no motivation because they
don't assume the same principles as they do for language metaphors.

For the iPod, people figured out how to make the touch circle control work
because they were fascinated by the device, were pressured by other users
and the media... etc. Funology stuff.

The 'trashcan' metaphor is used repeatedly, like iPod controls and is now
considered a "dead metaphor" or idiom. It is thought that through repetition
of use, idioms create their own meaning separate from any literal
translation and don't have to adhere to Gricean Maxims. They are literally
understood in their own sense. The research I'm working on right now. :)

So, I'm always looking for more ideas in this area (dissertation topics
anyone?), please email me if anything comes to mind or I can share my hours
of pouring over this literature.
cheers,
Jo

-- 
L. Jo Elliott, M.A.
PhD student
former IBM usability engineer
Engineering Psychology/Human Factors/HCI
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, NM  88001 USA
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help

Reply via email to