τῶν δ’ ὀνομάτων τῷ (38) μὲν σοφιστῇ ὁμωνυμίαι χρήσιμοι (παρὰ ταύτας γὰρ κακουρ(39)γεῖ),
τῷ ποιητῇ δὲ συνωνυμίαι, λέγω δὲ κύριά τε καὶ συν(1405a1)ώνυμα οἷον τὸ πορεύεσθαι καὶ τὸ βαδίζειν· ταῦτα γὰρ ἀμφό(2)τερα καὶ κύρια καὶ συνώνυμα ἀλλήλοις.
(3) τί μὲν οὖν τούτων ἕκαστόν ἐστι, καὶ πόσα εἴδη μετα(4)φορᾶς, καὶ ὅτι τοῦτο πλεῖστον δύναται καὶ ἐν ποιήσει καὶ (5) ἐν λόγοις, [αἱ μεταφοραί,] εἴρηται, καθάπερ ἐλέγομεν, ἐν τοῖς (6) περὶ ποιητικῆς·
τοσούτῳ δ’ ἐν λόγῳ δεῖ μᾶλλον φιλοπονεῖ(7)σθαι περὶ αὐτῶν, ὅσῳ ἐξ ἐλαττόνων βοηθημάτων ὁ λόγος (8) ἐστὶ τῶν μέτρων·
καὶ τὸ σαφὲς καὶ τὸ ἡδὺ καὶ τὸ ξενικὸν (9) ἔχει μάλιστα ἡ μεταφορά, καὶ λαβεῖν οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτὴν παρ’ (10) ἄλλου.
δεῖ δὲ καὶ τὰ ἐπίθετα καὶ τὰς μεταφορὰς ἁρμοτ(11)τούσας λέγειν.
τοῦτο δ’ ἔσται ἐκ τοῦ ἀνάλογον·
εἰ δὲ μή, (12) ἀπρεπὲς φανεῖται διὰ τὸ παρ’ ἄλληλα τὰ ἐναντία μάλιστα (13) φαίνεσθαι.
ἀλλὰ δεῖ σκοπεῖν, ὡς νέῳ φοινικίς, οὕτω γέ(14)ροντι τί (οὐ γὰρ ἡ αὐτὴ πρέπει ἐσθής)
καὶ ἐάν τε κοσμεῖν (15) βούλῃ, ἀπὸ τῶν βελτίστων τῶν ἐν ταὐτῷ γένει φέρειν τὴν (16) μεταφοράν, ἐάν τε ψέγειν, ἀπὸ τῶν χειρόνων·
λέγω δ’ οἷον, (17) ἐπεὶ τὰ ἐναντία ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ γένει, τὸ φάναι τὸν μὲν πτω(18)χεύοντα εὔχεσθαι τὸν δὲ εὐχόμενον πτωχεύειν, ὅτι ἄμφω αἰ(19)τήσεις, τὸ εἰρημένον ἐστὶ ποιεῖν,
ὡς καὶ Ἰφικράτης Καλλίαν (20) μητραγύρτην ἀλλ’ οὐ δᾳδοῦχον,
ὁ δὲ ἔφη ἀμύητον αὐτὸν (21) εἶναι· οὐ γὰρ ἂν μητραγύρτην αὐτὸν καλεῖν, ἀλλὰ δᾳδοῦχον·
(22) ἄμφω γὰρ περὶ θεόν, ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν τίμιον τὸ δὲ ἄτιμον.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
thus satisfying our definition of good oratorical prose.
Words of ambiguous meaning are chiefly useful to enable the sophist to mislead his hearers.
Synonyms are useful to the poet, by which I mean words whose ordinary meaning is the same, e.g. ’poreuesthai’ (advancing) and ‘badizein’ (proceeding); these two are ordinary words and have the same meaning.
In the Art of Poetry, as we have already said, will be found definitions of these kinds of words; a classification of Metaphors; and mention of the fact that metaphor is of great value both in poetry and in prose.
Prose—writers must, however, pay specially careful attention to metaphor, because their other resources are scantier than those of poets.
Metaphor, moreover, gives style clearness, charm, and distinction as nothing else can: and it is not a thing whose use can be taught by one man to another.
Metaphors, like epithets, must be fitting,
which means that they must fairly correspond to the thing signified:
failing this, their inappropriateness will be conspicuous: the want of harmony between two things is emphasized by their being placed side by side.
It is like having to ask ourselves what dress will suit an old man; certainly not the crimson cloak that suits a young man.
And if you wish to pay a compliment, you must take your metaphor from something better in the same line; if to disparage, from something worse.
To illustrate my meaning: since opposites are in the same class, you do what I have suggested if you say that a man who begs ‘prays’, and a man who prays ‘begs’; for praying and begging are both varieties of asking.
So Iphicrates called Callias a ‘mendicant priest’ instead of a ‘torch—bearer’,
and Callias replied that Iphicrates must be uninitiated or he would have called him not a ‘mendicant priest’ but a ‘torch—bearer’.