As discussed, in the traditional view similarity is the basis of metaphor, and it also constrains the

selection of particular linguistic expressions to talk about something else. A fairly typical example of
this would be the expression “the roses on her cheeks.” The example displays some typical features
of the most widely held traditional view of metaphor:

1.
Metaphor is decorative or fancy speech.
We use the word roses to talk about somebody’s cheeks because we wish to create some special
effect in the listener or reader (such as creating a pleasing image).
2.
Metaphor is a linguistic, and not a conceptual, phenomenon.
Whatever the intended effect or purpose is, in metaphor we simply use one word or expression
instead of another word or expression, rather than one conceptual domain to comprehend another.
3.
The basis for using the word roses to talk about somebody’s cheeks is the similarity between the
color of some roses (pink or red) and that of the color of a person’s cheeks (also pink or some light
red). This similarity makes it possible for speakers to use the word rose instead of, say, the phrase
the pink skin on her cheeks for some special effect. The similarity between some roses and some
kinds of skin exists in reality before anyone uses roses to talk about somebody’s cheeks.
4.
It is this preexisting kind of similarity between two things that constrains the possible metaphors
speakers can employ for skins of some color. Given the color of this kind of skin on the cheeks, the
rose is a good choice for a metaphor in a way in which many other things would not be; thus, for
example, we could not talk metaphorically appropriately about the pinkish color on a person’s
cheeks by using the word sky, as in “the sky on her cheeks.”