*pictures of reading are not in order*

There were many things I found interesting while reading this text. One part I found particularly interesting, was towards the end (p.6), when the example about dandelions and orchids came up. How the culture perceived the metaphor and how the person who came up with the metaphor perceived it were different. The metaphor compared children and their circumstances to flowers. A child who was considered a dandelion did well in a variety of circumstances whereas the child who was a orchid succeeded under a narrow set of circumstances. I think that Michael Erard and Tom Boyce, the ones who created this description were not thinking about the type of flower when the thought of it. When it got out to everyone, our culture immediately thought about the value and beauty of the flower. Sometimes people think of metaphors literally and some people really think about the deep meaning of them. This example of the flowers seems to me that culture took this metaphor literally. Thinking of metaphors in general was also talked about in this text. Metaphors can change how people think, and also make them look at words and their combinations in more detail. Usually metaphors compare two things that aren’t always related, a pairing of words that creates a surprise. As much as metaphors create a surprise, they can also make detailed words more “casual”, which in my personal opinion can sometimes ruin the word. Metaphors usually take two things and make them relatable to humans. Metaphors play a huge role in communication everyday between people. We use metaphors way more than we think. Metaphors are a very fascinating thing in our language, their use and how they portray objects are useful in relating things.