Familiar and Remote Simile: Detail, Conditional Resemblance, and Rhetorical Acceptance

Read-only question overview. Answers and scoring remain inside authenticated learner attempts.

• What principally identifies a familiar simile?
• When two terms have a conspicuous resemblance, which cause of familiarity is present?
• A frequently used model readily comes to mind. What explains this?
• Why is “a face is like the moon” often familiar?
• If a model is well known but its relation to this subject is obscure, what follows?
• What contributes most to remoteness in the sun-and-mirror comparison?
• A detailed analogy is nevertheless immediately understood through repeated use. Which analysis is correct?
• What is the defining feature of a remote simile?
• How do concealed resemblance and rare recollection of the model differ?
• What intellectual relation is central to the donkey carrying books?
• When does absence of an attribute matter in a detailed resemblance?
• What combination matters in the spear-tip image?
• Selecting only relevant properties of an object illustrates what?
• When may a remote simile be rhetorically successful?
• Which alteration most clearly can turn a familiar simile into an unusual one?
• What is the rhetorical effect of describing the sun as shameless before a face?
• Why is the no-setting condition necessary in the comparison of resolve to stars?
• What is the basic function of a condition in a conditional simile?
• On what criterion is a simile called emphatic (muʾakkad)?
• What distinguishes “Zayd is like a lion” from “Zayd is a lion” in the given comparison?
• Why is absence of “ka-” insufficient to prove that an expression is a simile?
• How is likeness conveyed in “they pass as clouds pass”?
• What is central to the picture of golden evening rays on silver-like water?
• What makes a simile acceptable?
• What is the defect if the model used to clarify a state is itself more obscure?
• What model suits a simile intended to establish possibility?
• Can a simile be both remote and acceptable?
• Any simile with several attributes must always be remote.
• Frequent mental presence of the model can contribute to familiarity.
• A conditional simile may depend on absence of a feature.
• Emphatic versus mursal similes are distinguished by the obscurity of resemblance.
• A very familiar simile may still be unacceptable if it fails its intended purpose.