When reading through Michael Erards work I noticed plenty of theories about metaphors. This included what the meaning of some of the structures were and the origins behind the creation of specific metaphor. I had to polar opposite reactions to two different theories I had come across. One of these theories discussed was about how metaphors are really categorisation proposals which are “suggesting that one things belongs with another.” I related to this theory because it connects and follows along the same lines that I view metaphors. When reading this it just made sense to me; I understood when creator of the theory, Princeton psychologist Sam Glucksberg, described the categories that separate different metaphors are how they are meant to be distinguished and why metaphors seem to have any connections at all. One of the major points in his theory was about how metaphors have ‘dual reference’. This essentially targets how people categorize certain words leading to a combination of ideas that according to one point of view have no correlation but according to another match together perfectly. The other theory, created by psychologist Dedre Gentnerclaimed that there are two steps in the creation of metaphors. In the first step the concepts are matched. This means that the two specific ideas are identified. The second step in this would then be the comparison of the two individual concepts which finishes in the result of a metaphor. This theory is both confused and unnecessarily long. I understand the overall concept of it but the first theory is a simple concept to grasp which simplifies the idea of what a metaphor means.