ellauri007.html on line 27: omnia cui similem vix nova saecla dabunt.

ellauri036.html on line 871: Il peut s'assimiler au débauché vulgaire,
ellauri077.html on line 828:

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
   ellauri156.html on line 699: The lawyer was in trouble; the story had no technicalities over which to argue. It brought the issue home, with little ground for quibbling over details. When push came to shove, the lawyer knew our Lord's functional definition of “neighbor” was absolutely right. He had nowhere to hide. The story did the trick; it cut to the heart of the matter, while avoiding trivial details to quibble over for hours. It was not the lawyer who made Jesus look bad with all his minutiae but Jesus who made the lawyer look bad with a simple story. The best part about similes that they can be tweaked any way you wish. Russians are our neighbors if they get to trouble, and so are Chinamen. But there is nothing here about helping them when they threaten our vital interests.
   ellauri158.html on line 791: P. 3. prop. 16. Ex eo solo, quod rem aliquam aliquid habere imaginamur simile obiecto, quod mentem laetitia vel tristitia afficere solet, quamvis id, in quo res obiecto est similis, non sit horum affectuum efficiens causa, eam tamen amabimus vel odio habebimus. [in: P. 3. prop. 15. schol., prop. 17., prop. 41., prop. 46., P. 4. prop. 34.]
   ellauri158.html on line 792: P. 3. prop. 17. Si rem, quae nos tristitiae affectu afficere solet, aliquid habere imaginamur simile alteri, quae nos aeque magno laetitiae affectu solet afficere, eandem odio habebimus et simul amabimus. [in: prop. 17. schol.]
   ellauri158.html on line 810: P. 3. prop. 27. Ex eo, quod rem nobis similem et quam nullo affectu prosecuti sumus, aliquo affectu affici imaginamur, eo ipso simili affectu afficimur. [in: P. 3. prop. 22. schol., prop. 23. schol., prop. 27. coroll. 1., prop. 27. coroll. 3., prop. 29., prop. 30., prop. 31., prop. 32., prop. 40., prop. 47., prop. 49. schol., prop. 52. schol., prop. 53. coroll., aff. defin. 33., aff. defin. 44., P. 4. prop. 50. schol., prop. 68. schol.]
   ellauri158.html on line 812: -- P. 3. prop. 27. coroll. 1. Si aliquem, quem nullo affectu prosecuti sumus, imaginamur laetitia afficere rem nobis similem, amore erga eundem afficiemur. Si contra eundem imaginamur eandem tristitia afficere, odio erga ipsum afficiemur. [in: P. 3. prop. 32., aff. defin. 19., aff. defin. 20.]
   ellauri158.html on line 826: P. 3. prop. 33. Cum rem nobis similem amamus, conamur, quantum possumus, efficere, ut nos contra amet. [in: P. 3. prop. 34., prop. 38., prop. 42.]
   ellauri158.html on line 850: P. 3. prop. 45. Si quis aliquem sibi similem odio in rem sibi similem, quam amat, affectum esse imaginatur, eum odio habebit.
   ellauri158.html on line 949: P. 3. aff. defin. 18. Commiseratio est tristitia concomitante idea mali, quod alteri, quem nobis similem esse imaginamur, evenit. [in: P. 4. prop. 50.]
   ellauri264.html on line 88: Dans sa réaction violente contre le milieu à la fois dreyfusard et juif auquel il est intimement lié malgré lui, Rolland perd toute impartialité et finit pas assimiler les défenseurs de Dreyfus aux Juifs. La cause dreyfusarde, c’est la campagne des Juifs ou celle de la Banque juive. En realite, la plupart d’entre eux se tenaient à l’écart. Les Juifs ne voulaient pas qu’on les accuse de prendre parti pour Dreyfus parce qu’il était, comme eux, Juif.
   xxx/ellauri010.html on line 62: That ´s an appropriate simile, that jackal;— Se onkin oiva vertauskuva, sakaali; -
   xxx/ellauri125.html on line 307: Though only 40 minutes long, “Yeezus” weighs a ton, heavy with gravity and mouthiness, yowls, synthetic noise, deep beats and screams. A multi-dimensional contradiction, West tosses out rhyme-schemed similes that employ racial ideas rich with symbolism but often in service of harsh lyrics that suggests he either doesn’t appreciate or care about original intent.
   xxx/ellauri387.html on line 499: The ´definiteness´ of a genre classification leads the reader to expect a series of formal stimuli--martial encounters, complex similes, an epic voice--to which his response is more or less automatic; the hardness of the Christian myth predetermines his sympathies; the union of the two allows the assumption of a comfortable reading experience in which conveniently labelled protagonists act out rather simple roles in a succession of familiar situations. The reader is prepared to hiss the devil off the stage and applaud the pronouncements of a partisan and somewhat human deity . . . . But of course this is not the case; no sensitive reading of Paradise Lost tallies with these expectations, and it is my contention that Milton ostentatiously calls them up in order to provide his reader with the shock of their disappointment. This is not to say merely that Milton communicates a part of his meaning by a calculated departure from convention; every poet does that; but that Milton consciously wants to worry his reader, to force him to doubt the correctness of his responses, and to bring him to the realization that his inability to read the poem with any confidence in his own perception is its focus.
   15