Figurative Language Techniques

What is figurative language?

Figurative language creates images and effects beyond the literal meaning of words. Writers use it to make their writing vivid, emotional, and memorable.

Knowing the names of the techniques is the easy part, and on its own it earns very little. The marks come from explaining what a particular image makes the reader see, feel or understand — and from noticing which image the writer chose when they could have chosen another.

Key Techniques

Technique	Definition	Example
Simile	Comparing using like or as	"Her smile was like sunshine."
Metaphor	Saying something is something else	"He was a lion in battle."
Personification	Giving human qualities to non-human things	"The wind howled through the trees."
Hyperbole	Deliberate exaggeration	"I've told you a million times."
Symbolism	Object/image represents a bigger idea	A dove symbolising peace
Pathetic fallacy	Weather or landscape reflecting mood	"The sky darkened as she read the letter."
Extended metaphor	A metaphor sustained across several lines	Describing an argument entirely in the language of war

Simile versus metaphor — why the difference matters

Students often treat these as interchangeable, but the distinction is analysable.

A simile keeps the two things separate. "He was like a lion" admits the comparison is a comparison — the man remains a man who resembles a lion in some respect.

A metaphor collapses them. "He was a lion" makes no concession to reality, so it feels more absolute and more committed.

That difference is worth a sentence in an answer: a writer choosing a metaphor over a simile is choosing certainty over comparison, and you can say so.

From spotting to analysing

This is the single biggest cause of lost marks in language analysis. Compare three responses to "The wind howled through the trees."

Level 1 — spotting: "The writer uses personification."

Level 2 — explaining: "The writer uses personification to make the wind seem alive."

Level 3 — analysing: "The verb 'howled' personifies the wind as something animal rather than human — a wolf or a dog — which makes the landscape feel predatory rather than merely windy. The reader is positioned to feel the character is being hunted by the setting itself."

The third answer does three things the others do not: it quotes a specific word, it notices what kind of living thing the personification suggests, and it says what the effect is on the reader.

Always zoom in on the word

The fastest way to lift an answer is to analyse one word rather than the whole image.

In "the wind howled", the technique is personification but the mark is in "howled". Ask yourself what the writer rejected: blew, rushed, whistled, moaned. Each would have created a different mood. "Howled" was chosen for its animal connotations and its suggestion of pain or threat.

That question — what else could they have written? — is the most reliable analytical habit you can build.

Connotations

Connotations are the associations a word carries beyond its dictionary meaning, and they are where most analysis actually happens.

• Home and house describe the same building; only one suggests warmth and belonging
• Slim, thin and skinny describe the same body; the connotations run from complimentary to unkind
• Crimson, scarlet and red name the same colour; crimson suggests richness or blood, scarlet suggests danger or scandal

When you analyse an image, ask what the specific word brings with it that a neutral synonym would not.

Worked example

"The city swallowed her whole."

A full analysis: the metaphor presents the city as a predatory creature, and the verb "swallowed" suggests being consumed without struggle or trace — it is effortless on the city's part and final on hers. "Whole" intensifies this: she is not damaged but disappeared entirely, and the reader is left with an image of a person absorbed into something vastly larger and indifferent. The writer could have written "the city overwhelmed her"; choosing a verb of eating makes the city alive and hungry.

Common mistakes

• Feature-spotting — naming techniques without explaining their effect
• Writing "this makes it more interesting for the reader", which says nothing and is the most common filler phrase in the subject
• Analysing the whole quotation instead of zooming in on one word
• Confusing simile and metaphor, or calling any comparison a metaphor
• Inventing effects the language does not support — analysis must be rooted in the actual words

Exam tips

• Quote short — a few words is usually enough
• Name the technique, then immediately move to the specific word and its connotations
• Say what the reader sees, feels or understands — that phrasing keeps you on the effect
• Ask "what else could the writer have chosen?" to find something to say
• One image analysed in depth scores more than four listed quickly

Key facts to remember

• Naming a technique is worth almost nothing; explaining its effect is the mark
• Metaphor is more absolute than simile — that difference is analysable
• Zoom in on individual words and their connotations
• Personification is more useful when you identify what kind of living thing is suggested
• Avoid "makes it more interesting" — say precisely what effect is created