Discusses 3 theories of metaphor: (a) that metaphors make comparisons, the basis for the comparison being the features that the terms of the metaphor share; (b) that metaphors involve an anomaly; and (c) that metaphors are “interactive,” producing a new way of seeing the terms. The domains-interaction view is proposed, which draws on elements of all 3 earlier views, but borrows especially from the interaction view. It is argued that metaphors correlate 2 systems of concepts from different domains. The best metaphors involve 2 diverse domains (more distance between domains making for better metaphors) and close correspondence between the terms within those domains. The degree of correspondence is called within-domain similarity. Metaphors are interpreted in several stages: the terms of the metaphor are encoded, the domains involved are inferred, the structures to be seen as parallel are found, the correspondences between the structures are constructed, and the terms of the metaphor are compared. If the terms do not match or occupy analogous roles in their different domains, then the metaphor may be reinterpreted. Studies showing that tenor and vehicle do not share features are cited as evidence for this theory. (French abstract) (47 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)