Explanation
A table does not ordinarily formulate a conclusion in words. Someone selects measurements, comparisons and thresholds, then describes their significance. Saying 'the figures tell us everything' compresses those operations into an apparently direct message. The compression may be convenient, but its argumentative consequences remain open to examination. Recovering interpretation does not dissolve evidence into arbitrary opinion. Some readings fit a body of observations much better than others. The point is to make their warrants available: which observations support which claim, and what further causes or conditions have been assumed? A sound interpretation benefits from having its route shown.
Movement of thought
1. State the message supposedly voiced by the object or data. 2. Describe the observation without that message. 3. Recover selection, comparison and inference. 4. Test relevant alternative explanations. 5. Restate the conclusion with its justified scope.
Scientific use case
Research on the communication of evidence can distinguish reported observations, attributed voices and inferential claims in public reports. The resulting coding describes discourse; it does not replace validation of the dataset itself.
Example
Invented example: 'The empty chairs say nobody cares.' The chairs show low attendance at a particular event. Lack of interest is one possible explanation; a changed timetable or missing invitation is another. Additional inquiry, not the strength of the metaphor, decides between them.
Counterexample
An idiom such as speaks for is not necessarily dishonest or an elaborate personification. Recognising human interpretation does not license denial of well-established measurements.
Distinction
Personification concerns presentation as a person; anthropomorphism concerns human-like attributes. Speaking metaphors focus specifically on the source of a message and interpretive authority. Book and reading metaphors foreground legibility instead.
Effect on thought and perception
An apparently immediate factual message becomes a reconstructable and potentially corrigible interpretation.
Resonance
The world may feel articulate and close. Asking who translates its supposed speech can turn passive acceptance into informed participation.
Etymology
The English title is descriptive, not a claim that speaking metaphors form one universally standardised historical figure name.
Provenance
The historical source field is the Sprechen article in the Dictionary of Philosophical Metaphors. The focus on contemporary datasets is an explicitly modern Atlas application rather than an inherited theory of digital evidence.
Cite this entry
Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Metaphors of speaking things and data“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-ADD-20261020-0006. ATLAS 261, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-ADD-20261020-0006The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-20. Include your access date for precise references.
Guiding question
Who is interpreting when the numbers supposedly speak for themselves?
Five coordinate questions
These descriptions explain the entry. They are not controlled register values and do not generate shared register results.
- Where can the process be observed?
Invented example: 'The empty chairs say nobody cares.' The chairs show low attendance at a particular event. Lack of interest is one possible explanation; a changed timetable or missing invitation is another. Additional inquiry, not the strength of the metaphor, decides between them.
- What happens to the material?
State the message supposedly voiced by the object or data.
Describe the observation without that message.
Recover selection, comparison and inference.
Test relevant alternative explanations.
Restate the conclusion with its justified scope.
- At what level does a change occur?
An apparently immediate factual message becomes a reconstructable and potentially corrigible interpretation.
- What temporal structure is explicitly described?
The steps offer an order of analysis, not an asserted real-time sequence of mental events. Read the particular example sequence separately from the historical development.
- How can the description be tested?
An idiom such as speaks for is not necessarily dishonest or an elaborate personification. Recognising human interpretation does not license denial of well-established measurements.
Historical context
The historical source field is the Sprechen article in the Dictionary of Philosophical Metaphors. The focus on contemporary datasets is an explicitly modern Atlas application rather than an inherited theory of digital evidence.
Cross-language distinction and terminology
The figures speak for themselves resembles die Zahlen sprechen für sich, but ordinary idiom need not imply literal speech. Context determines how strongly interpretive work is being concealed.
Scholarly comparisons and distinctions
These entries are editorial comparison anchors for the distinctions made in this article. They are not new canonical relation edges or shared register results.
Proposed thought pathway
- State the message supposedly voiced by the object or data.
- Describe the observation without that message.
- Recover selection, comparison and inference.
- Test relevant alternative explanations.
- Restate the conclusion with its justified scope.
An editorial exploration, not a necessary sequence of thought or experimental evidence of an effect.
Source scope and provenance
Both specialist versions are editorially accepted. The recorded scope of the reference-work research is retained; this is not a fresh full verification of every primary source. Examples and analytical steps are Atlas applications.