A cliché is an expression that is used too often and has lost most of its meaning. Do you have the cliché in the cartoon in your language? Look at the clichés in bold in the following article. What do you think they mean?

Sweet Nothings

Stop and listen to a conversation in the bus or in the supermarket and time and time again you will hear conclusions along the lines of: 'Well, you know what they say...' And how many times have we all said that 'birds of a feather flock together', or, if it happen to be applicable, 'opposites attract'? Our conversations about life and love are full of clichés that we pull out time and again without really thinking. In fact, they communicate succinct and powerful messages, but that doesn't really explain why we're quite so keen on them.
Dr George Gaskell from the department of psychology at the London School of Economics likens clichés to conspiracy theories - 'hard to disprove and with a grain of truth to them - so once they're there, they're hard to get rid of. There's something self-reinforcing about them.' Dr Gaskell draws on research evidence which reveals that people are much more affected by something which confirms a hypothesis than something which negates it. So, even if a cliché is disproved ten times more often than it is proved, we'll still fall back on the idea that it must be true every single time.
Clichés, especially those we use when we're in love, are convenient short-cuts, avoiding the need for explanation so that someone gets the general idea immediately. Clichés, say the experts, are rarely challenged and it's their generality that makes them strong. If you're too specific, people have got something to disagree with. Above all, they're familiar.
The big question has got to be whether these pearls of wisdom are true. Should we trust the clichés trotted out about love, or are they just another set of myth?

Does (A) absence make the heart grow fonder, or is (B) out of sight, out of mind? The answer to this, according to Dr Jonathan potter from the department of sociology at Loughborough university, is that both are features of relationships: people have conflicting feelings and couples can miss each other when separated, yet be quite capable of getting on with their lives. 'You can use either cliché without fear of contradiction,' he says.
Well, not quite without contradiction. professor Nicholas Emler, from Dundee university, comes down squarely on the side of out of sight, out of mind in our personal relationships and forget about them surprisingly easily.'
Of course, the way you felt about the person in the first place might play its part.

(C) Does familiarity breed contempt? Professor Emler says research suggests that we prefer the familiar, that we are happiest when we know what to expect and from whom. Experiments in the States back up professor Emler's interpretation. In tests, the more people saw new objects, the more they liked them. but if we do prefer the familiar, why do we get bored?

(D) Is there a seven-year itch? This proverb did not fare well with the expert. "There is no evidence that after any set time couples are likely to break up or have difficulties." Dr potter says. 'While it's a good phrase accepting that after people have been together for some time there can be problems, there's nothing magical about the number seven, or any other number.'
But if people do get an itch, who are they likely to go for?

(E) Do birds of a feather flock together, or do (F) opposites attract? Professor Emler is quite definite on this: one saying is correct, the other a load of rubbish. people are much more attracted to 'their own kind'. Complementary backgrounds, religious, cultural or social, are vital to a happy relationship. 'A lot of research has been done on what draws people together, but the evidence clearly runs contrary to the theory that opposites attract. The fact is that real opposites run a mile from each other.' states professor Emler.
And what about the theory that the more unobtainable you seem, the more desirable you are to the opposite sex?

(G) Should you play hard to get? Some psychologists say it's really hit and miss - the theory may work - or it could hopelessly backfire. 'The experts agree that being nice, considerate, witty and charming is much more likely to win people's hearts.
We do, however, attach status to winning the affections of someone who is seen to be desired by a lot of people, and therefore is necessarily less likely to be obtainable. But ego seems to be the operative word here.
So, why is that we're sometimes left asking ourselves the question, 'What is it she or he's got that I haven't?'

(H) Beauty is in the eye of the beholder perhaps? Research shows that there is some consensus on attractiveness but there is never 100 per cent agreement. According to professor Emler. 'Cultural stereotypes, cinema and advertising all play their part in shaping our opinion on beauty. While in one group the majority can agree on what they find attractive, it is difficult to say why one person stands out.
'This phrase is a reassurance, it tells people that whatever they look like, there is someone out there who will desire them; that beauty, after all, really is only skin deep. It's also something you can't argue with because people cannot agree entirely on what beauty is.'