[Lingtyp] Metaphors linguists live by?

[Nigel Vincent]

Thanks for the clarification, Claire. I'll read the papers and see what they propose.
Nigel


Professor Nigel Vincent, FBA MAE
Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics
The University of Manchester

Linguistics & English Language
School of Arts, Languages and Cultures
The University of Manchester



https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/researchers/nigel-vincent(f973a991-8ece-453e-abc5-3ca198c869dc).html

________________________________________
From: Claire Bowern [clairebowern at gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2018 8:14 PM
To: Nigel Vincent
Cc: ian.joo at outlook.com; lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Metaphors linguists live by?

Hi Nigel,
Davis and Hill are specifically talking about the technical
terminology that linguists use amongst themselves, not language
advocacy work. In fact, they both argue that the terminology is
alienating to indigenous linguists working on their own languages, and
is a barrier rather than a help in advocacy.
Claire
On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 9:33 AM Nigel Vincent
<nigel.vincent at manchester.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> I haven't read the papers Claire cites but instinctively I'd say that there is a big difference between the kinds of rhetorical metaphor that are used in situations of language advocacy, where the audience is necessarily wider than fellow specialists, and the technical terminology of linguistic analysis such as Ian cites, all of which in my view is simply metaphorical in the etymological sense.
> Nigel
>
> Professor Nigel Vincent, FBA MAE
> Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics
> The University of Manchester
>
> Linguistics & English Language
> School of Arts, Languages and Cultures
> The University of Manchester
>
>
>
> https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/researchers/nigel-vincent(f973a991-8ece-453e-abc5-3ca198c869dc).html
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Lingtyp [lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org] on behalf of Claire Bowern [clairebowern at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2018 2:16 PM
> To: ian.joo at outlook.com
> Cc: lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Metaphors linguists live by?
>
> Jane Hill and Jenny Davis have interesting papers on this for language
> documentation and endangerment:
>
> Davis, Jenny L. 2017. Resisting rhetorics of language endangerment:
> Reclamation through Indigenous language survivance. Language
> Documentation and Description 11.37-58.
> http://www.elpublishing.org/docs/1/14/ldd14_03.pdf
>
> Hill, Jane H. 2002. “Expert Rhetorics” in Advocacy for Endangered
> Languages: Who Is Listening, and What Do They Hear? Journal of
> Linguistic Anthropology 12(2). 119–133.
>
> Claire
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 9:07 AM Joo Ian <ian.joo at outlook.com> wrote:
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I would like to know if there is any work on the metaphors used by linguists.
> > For example, generative linguists use dynamic metaphors in their theory, such as "move", "merge", "bind", "command", or "govern".
> > On the other hand, cognitive linguists tend to use visual metaphors for their theory, such as "image schema" or "frame".
> > Phonologists use metaphors too, such as "lenition/fortition" (as though certain phonemes had "power" over others).
> > In fact, the concept of "metaphor" used in the metaphor theory is itself a metaphor, I would argue.
> > Are there any previous works that deal with metaphors used in linguistic theories? I would appreciate if anyone would share their experience on such works.
> >
> > From Hong Kong,
> > Ian Joo
> > http://ianjoo.academia.edu
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Lingtyp mailing list
> > Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> > http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp