5.0455 Rs: Methodology as Metaphor (3/67)
Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Mon, 18 Nov 1991 18:54:09 EST
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 5, No. 0455. Monday, 18 Nov 1991.
(1) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 14:23:17 MST (28 lines)
From: "don l. f. nilsen" <ATDFN@ASUACAD>
Subject: METHODOLOGY AS METAPHOR
(2) Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1991 11:52 MST (15 lines)
From: OCRAMER@CCNODE.Colorado.EDU
Subject: Re: 5.0448 N&Q: ... Methodology
(3) Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 21:55 EST (24 lines)
From: John_E_JOSEPH@umail.umd.edu (jj36)
Subject: re: 5.0448(5): Methodology as metaphor
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 14:23:17 MST
From: "don l. f. nilsen" <ATDFN@ASUACAD>
Subject: METHODOLOGY AS METAPHOR
I am intrigued by Mark Bergman's inquiry about "Methodology as
Metaphor." I believe that this phenomenon is much more prevalent than
we are aware of.
I don't think it's a coincidence, for example, that Einstein developed
his concept of Relativity (E = mc2), and that later Benjamin Whorf
developed his concept of "Linguistic Relativity."
I also don't think it's a coincidence that Darwin developed his
tree diagrams to explain the theory of evolution and that later Noam
Chomsky used similar looking trees to describe phrase structure rules.
Actually, these trees, don't look like trees at all. Perhaps the word
ROOTS should have been used in both cases, but then maybe this would
have made our perceptions more BASIC, or more BASE.
Maybe we could call the Einstein and the Darwin metaphors ROOT
METAPHORS, since other metaphors grow from them. This would be
especially apt in the Darwin case.
=-) ;-> 8*) {^_^}
Don L. F. Nilsen
<ATDFN@ASUACAD.BITNET>, (602) 965-7592
Executive Secretary
International Society for Humor Studies
English Department
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-0302
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------23----
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 1991 11:52 MST
From: OCRAMER@CCNODE.Colorado.EDU
Subject: Re: 5.0448 N&Q: E-Addresses; Methodology; Grant; etc. (6/93)
Re: Marc Bregman's question about method and metaphor: the notion itself
of method, Greek met-hodos, a road from here to there, must have started in
Plato (Sophist 218d etc. moving toward Phaedrus 270c etc.; citations just
from Liddell-Scott, this isn't very learned) as a metaphor (meta-phora, a
carrying from here to there). Maybe any linguistic coinage is always at the
start metaphor, and it would be good to look at the rhetorics, including
Hayden White's _Tropics of Discourse_ for discussion of the way this trope
works in general. Maybe any new method in any science is always transferred
metaphorically (Latin _transferre_ = Greek _metapherein_) from some other
science or area. Kuhn on paradigms, Holton on thematic basis of sciences?
Owen Cramer, Colorado College
(3) --------------------------------------------------------------35----
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 91 21:55 EST
From: John_E_JOSEPH@umail.umd.edu (jj36)
Subject: re: 5.0448(5): Methodology as metaphor
> There is a considerable literature of this sort in the history of
>linguistics. Apparently because linguists have had such a difficult time
>defining an object of study for our field over the last 200 years, we have
developed a series of methodologies-as-metaphor based on the
>terminology of biology, economics, physics, etc. Some citations:
>
>Joseph, John E. 1989. "Four models of linguistic change." _Synchronic and
>Diachronic Approaches to Linguistic Variation and Change: Papers from the
>Georgetown Round Table on Languages & Linguistics 1988_, ed. Thomas J.
>Walsh, 147-157. Washington: Georgetown UP.
>
>Koerner, E. F. Konrad. 1989. "Models in linguistic historiography."
>_Practicing Linguistic Historiography_ by E. F. K. Koerner, 47-59.
>Amsterdam: Benjamins.
>
>Hoenigswald, Henry M., & Linda F. Wiener, eds. 1987. _Biological Metaphor
>and Cladistic Classification: An interdisciplinary perspective._
>Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania Press.