I don't know if we really need a metaphor to talk about language. In the
kind of linguistics I do, there is a very direct connection between form
and meaning in language: form can be manipulated to affect the way a
listener responds, cognitively, to my speech. (Of course we can't
literally control another person's cognition, but as long as the meanings
of certain forms are pretty widespread and have a high degree of
similarity across individuals, my choice of forms will have consequences
for the activation of meanings in the listener's mind.) To give a simple
example, consider the preference for 'action' verbs over 'state' verbs
expressed in so much writing instruction. According to cognitive
linguistics, the way we cognize when processing an 'action' verb is in
fact dynamic -- we conceptualize change in progress. For stative verbs,
we conceptualize sameness over time (a static rather than dynamic situation).
 
Another example is use of the passive. It's no accident that the
Watergate tapes' transcripts show a high incidence of agentless passives
(as Jeanne van Oosten pointed out in her Berkeley diss. a number of years
ago). Agentless passives don't call for conceptualization of an
identified agent, and are therefore useful when one desires to hide the
identity of an agent. George Bush made good use of this with his famous
'Mistakes were made'.
 
Another example: the now common use of 'harvest' in reference to logging
(even logging of virgin forest) in the media. I don't have the facts, but
I'd bet this practice was started by the timber industry in order to (a)
make logging seem like an agricultural  practice; (b) transfer the many
positive associations of the word to logging. I have lately seen this
word used by the LA Times in reference to the taking of down (and up!)
timber in the Headwaters Forest in No. CA. Not a harvest in any usual
sense of the word, so far as I'm concerned!
 
I'm a little disappointed that my long posting of a while ago generated
virtually no list response. I thought it was sort of controversial. I'd
like to know how many of you out there agree or disagree with me; or
maybe you just think I'm so far out in left field (in multiple senses of
the word) that you don't find it worthwhile responding. Or maybe you're
just busy with grading, holiday plans, etc.
 
Speaking of which, happy!  (If I may be so elliptical.)
 
Johanna
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba   Assistant Professor, Linguistics              ~
English Department, California Polytechnic State University   ~
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407                                     ~
Tel. (805)-756-2184  E-mail: [log in to unmask]      ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~