Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!

A large number of legal concepts is expressed through metaphors, exemplifing the Conceptual Metaphor Theory created by Lakoff & Johnson. Indeed, the law often resorts to metaphors in order to allow us to understand an abstract and/or unknown concept in terms of another that is concrete and/o...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Isabelle Richard
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3 2014-01-01
Series:Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology
Subjects:
Online Access:http://journals.openedition.org/lexis/251
id doaj-b6c38fe6521741d3837e08e948b3764c
record_format Article
spelling doaj-b6c38fe6521741d3837e08e948b3764c2020-11-24T21:56:34ZengUniversité Jean Moulin - Lyon 3Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology1951-62152014-01-01810.4000/lexis.251Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!Isabelle RichardA large number of legal concepts is expressed through metaphors, exemplifing the Conceptual Metaphor Theory created by Lakoff & Johnson. Indeed, the law often resorts to metaphors in order to allow us to understand an abstract and/or unknown concept in terms of another that is concrete and/or familiar (the metaphor of the “living tree” to describe some aspects of the Canadian constitution is a case in point). The law itself is often compared to an object (“to break the law”, “a law breaker”) or to a person (“Our Lady the Common Law”, “the arm of the law”, “the eye of the law”). What is more, some metaphors have allegedly contributed to developing new legal concepts (for instance the metaphor of “the golden thread” was used to evoke the then new notion of the presumption of innocence in Canada).However, though it cannot be denied that metaphors are useful to shed light on legal concepts, the interpretation of the latter is necessarily biased because the compared concept is always circumscribed to the comparing concept which, besides, tends to present the interpretation as the only possible one. This way, some metaphors can be used as manipulative tools.Finally, the cognitive function of metaphors may be limited: on the one hand, some metaphors may remain obscure even to the native speaker (“blue sky law”, “thin skull doctrine”), on the other hand, others may be misleading either because they are ambiguous or because they suggest (impose?) one vision of the world that excludes all the others.http://journals.openedition.org/lexis/251dead metaphorslegal conceptspedagogic powerinterpretation of legal concepts
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Isabelle Richard
spellingShingle Isabelle Richard
Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!
Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology
dead metaphors
legal concepts
pedagogic power
interpretation of legal concepts
author_facet Isabelle Richard
author_sort Isabelle Richard
title Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!
title_short Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!
title_full Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!
title_fullStr Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!
title_full_unstemmed Metaphors in English for Law: Let Us Keep Them!
title_sort metaphors in english for law: let us keep them!
publisher Université Jean Moulin - Lyon 3
series Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology
issn 1951-6215
publishDate 2014-01-01
description A large number of legal concepts is expressed through metaphors, exemplifing the Conceptual Metaphor Theory created by Lakoff & Johnson. Indeed, the law often resorts to metaphors in order to allow us to understand an abstract and/or unknown concept in terms of another that is concrete and/or familiar (the metaphor of the “living tree” to describe some aspects of the Canadian constitution is a case in point). The law itself is often compared to an object (“to break the law”, “a law breaker”) or to a person (“Our Lady the Common Law”, “the arm of the law”, “the eye of the law”). What is more, some metaphors have allegedly contributed to developing new legal concepts (for instance the metaphor of “the golden thread” was used to evoke the then new notion of the presumption of innocence in Canada).However, though it cannot be denied that metaphors are useful to shed light on legal concepts, the interpretation of the latter is necessarily biased because the compared concept is always circumscribed to the comparing concept which, besides, tends to present the interpretation as the only possible one. This way, some metaphors can be used as manipulative tools.Finally, the cognitive function of metaphors may be limited: on the one hand, some metaphors may remain obscure even to the native speaker (“blue sky law”, “thin skull doctrine”), on the other hand, others may be misleading either because they are ambiguous or because they suggest (impose?) one vision of the world that excludes all the others.
topic dead metaphors
legal concepts
pedagogic power
interpretation of legal concepts
url http://journals.openedition.org/lexis/251
work_keys_str_mv AT isabellerichard metaphorsinenglishforlawletuskeepthem
_version_ 1725858353484136448