Making Sense of Metaphors: Visuality,
Aurality, and the Reconfiguration of American Legal Discourse
16 Cardozo Law Review 241 (1994); reprinted by permission of the Cardozo Law Review

Title Page | E-mail

Notes: Part I

30. Barbara M. Stafford, Body Criticism: Imaging the Unseen in Enlightenment Art and Medicine 465 (1993).

31. The frequent association of metaphor with image has led some commentators to suggest that all metaphors are necessarily visual. Most modern scholars nonetheless believe that metaphors can theoretically appeal to any (or any combination) of the senses, thereby allowing for the possibility of the "aural metaphors" discussed in this Article. See, e.g, I.A. Richards, Principles of Literary Criticism 119 (1925); Paul Ricoeur, The Rule of Metaphor 207-15 (Robert Czerny trans., Univ. of Toronto Press 1977) (1975).

32. See generally Douglass Berggren, "The Use and Abuse of Metaphor," 1, 16 Rev. Metaphysics 237, 244-45 (1962).

33. See, e.g., Ball, supra note 4; Haig Bosmajian, Metaphor And Reason in Judicial Opinions (1992); Alexander E. Silverman, Mind, Machine and Metaphor: An Essay on Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning (1993); Michael Boudin, "Antitrust Doctrine and the Sway of Metaphor," 75 Geo. L.J. 395 (1986); Gary Minda, "The Law and Metaphor of Boycott," 41 Buff. L. Rev. 807 (1993); James E. Murray, "Understanding Law as Metaphor," 34 J. Legal Educ. 714 (1984); Ross, supra note 7; Steven L. Winter, "The Metaphor of Standing and the Problem of Self-Governance," 40 Stan. L. Rev. 1371 (1988).

34. Ross, supra note 7, at 1053.

35. Quoted in id. at 1057 n.9.

36. Id.

37. Berkey v. Third Ave. Ry. Co., 155 N.E. 58, 61 (N.Y. 1926). For a similar comment by Justice Frankfurter, see Tiller v. Atlantic Coast Line R.R. Co., 318 U.S. 54, 68 (1943).

38. See, e.g., Gerald W. Casenave, "Taking Metaphor Seriously: The Implications of the Cognitive Significance of Metaphor for Theories of Language," 17 S.J. Phil. 19 (1979).

39. George Lakoff & Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By 3 (1980).

40 Id. at 27-28.

41. This unfortunate label recalls an "unintentional" but highly controversial "Freudian slip" made by noted TV sportscaster and inveterate metaphor-monger (-mangler?) Howard Cosell in 1983. See Charles R. Lawrence III, "The Id, the Ego, and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism," 39 Stan. L. Rev. 317, 339 (1987).

42. Ball, supra note 4, at 6; Lakoff & Johnson, supra note 39, at 4-5.

43. To this point, the only work of legal scholarship to have given even passing consideration to the implications of choosing one scheme of modal metaphors over another is O'Fallon & Ryan, supra note 22, at 896-97. The authors of that piece notably recommend that the prevailing metaphorical model of "seeing" be replaced by one of "listening."