"Logical" Metaphor

Martin & Rose (2007: 148):

In Chapter 3 we introduced ideational metaphor and discussed the experiential type, in which elements of figures are reconstrued as if they were other kinds of elements, such as process thing and quality thing. Here we are going to look at how conjunctions are reconstrued as other kinds of elements, including processes, things, qualities and circumstances. This is the logical type of ideational metaphor, or logical metaphor. It is used to reconstrue logical relations between figures as if they were relations between elements within figures. Logical metaphor always involves experiential metaphor as well.

Blogger Comments:

[1] To be clear, 'element' and 'figure' are orders of phenomena in the ideational semantics of Halliday & Matthiessen (1999).

[2] To be clear, this is elemental metaphor considered in isolation, ignoring the syntagmatic complexity that arises when they cluster as syndromes; see Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 244-9). However, this characterisation confuses a class of form (conjunction) with functions (process, thing, quality, circumstance). In SFL Theory, conjunctions, or conjunction groups, realise the function 'relator' (Halliday & Matthiessen 1999: 59).

[3] To be clear, if the metaphors involve both logical and experiential meanings, then they are ideational metaphors, not merely logical metaphors.

[4] To be clear, this involves syntagmatic syndromes of elemental metaphor of the type where a figure is realised as an element; see Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 250-2). The two other types of syndrome are where a sequence is realised as a figure, and where a figure with process is realised as a figure with process as thing; see Halliday & Matthiessen (1999: 252-5).