Letters to the Editor

This letter is associated with the following article:
Read other letters about this article
The art of neoconservative innuendo
An e-mail exchange with Michael Ledeen shows that, as always, neocons lack the courage of their implicit smears.
Glenn Greenwald [2007-09-20]

  • George Lakoff on Metonymy...

    From the Huffington Post, some excerpts: [Posted September 20, 2007]

    The US Senate will make linguistics history today. Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell actually brought to the floor a bill based on a linguistic trope called "metonymy." The bill also makes history by trying to censure an ad. But the most "damning" part of the censure is not what is in the ad, but what is in the heads of people who use the metonymy trope.

    Here's an example of how metonymy works. It is a mental operation. If you say, "The US invasion toppled Saddam Hussein," you mean it toppled the government of Saddam Hussein. The Leader stands for the Institution he or she leads. In a frame containing both a leader of a government and the government, the Leader can stand for the Government.

    This metonymy works for generals as well. A general in uniform reporting to Congress can be seen simply as himself. But if you use the Leader-for-Institution metonymy, you can see the general as standing for the entire armed forces. Thus, an attack on the general can be seen, if you use the metonymy, as an attack on the entire military. The use of the metonymy isn't automatic in this case. People can use it or not. If not, an attack on the general is just an attack on the general.

    The Republicans' own use of this metonymy is coming up in the Senate today. It is in a Republican bill to censure the use of the metonymy -- by the Republicans themselves!

    [snip]

    Now the scene moves to the US Senate. Senator John Cornyn of Texas has introduced a bill saying the following:
    To express the sense of the Senate that General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Forces-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces.
    It goes on to condemn MoveOn as the source of the "attacks." Now how did "and all the members of the United States Armed Forces" get in there? By metonymy! A metonymy used not by MoveOn, but by Senator Cornyn himself! The bill is actually condemning the people who wrote and introduced it, Cornyn and Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
    -- Anonymust
    [Read Anonymust's other letters]
    Thursday, September 20, 2007 11:56 AM
Read other letters about this article

Letters Help