Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1520270
 
 

Footnotes (241)



 


 



Penumbral Thinking Revisited: Metaphor in Legal Argumentation


Chris Rideout


Seattle University School of Law


Journal of the Association of Legal Writing Directors, 2010
Seattle University School of Law Research Paper No. 10-18

Abstract:     
This article looks at the use of metaphor in legal argumentation, using as its example the penumbra metaphor found in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) and the subsequent controversy over its use. The article points out that some of this controversy may lie in longstanding attitudes toward the place of metaphor in language and thought, but that under contemporary cognitive theories of metaphor, that controversy is misdirected. Justice Douglas’s metaphor offers an appropriate example of what could be called a spatial metaphor. His expression of the metaphorical entailment, however, may be inaccurate - a more legitimate area of concern and a possible object lesson for the use of metaphors in legal argumentation.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 30

Keywords: legal argument, metaphor

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: December 8, 2009 ; Last revised: June 15, 2010

Suggested Citation

Rideout, Chris, Penumbral Thinking Revisited: Metaphor in Legal Argumentation. Journal of the Association of Legal Writing Directors, 2010; Seattle University School of Law Research Paper No. 10-18. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1520270

Contact Information

Chris Rideout (Contact Author)
Seattle University School of Law ( email )
901 12th Avenue
Seattle, WA n/a 98122
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 630
Downloads: 166
Download Rank: 81,333
Footnotes:  241

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.266 seconds