Language as Vision: The Ocularcentrism of Chomskyan Linguistics 
References to vision pervade Chomsky’s work. They are a key component of the figures he uses, the examples he provides, the analogies he makes, and the argumentative warrants supporting his central claims. When dealing with opponents Chomsky repeatedly exploits the rhetorical potential of visual analogies and metaphors in order to construct rebuttals. References to vision and to spatio-visual phenomenon constitute a key component of the most characteristic rhetorical moves Chomsky makes, and are central to the way Chomsky defines the project of linguistics. From Syntactic Structures to his most recently published texts, Chomsky’s writing is permeated by a constellation of terms centered on space, vision, optics and form. This is perhaps not altogether surprising, given that Chomsky is a thinker who identifies so strongly with Descartes, and who describes his theoretical project as “Cartesian”. In Modernity and the Hegemony of Vision David Levin argues that Descartes is the modern philosopher most obviously indebted to the metaphor of knowledge as spatio-visual, a writer whose work most clearly exemplifies a discourse that is dominated by an ocular metaphoric. While a range of figurative expressions characterize generative discourse, ocular metaphors are assigned a place of particular importance.
Understanding Metaphors for Writing: In Defense of the Conduit Metaphor

The Conduit Metaphor has been roundly condemned by language scholars, including scholars in rhetoric and composition, but it is time to reevaluate its import and value. Rather than simply asserting a mistaken view of linguistic communication, the Conduit Metaphor combines with the metaphor Language Is Power to form a prudentially applied ethical measure of discourses, genres, and texts.
Eubanks, Philip. CCC (2001). Articles>Rhetoric>Theory>Tropes
There are 20 readers currently online: 2 registered users and 18 guests. Register.

![]()
![]()


![]()
![]()
![]()