Explanation in Cultural Geography: A Reply to Cosgrove, Jackson and the Duncans

Abstract

Hardly. In the first place, the interesting question is less one of how language is not mimetic but what makes it partially mimetic, what forces and structures of power (broadly conceived) determine the relationship between a concept and its referent. As long as we live in a social world, it makes absolutely no sense at all to claim that metaphors are not 'grounded' in that social world in one way or another. Certainly, this 'grounding' process is complex and my way of understanding it is necessarily incomplete. But if Cosgrove wants to give up any claim to being able to explain the world and how it works, I am not willing to follow him and I hope any geographers concerned with the uneven structure of the world will not want to

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 26 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.