language is drawn from a range of sources (see Figures 2.4 and 2.5, above) and given a new target domain. But it is the hearer/reader who makes the ultimate connections. That such language is used in politics is not surprising. Politicians seek to persuade by all means possible and, as Aristotle remarked, persuasive language is used to effect by the introduction of figurative language. Such language is only one aspect of rhetoric, but, as this extract demonstrates, it is a powerful aspect. Lawyers and the judiciary will always state that emotional and poetic language has no place in the courtroom, in the language of law. Part of the rationale for this is that poetic and emotional language can exercise much power and in matters of innocence and guilt it is surely more just to rely on rationality not emotion. This view can be particularly traced back to the insistence by Francis Bacon who, in the 17th century, insisted that law must be seen to have an objective, scientific, rational methodology. However, it is impossible for there to be a pure science of law given its necessary reliance on language, and the imprecision of language. Therefore, often it is the appeal to the rational neutrality of the science of legal decision making that is misleading. Figurative language is often used in the courtroom despite the view that it is inappropriate, as extracts 2 and 3 illustrate (in Figures 2.7 and 2.9, below, respectively). 2.5.2.2 Extracts 2 and 3: Lord Justice Comyn in Orme v Associated Newspapers Group Inc (1981) Figure 2.7: extract 2—Lord Justice Comyn summing up in Orme v Associated Newspapers Group Inc (1981) (This case was a defamation case involving membership of the Unification Church. Orme is the UK Director of the church.) This is not a battle between the freedom of religion and the freedom of the press; two freedoms which we treasure greatly. This is rather a battle of right and wrong. Has the Daily Mail infringed the plaintiff’s right to a good, clean reputation, or has the plaintiff Mr Orme in all the circumstances no right to any reputation at all in this case because of what he and his organisation have done and do? Was the Daily Mail wrong about its allegations in its article? Was it wrong about its allegations during this case? Or was the plaintiff wrong; was the plaintiff giving a false picture? That is what it is, members of the jury, not a battle between freedom of the press and freedom of religion, but a battle of right and wrong. This extract is useful as an illustration of language techniques, repetition, figurative language (particularly, metaphor) in action; as well providing the basis for a necessarily limited discussion of what the function of these techniques may be. It is set out again below, with phrases and sentences numbered for discussion purposes.