ABSTRACT
The metaphorical field circumscribing analogies between language and money is undoubtedly one of the most productive in all of Western culture. Quintilian’s admonition that one expend words as carefully as one spends money (1921-2:I.6, 1), Ovid’s remark that words, like coins, are minted by public authority (1979:III.4790, Nietzsche’s famous comparison of current words to coins that have lost their impression due to overcirculation (1988:881), and Saussure’s identification of linguistic significance with monetary value (1966:115): what all these metaphors have in common is that they draw on issues of monetary practice to elucidate the operation and use of language. The historical extension of this metaphorical field is matched by its broad cultural dispersion throughout the European languages: comparisons between money and language are just as likely to be found among English or French writers as they are among German ones.2 The unusual vitality of this analogy between money and language is further reflected in the expansive semantic territory it encompasses. Aside from the common identification of words with coins, many other elements drawn from the sphere of finance, such as the notions of circulation, exchange, credit, banking, counterfeiting, investment, etc., are frequently applied as metaphorical vehicles for the illumination of linguistic practices. The vitality and diversity of this metaphorical field gives the best indication that the analogy between money and language in particular, and between the realms of economics and linguistics in general, is underwritten by a wealth of substantive capital. Indeed, as Jean-Joseph Goux (1990:110) has argued, the coherence and organic nature of this relation indicates that what is at work here is not a mere analogy, but rather a deep-seated isomorphism between the domains of money and language.
