Does a Ribosome Really Read? On the Cognitive Roots and Heuristic Value of Linguistic Metaphors in Molecular Genetics. Part 2

We discuss the role of linguistic metaphors as a cognitive frame for the understanding of genetic information processing. The essential similarity between language and genetic information processing has been recognized since the very beginning, and many prominent scholars have noted the possibility of considering genes and genomes as texts or languages. Most of the core terms in molecular biology are based on linguistic metaphors. The processing of genetic information is understood as some operations on text – writing, reading and editing and their specification (encoding/decoding, proofreading, transcription, translation, reading frame). The concept of gene reading can be traced from the archaic idea of the equation of Life and Nature with the Book. Thus, the genetics itself can be metaphorically represented as some operations on text (deciphering, understanding, code-breaking, transcribing, editing, etc.), which are performed by scientists. At the same time linguistic metaphors portrayed gene entities also as having the ability of reading. In the case of such “bio-reading” some essential features similar to the processes of human reading can be revealed: this is an ability to identify the biochemical sequences based on their function in an abstract system and distinguish between type and its contextual tokens of the same type. Metaphors seem to be an effective instrument for representation, as they make possible a two-dimensional description: biochemical by its experimental empirical results and textual based on the cognitive models of comprehension. In addition to their heuristic value, linguistic metaphors are based on the essential characteristics of genetic information derived from its dual nature: biochemical by its substance, textual (or quasi-textual) by its formal organization. It can be concluded that linguistic metaphors denoting biochemical objects and processes seem to be a method of description and explanation of these heterogeneous properties.

epistemology, philosophy of science, genetic code, genetic reading, genetic translation, genetic information, quasi-mind, cognitive metaphor

1. Aase L., Fleming M., Ongstad S., Pieper I., & Samihaian F. (2009) Reading. In: Platform of Resources and References for Plurilingual and Intercultural Education. Strasbourg: Language Policy Division, Council of Europe. Retrieved from http://rm.coe.int/CoERMPublicCommonSearchServices/DisplayDCTMContent?documentId=09000016805a234b

2. Abel D.L. & Trevors J.T. (2006) More than Metaphor: Genomes are Objective Sign Systems. Journal of BioSemiotics. Vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 253–267.

3. Albert D.Z. (1987) Quantum-Mechanical Automation. Philosophy of Science, Vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 577–585.

4. Barbieri M. (2018) What is Code Biology? Biosystems. Vol. 164, pp. 1–10.

5. Barrell B.G., Bankier A.T., & Drouin J. (1979) A Different Genetic Code in Human Mitochondria. Nature. Vol. 282, no. 5735, pp. 189–194.

6. Crick F. (1981) Life Itself: Its Origin and Nature. London: Simon and Schuster.

7. de Saussure F. 1959. Course in General Linguistics. (C. Bally, A. Sechehaye, Eds.; W. Baskin, Trans.). New York: Mc-Graw Hill Book.

8. Emmeche C. & Hoffmeyer J. (1991) From Language to Nature – the Semiotic Metaphor in Biology. Semiotica. Vol. 84, no. 1/2, pp. 1–42.

9. Jacob F. (1977) The Linguistic Model in Biology. In: Armstrong D. & van Schooneveld C.H. (Eds.) Roman Jakobson. Echoes of His Scholarship (pp. 185–192). Lisse: Peter de Ridder.

10. Jakobson R.O. (1970) Linguistics and Its Relation to Other Science. In: Main Trends of Research in Social and Human Sciences. Part 1. Social Sciences (pp. 419–463). Paris: Mouton.

11. Katz G. (2008) The Hypothesis of a Genetic Protolanguage: an Epistemological Investigation. Biosemiotics. Vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 57–73.

12. Kay L. (2000) Who Wrote the Book of Life?: A History of the Genetic Code. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

13. Lévi-Strauss C., Jakobson R., & L’Heritier P. (1968) Vivre et parler. Les Lettres françaises, No. 1221, pp. 3–7 (in French).

14. Luhmann N. (1990) Essays on Self-Reference. New York: Columbia University Press.

15. Peirce C. S. (1906a) Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmaticism. The Monist. Vol. 16, pp. 492–546.

16. Peirce C.S. (1906b) Letters to Lady Welby. In: Bergman M. & Paavola S. (Eds.) The Commens Dictionary: Peirce’s Terms in His Own Words. New Edition. Retrieved from http://www.commens.org/dictionary/entry/quote-letters-lady-welby-17

17. Ratner V.A. (2000) Khronika velikogo otkryiya: idei i litsa [Chronicle of the great discovery: ideas and persons]. Priroda. 2000. No. 6, pp. 22–30 (in Russian).

18. Ricœur P. (2006) On Translation (E. Brennan, Trans.). London: Routledge.

19. Searls D.B. (2001) Reading the book of life. Bioinformatics. Vol. 17, no. 7, pp. 579–580.

20. Searls D.B. (2002) The Language of Genes. Nature. Vol. 420, no. 6912, pp. 211–217.

21. Sedov A.E. (2000) Metafory v genetike [Metaphors in genetics]. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2000. No. 6, pp. 526–534 (in Russian).

22. Steiner G. (1975) After Babel: Aspects of Language and Translation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

23. Turanov A.A., Lobanov A.V., Fomenko D.E., Morrison H.G., Sogin M.L., Klobutcher L.A., Hatfield D.L., & Gladyshev V.N. (2008) Genetic Code Supports Targeted Insertion of Two Amino Acids by One Codon. Science. Vol. 323, no. 5911, pp. 259–261.

24. Zolyan S. & Zhdanov R. (2018) Genome as (Hyper)Text: From Metaphor to Theory. Semiotica. No. 225, pp. 1–18.