Metaphor, metonymy and evaluation as political devices in American and Spanish parliamentary political discourse

  1. Ana Belén Cabrejas Peñuelas
Revista:
Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos ( AELFE )

ISSN: 1139-7241

Any de publicació: 2020

Número: 40

Pàgines: 75-100

Tipus: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Altres publicacions en: Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos ( AELFE )

Resum

The present study explores the interplay of metaphor, metonymy and evaluation in an American and Spanish parliamentary speech by President Obama and PM Rajoy, aiming at convincing the public of economic victory through positive selfevaluation and other-deprecation. A further objective is to investigate whether there is a relationship between the speakers’ ideological positions and the entities that are evaluated. Within the general framework of CDA for parliamentary debates (van Dijk, 2005), we use Martin and White’s Appraisal scheme as an analytical tool. The results reveal that both political candidates used evaluation in their speeches as a tool to justify and persuade the audience of their economic decisions. On the other hand, both politicians used evaluation, not as an expression of their own ideological traits, but also as an ideological tool that would favor their intentions of rising to power

Referències bibliogràfiques

  • Barcelona, A. (2002). “Clarifying and applying the notions of metaphor and metonymy within Cognitive Linguistics: an update” in R. Dirven & R. Pörings (eds.), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, 202-277. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A.B. (2018). “Metonymy in Spanish and American parliamentary speeches: Obama’s State of the Union Address versus Rajoy’s State of the Nation Address”. Cultura,Lenguaje y Representación/Culture, Language and Representation 19: 45-69.
  • Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A.B. (2020). “The language of recovery: Metaphors in Obama’s and Rajoy’s political speeches”. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada (REsLA) 33(1), 27-54.
  • Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A.B. & M. Díez-Prados (2014). “Positive self-evaluation versus negative other-evaluation in the political genre of preelection debates”. Discourse and society 25(2): 159-185.
  • Campbell, K.K. & K. Hall Jamieson (2008). Presidents Creating the Presidency: Deeds Done in Words. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Catalano, Th. & L.R. Waugh (2016). “Representations of power: A critical multimodal analysis of US CeOs, the Italian Mafia and government in the media”. Journal of Language and Politics 15(6): 790-817.
  • Charteris-Black, J. (2003). “Speaking with a forked tongue: A comparative study of metaphor and metonymy in english and Malay phraseology”. Metaphor and symbol 18(4): 289-310.
  • Charteris-Black, J. (2009). “Metaphor and political communication” in A. Mussolff & J. Zinken (eds.), Metaphor and Discourse, 97-115. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Condon, S. (2015). “Obama revamps the State of the Union”. Cbs News. URL: <https://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-revamps-the-state-of-the-union/ > [03/09/2019].
  • Díez-Prados, M. (2016). “The use of metaphor and evaluation as discourse strategies in pre-electoral debates: Just about winning votes” in M. Romano & M.D. Porto (eds.), Exploring Discourse strategies in social and Cognitive Interaction: Multimodal and Cross-linguistic Perspectives, 215- 244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Dirven, R. & F. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (2010). “Looking back at thirty years of Cognitive Linguistics” in e. Tabakowska, M. Choiński & Ł. Wirszaka (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics in Action, 11-70. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: OUP.
  • European Commission. (2015). “european economic Forecast”. European Economy. URL: https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2015/pdf/ee1_en.pdf/> [03/09/2019].
  • Ferrari, F. (2007). “Metaphor at work in the analysis of political discourse: investigating a ‘preventing war’ persuasion strategy”. Discourse and society 18(5): 603-625.
  • Izquierdo Labella, L. (2014). El Estado de la Nación: 30 años de la historia de España a través de un debate. Unpublished PhD Humanities Department. Universidad Carlos III de Madrid.
  • Kaplan, R. (2015). “Obama’s 2015 State of the Union to-do-list”. Cbs news. URL: <https://www.cbsnews.com/> [03/09/2019].
  • Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. 2nd edition. Oxford: OUP.
  • Lakoff, G. (2002). Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakoff, G. & M. Johnson. (1980/2003). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lakoff, G. & M. Turner. (1989). More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in Language, Thought and Communication. Cambridge: CUP.
  • Llamas, M. (2015). “Los mayores ejemplos de recuperación son Irlanda y los países bálticos”. Libremercado. URL: <https://www.libremercado. com> [03/09/2019].
  • Martin, J.R. & P.R.R. White. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Meadows, B. (2006). “Distancing and showing solidarity via metaphor and metonymy in political discourse: a critical study of American statements on Iraq during the years 2004-2005”. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines 1(2): 1-17.
  • Muñoz, e. (2015). “No pedir el rescate fue la gran medida social de esta legislatura”. Cadena ser. URL: <https://cadenaser.com/> [03/09/2019].
  • Mussolff, A. (2012). “The study of metaphor as part of critical discourse analysis”. Critical Discourse studies 9(3): 301-310.
  • Neagu, M.I. (2013). Decoding Political Discourse: Conceptual Metaphors and Argumentation. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Paris, R. (2002). “Kosovo and the metaphor war”. Political science Quarterly 17(3): 423-450.
  • Sánchez García, J.F. (2009). Estudio programático del discurso periodístico político español. A propósito de los debates sobre el Estado de la Nación. PhD Dissertation. Universidad de Granada.
  • Semino, e. (2008). Metaphors in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Shogan, C.J. (2015). The President’s state of the Union Address: Tradition, Function, and Policy Implications. URL: <https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/ misc/R40132.pdf> [15/08/2019].
  • van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage.
  • van Dijk, T.A. (2005). “War rhetoric of a little ally: Political implicatures and Aznar’s legitimatization of the war in Iraq”. Journal of Language and Politics 4(1): 65-91.
  • Zug, Ch. & C.M. ewing (2018). “What happened to the State of the Union Address? Originally, it helped the president and Congress deliberate”. The Washington Post. URL: <http:// washingtonpost.com> [03/09/2019].
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet