Ukraine’s Voice Makes Russia Angry; Lithuania Speaks Boldly... Constructing attitudinal stance through personification of countries
-
Jurga Cibulskienė
Dr Jurga Cibulskienė is Associate Professor at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, Vilnius University, Lithuania. Her main research interests lie in Cognitive Linguistics, metaphor in particular, and socio-political discourse analysis. She attempts to bring together cognitive metaphor studies and Critical Discourse Analysis. Her recent publications focus on metaphor's evaluative and persuasive role in public discourse.
Dr Inesa Šeškauskienė is Professor of linguistics at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, Vilnius University, Lithuania. Her research interests include metaphoricity of different discourses (academic, legal, political, literary, etc.), genres and cultures, space semantics, translation, and learner language. Recently she has published several papers focusing on the polysemy of prefixes and prepositions. In 2022 she edited a book
Metaphor in Legal Discourse published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Abstract
Personification, one of major types of metaphors often employed to express an attitude, is also an argumentative tool, especially in media texts on politically contested events. The present investigation aims at disclosing the attitudinal stance in personifying Ukraine, Russia, the Western countries and Lithuania in a corpus of texts collected from Lithuanian media in 2015–2018. The study relies on the three-step Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA, Charteris-Black 2004), involving three levels: linguistic, cognitive and rhetorical. More specifically, they include (1) identifying personification cases, (2) interpreting personification through cognitive metaphorical scenarios (Musolff 2016), and (3) explaining ideological implications encoded in the scenarios. The findings indicate that in the scenario of COMMUNICATION, Ukraine is mostly presented positively: active defender and in need of support, with occasional scepticism whether it is capable to change. The West, Lithuania including, is presented as a supporter, whereas Russia is viewed as a negatively evaluated antagonist.
About the authors
Dr Jurga Cibulskienė is Associate Professor at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, Vilnius University, Lithuania. Her main research interests lie in Cognitive Linguistics, metaphor in particular, and socio-political discourse analysis. She attempts to bring together cognitive metaphor studies and Critical Discourse Analysis. Her recent publications focus on metaphor's evaluative and persuasive role in public discourse.
Dr Inesa Šeškauskienė is Professor of linguistics at the Institute of Applied Linguistics, Vilnius University, Lithuania. Her research interests include metaphoricity of different discourses (academic, legal, political, literary, etc.), genres and cultures, space semantics, translation, and learner language. Recently she has published several papers focusing on the polysemy of prefixes and prepositions. In 2022 she edited a book Metaphor in Legal Discourse published by Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
References
A’Beckett, Ludmilla. 2017. Fragmentation of the discourse community through the lens of metaphor analysis: A case study of RUSSIANS AND UKRAINIANS ARE BROTHERS. In Karolina Broś & Grzegorz Kovalski (eds.), Discourse studies – ways and crossroads 365–386. Frankfurt-Bern: Peter Lang.Suche in Google Scholar
Anthony, Lawrence. 2019. AntConc (Version 358) [Windows]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from https://www.laurenceanthony.net/softwareSuche in Google Scholar
Arcimavičienė, Liudmila. 2020. Metaphor, identity and conflict in political discourse: A case study of president Poroshenko and president Putin’s Speeches. In Natalia Knoblock (ed.), Language of conflict. Discourses of the Ukrainian crises, 117–135 London: Bloomsbury Academic.10.5040/9781350098633.0007Suche in Google Scholar
Bednarek, Monika & Helen Caple. 2012/2019. News discourse. London, New York: Bloomsbury Academic.Suche in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2004. Corpus approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230000612Suche in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2007. The communication of leadership. The design of leadership style. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203968291Suche in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2014. Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-1-137-36833-1Suche in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2017. Competition Metaphors and Ideology: Life as a Race. In Ruth Wodak & Bernhard Forchtner (eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and politics 322–346. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315183718-16Suche in Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2019. Metaphors of Brexit: No cherries on the cake? London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-030-28768-9Suche in Google Scholar
Chilton, Paul. 2004. Analysing political discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203561218Suche in Google Scholar
Chilton, Paul & George Lakoff. 1989. Foreign Policy by Metaphor. CRL Newsletter 5(3). 5– 19.Suche in Google Scholar
Cienki, Alan. 2005. Metaphor in the “Strict Father” and “Nurturant Parent” cognitive models: Theoretical issues raised in an empirical study. Cognitive linguistics 16(2). 279–312.10.1515/cogl.2005.16.2.279Suche in Google Scholar
Kennan, George. F. 1946. Long Telegram. Available at: https://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/document/116178.pdf (accessed 10 August 2020).Suche in Google Scholar
Dorst, Aletta. 2011. Personification in discourse: Linguistic forms, conceptual structures and communicative functions. Language and literature 20(2). 113–135.10.1177/0963947010395522Suche in Google Scholar
Dorst, Aletta, Gerben Mulder & Gerard J. Steen. 2011. Recognition of personifications in fiction by non-expert readers. Metaphor and the social world 1(2). 174–200.10.1075/msw.1.2.04dorSuche in Google Scholar
Encyclopedia of Ukraine. Available at: http://www.encyclopediaofukraine.com/display.asp?linkpath=pages%5CL%5CI%5CLithuanian6Ruthenianstate.htm (accessed 14 March 2020).Suche in Google Scholar
Feinberg, Matthew, Elisabeth Wehling, Joanne M. Chung, Laura R. Saslow & Paulin I. Melvær. 2020. Measuring moral politics: How strict and nurturant family values explain individual differences in conservatism, liberalism, and the political middle. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 118(4). 777–804.10.1037/pspp0000255Suche in Google Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W. 2017. Metaphor wars. Conceptual metaphors in human life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781107762350Suche in Google Scholar
Hart, Christopher. 2014. Discourse, grammar and ideology. Functional and cognitive perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan. 2002/2010. Metaphor. A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195145113.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1996. Moral politics: What conservatives know that liberals don’t. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1980/2003. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: Chicago University Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470993.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books.Suche in Google Scholar
Lakoff, George & Mark Turner. 1989. More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226470986.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Littlemore, Jeannette. 2015. Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107338814Suche in Google Scholar
Low, Graham. 1999. “This paper thinks…”: Investigating the acceptability of the metaphor AN ESSAY IS A PERSON. In Graham Low & Lynn Cameron (eds.), Researching and applying metaphor 221–248. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524704.014Suche in Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics 2 vol., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Mio, Jeffery Scott. 1996. Metaphor, politics and persuasion. In Jeffery Scott Mio & Albert N. Katz (eds.), Metaphor: Implications and applications, 127–146 Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.10.4324/9781315789316-8Suche in Google Scholar
Moses, Jennifer F. & Marti H. Gonzales. 2015. Strong candidate, nurturant candidate: Moral language in presidential television advertisements. Political Psychology 36(4). 379–397.10.1111/pops.12160Suche in Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2004. Metaphor and political discourse. Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230504516Suche in Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2006. Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and symbol 21(1). 23–38.10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2Suche in Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2016. Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.Suche in Google Scholar
OALD. Hornby, Albert S., Diana Lea & Jennifer Bradbery. 2020. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of English. 10th edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Semino, Elena. 2008. Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816802.015Suche in Google Scholar
Semino, Elena, Zsófia Demjén & Jane Demmen. 2018. An Integrated approach to metaphor and framing in cognition, discourse, and practice, with an aplication to metaphors for cancer. Applied Linguistics 39(5). 625–645.Suche in Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, Berenike J. Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal & Tina Krennmayr. 2010. A Method for linguistic metaphor identification. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/celcr.14Suche in Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 2012. Viewpoint and perspective in language and gesture, from the ground down. In Barbara Dancyger & Eve Sweetser (eds.), Viewpoint in language 1–22. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139084727.002Suche in Google Scholar
Šeškauskienė, Inesa & Julia Ostanina-Olszewska. 2015. Conceptualizing events in Ukraine: A cross-cultural analysis of online news reports. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 11(2). 247– 270.10.1515/lpp-2015-0013Suche in Google Scholar
Taylor, John. 1995. Linguistic categorization. Prototypes in linguistic theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Turner, Mark. 1987. Death is the mother of beauty. Mind, metaphor, criticism. Chicago: University of Chicago PressSuche in Google Scholar
Urbonaitė, Justina, Inesa Šeškauskienė & Jurga Cibulskienė. 2019. Linguistic metaphor identification in Lithuanian. In Susan Nacey, Aletta G. Dorst, Tina Krennmayr & Gudrun W. Reijnierse (eds.), Metaphor identification in multiple languages. MIPVU around the world, 159–181. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/celcr.22.08urbSuche in Google Scholar
Weiss, Daniel. 2020. The Ukrainian nation – stepmother, younger sister or still-born baby? Evidence from Russian TV debates and related political sources (2013-15). In Natalia Knoblock (ed.), Language of conflict. Discourses of the Ukrainian crises, 117–135. London: Bloomsbury Academic.10.5040/9781350098633.0011Suche in Google Scholar
Zhabotynska, Svetlana. 2018. Images of Ukraine – EU relations in conceptual metaphors of Ukrainian mass media. Cognition, Communication, Discourse 17. 118–140.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Between grammar and culture: Cognitive insights into language use
- Conceptualising multiple-Marking in NZE
- Games and turns: Considering context in language use
- Conceptualization of emotions in the novel The Slynxby Tatyana Tolstaya
- Translation of Perso-Arabic loanwords from Hindi into Polish: A pilot study
- Ukraine’s Voice Makes Russia Angry; Lithuania Speaks Boldly... Constructing attitudinal stance through personification of countries
- Scare rhetoric as a device used to bolster Jewish fighting and pioneering spirit: David Ben-Gurion’s use of antithesis reference
- Cultural cognition, effective communication, and security: Insights from intercultural trainings for law enforcement officers in Poland
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Between grammar and culture: Cognitive insights into language use
- Conceptualising multiple-Marking in NZE
- Games and turns: Considering context in language use
- Conceptualization of emotions in the novel The Slynxby Tatyana Tolstaya
- Translation of Perso-Arabic loanwords from Hindi into Polish: A pilot study
- Ukraine’s Voice Makes Russia Angry; Lithuania Speaks Boldly... Constructing attitudinal stance through personification of countries
- Scare rhetoric as a device used to bolster Jewish fighting and pioneering spirit: David Ben-Gurion’s use of antithesis reference
- Cultural cognition, effective communication, and security: Insights from intercultural trainings for law enforcement officers in Poland
