Cover not available
Article published In:
Concentric
Vol. 48:2 (2022) ► pp.212–248

democracy in Taiwanese presidential inaugural addresses

Metaphors, source domains, scenarios, and ideologies

| National Chengchi University
| National Chengchi University
| National Chengchi University
This study explored metaphorical expressions related to democracy in 15 Taiwanese presidential inaugural addresses. The source domain concepts mapped to understand democracy were examined and the relationship between these metaphorical expressions and ideologies was teased out by employing the discourse-historical approach. Our analysis demonstrates that various source domain concepts were utilized to discuss democracy, and most newly-emerged types occurred after the success of the first direct presidential election in 1996. A more detailed analysis of the source domain elements showed that different scenarios were highlighted, reflecting specific ideologies embedded along with the social, historical and political situation.
Keywords: democracy, metaphor, source domain, scenario, ideology, political discourse
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Metaphors and ideologies in political discourse
    • 1.2Discourse-historical approach (DHA)
    • 1.3Historical and social-political background related to democratization in Taiwan
  • 2.Data and methodology
    • 2.1Data
    • 2.2Identification of the metaphorical expressions and metaphorical keywords
    • 2.3Source domain and scenario identification
    • 2.4Interpreting the variation of metaphor use and the ideologies
  • 3.Findings
    • 3.1Source domains
    • 3.2Scenarios
    • 3.3Embedded ideologies
  • 4.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • List of abbreviations
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 29 November 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/consl.22006.hsu
References (44)
References
Ahrens, Kathleen, and Menghan Jiang. 2020. Source domain verification using corpus-based tools. Metaphor and Symbol 35.1:43–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid Khosravinik, Michal Krzyżanowski, Tony McEnery, and Ruth Wodak. 2008. A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse & Society 19.3:273–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burgers, Christian. 2016. Conceptualizing change in communication through metaphor. Journal of Communication 66.2:250–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burgers, Christian, and Kathleen Ahrens. 2020. Change in metaphorical framing: Metaphors of trade in 225 years of State of the Union addresses (1790–2014). Applied Linguistics 41.2:260–279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chao, Linda, and Ramon H. Myers. 1994. The first Chinese democracy: Political development of the Republic of China on Taiwan, 1986–1994. Asian Survey 34.3:213–230. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2019. Metaphors of Brexit: No Cherries on the Cake? Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cibulskienė, Jurga. 2012. The development of the journey metaphor in political discourse: Time-specific changes. Metaphor and the Social World 2.2:131–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dorst, Aletta G., and Anna G. Kaal. 2012. Metaphor in discourse: Beyond the boundaries of MIP. Metaphor in Use: Context, Culture, and Communication, ed. by Fiona MacArthur, José Luis Oncins-Martínez, Manuel Sánchez-García and Ana María Piquer-Píriz, 51–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dreyfuss, Caroline. 2015. Taiwanese student sit-in for democratic reform (Wild Lily Movement) 1990. Retrieved June 27, 2022, from [URL]
Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Language and Power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 2001. Language and Power (2nd edition). London: Longman.Google Scholar
Goatly, Andrew. 2007. Washing the Brain: Metaphor and Hidden Ideology, vol. 231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heywood, Andrew. 2017. Political Ideologies: An Introduction. London: Macmillan International Higher Education. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hood, Steven J. 2020. The Kuomintang and the Democratization of Taiwan. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huang, Chu-Ren, and Shu-Kai Hsieh. 2010. Infrastructure for Cross-lingual Knowledge Representation – Towards Multilingualism in Linguistic Studies. Taiwan NSC-granted Research Project (NSC 96-2411-H-003-061-MY3). Retrieved March 10, 2021, from [URL]
Jacobs, J. Bruce. 2012. Democratizing Taiwan. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Pavel Rychlý, Pavel Smrž, and David Tugwell. 2004. The sketch engine. Proceedings of the 11th EURALEX International Congress, ed. by Williams Geoffrey and Sandra Vessier, 105–116.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubíček, Vojtěch Kovář, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý, and Vít Suchomel. 2014. The Sketch Engine: Ten years on. Lexicography 11:7–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2015. Where Metaphors Come from: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George. 2008. The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
. 2014. The All New Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Hartford: Chelsea Green Publishing.Google Scholar
. 2016. Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (3rd edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, Nancy. 2011. Taiwanese Student Sit-in for Democratic Reform (Wild Lily Movement) 1990. Retrieved June 27, 2022, from [URL]
Lu, Louis Wei-Lun, and Kathleen Ahrens. 2008. Ideological influence on building metaphors in Taiwanese presidential speeches. Discourse & Society 19.3:383–408. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2006. Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 21.1:23–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Metaphor in the discourse-historical approach. Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies, ed. by Christopher Hart and Piotr Cap, 45–66. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
. 2016. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
. 2017. Truths, lies and figurative scenarios: Metaphors at the heart of Brexit. Journal of Language and Politics 16.5:641–657. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niles, Ian, and Adam Pease. 2001. Towards a standard upper ontology. Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, vol. 2001, ed. by Guarino Nicola, Barry Smith, and Christopher Welty, 2–9. Retrieved March 10, 2021, from [URL]. DOI logo
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22.1:1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reisigl, Martin. 2008. Rhetoric of political speeches. Handbook of Communication in the Public Sphere, vol. 41, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Veronika Koller, 243–270. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak. 2009. The discourse-historical approach (DHA). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 87–121. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Reisigl, Martin. 2017. The discourse-historical approach. The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, ed. by John Flowerdew and John E. Richardson, 44–59. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roy, Denny. 2003. Taiwan: A Political History. New York: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Tryntje Pasma. 2010. A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU, vol. 141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun A. 1998. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wachman, Alan. M. 1994. Taiwan: National Identity and Democratization. Armonk, New York, and London: M.E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
Wei, Jennifer M., and Ren-feng Duann. 2019. Who are we?: Contesting meanings in the speeches of national leaders in Taiwan during the authoritarian period. Journal of Language and Politics 18.5:760–781. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 1999. Critical discourse analysis at the end of the 20th century. Research on Language & Social Interaction 32.1–2:185–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2001. The discourse-historical approach. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 63–94. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer. 2009. Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis 21:1–33.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Salomi Boukala. 2015. European identities and the revival of nationalism in the European Union: A discourse historical approach. Journal of Language and Politics 14.1:87–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, Joseph. 2001. Dynamic democratization in Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary China 10.27:339–362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Winnie Huiheng, Christian Burgers, and Kathleen Ahrens. 2021. Framing metaphor use over time: ‘Free Economy’ metaphors in Hong Kong political discourse (1997–2017). Lingua 2521:102955. DOI logoGoogle Scholar