Chapter published in:
Persuasion in Public Discourse: Cognitive and functional perspectives
Edited by Jana Pelclová and Wei-lun Lu
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 79] 2018
► pp. 65–84

Metaphor as a (de-)legitimizing strategy in leadership discourse

The language of crisis in Winston Churchill’s Cold War speeches

This chapter investigates Churchill’s Cold War speeches as a case of how cognitive and corpus linguistics may serve as a useful tool for analyzing how political leaders legitimize their agendas via linguistic means. We find that Churchill’s rhetoric makes extensive use of the source domains person, journey, and building. The argumentative purpose is at least twofold. First, journey and building metaphors give positive value to the country’s prospects. Second, the journey metaphor is found to co-occur with personification, with the purpose of seeking partnership between the United States and the United Kingdom. We conclude by discussing how political leaders linguistically represent and conceptually frame a crisis, especially via metaphorical means, convincing their people of the usefulness of certain proposals and thus legitimizing their agendas, with Churchill as a representative example.
Keywords: Cold War, crisis, leadership, legitimization, metaphor, Winston Churchill
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 08 August 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.79.04seb
References

References

Cameron, Lynne, and Graham Low
1999 Researching and Applying Metaphor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cap, Piotr
2006 Legitimization in Political Discourse. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan
2004 Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. New York: Macmillan.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 Politicians and Rhetoric. New York: Macmillan.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chilton, Paul Anthony
2004 Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Churchill, Winston S.
1930 A Roving Commission: My Early Life. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana
2008 “Framing and Blending in Persuasive Discourse.” In Frames, Corpora and Knowledge Representation, ed. by Rema Rossini Favretti, 33–42. Bologna: Bolonia University Press.Google Scholar
Coulson, Seana, and Esther Pascual
2006 “For the Sake of Argument: Mourning the Unborn and Reviving the Dead through Conceptual Blending.” Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 4: 153–181.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Crespo-Fernández, Eliecer
2013 “Words as Weapons for Mass Persuasion.” Text & Talk 33 (3): 311–330.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Edelman, Murray
1977 Political Language: Words That Succeed and Policie That Fail. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner
2002 The Way We Think. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles
1982 “Frame semantics.” In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, ed. by , 111–137. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing.Google Scholar
Geis, Michael L.
1987 The Language of Politics. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goatly, Andrew
1997 The Language of Metaphors. New York: Routledge.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hart, Christopher
2014 Discourse, Grammar and Ideology. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Johnson, Mark
1987 The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jowett, Garth, and Victoria O'Donnel
1992 Propaganda and Persuasion. London and Newbury Park: Sage.Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Pavel Rychlý, Pavel Smrž, and David Tugwell
2004 “The Sketch Engine.” In Proceedings of the Eleventh EURALEX International Congress, ed. by Geoffrey Williams, and Sandra Vessier, 105–116. Lorient, France: Universite de Bretagne-Sud.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltan
2002 Metaphor: A practical Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George
1993 “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought, ed. by Andrew Ortony, 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2004 Don't Think of an Elephant. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.Google Scholar
2008 The Political Mind. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Turner
1989 More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. London: University of Chicago Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lu, L.Wei-lun
2008 “From Textual Prompts to Cognitive Models: A Context-oriented Perspective on Metaphor Interpretation in Taiwanese Presidential Speeches.” Language and Linguistics 9 (2): 341–358.Google Scholar
Lu, L.Wei-lun, and Kathleen Ahrens
2008 “Ideological Influence on BUILDING Metaphors in Taiwanese Presidential Speeches.” Discourse & Society 19 (3): 383–408.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lu, Wei-lun
2017 “Religion and Worldview in Metaphor Use: Cultural Conceptualisations of Death in Taiwanese Buddhist and Christian Eulogistic Idioms.” In Advances in Cultural Linguistics ed. by Farzad Sharifian, 49–64. New York: Springer.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Macmillan Dictionary
2009–2015
Pelclová, Jana
2010 Persuasive Strategies in Advertising Discourse. A Lexico-grammatical and Socio-pragmatic Analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Brno: Masaryk University.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman
1981 “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science 211 (4481): 453–458.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun
1995 “Discourse Analysis as Ideology Analysis.” In Language and Peace, ed. by Christina Shaffner, and Anita L. Wendon, 17–33. Aldershot: Dartmouth Publishing.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, Theo, and Ruth Wodak
1999 “Legitimizing Immigration Control:A Discourse-historical Analysis.” Discourse Studies 10 (1): 83–118.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

Corpus and database consulted

The British National Corpus
, version 3 (BNC XML Edition) 2007 Distributed by Oxford University Computing Services on behalf of the BNC Consortium.