Chapter published in:
Migration and Media: Discourses about identities in crisis
Edited by Lorella Viola and Andreas Musolff
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 81] 2019
► pp. 163–182

Chapter 7
Practical reasoning and metaphor in TV discussions on immigration in Greece

Exchanges and changes

This article investigates the dynamic processes taking place in relation to the choice of specific fixed metaphors which function as framing devices by rival politicians to reinforce their proposals for action in the media immigration discourse of Greek TV discussions (1996-2016). In this research context a critical, integrated, multi-level metaphor analysis model is suggested which combines different methods (see Cameron 2008; Fairclough et al. 2012; Charteris-Black 2014; Musolff 2016; Semino et al. 2016) for a linguistic, cognitive and discursive-communicative-rhetorical analysis in the context of practical reasoning focusing on the framing power of metaphor. Results revealed that around these metaphors the different political ideologies are framed in agreement with the rhetorical tendencies (e.g simplification, bipolarization, hyperbole) of the political media discourse.
Keywords: metaphor analysis (critical, integrated, multi-level), frames, scenarios, practical reasoning, TV discussions, immigration
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology of metaphor analysis
    • 2.1Linguistic, conceptual, discursive-communicative analysis
    • 2.2Conceptual analysis and Scenarios (3rd stage)
    • 2.3Discursive-communicative analysis, practical reasoning and metaphor shifting (4th stage)
  • 3.Analysis
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 07 March 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.81.08but
References
Aristotle
2002 Ρητορική Α. [ Rhetoric A. ] Introduction, Translation, Comments: Dimitris, Lipourlis. Thessaloniki: Zitros.Google Scholar
Agamben, Giorgio
1995 “We Refugees.” Symposium 49 (2): 114–119.Google Scholar
Bickes, Hans, Eleni Butulussi, Tina Otten, Janina Schendel, Amalia Sdroulia, and Alexander Steinhof
2012 Die Dynamik der Konstruktion von Differenz und Feindseligkeit am Beispiel Griechenland: Hört beim Geld die Freundschaft auf? Kritisch-diskursanalytische Untersuchungen der Berichterstattung ausgewählter deutscher und griechischer Medien. München: Iudicium.Google Scholar
Butulussi, Eleni
1999 The “strong” – “weak” discourse in school. A.-F. Christidis. “Strong” and “weak” languages in the European Union. Aspects of linguistic Hegemonism. Centre for Greek Language. Thessaloniki. 776–783.
2007 “Zur Herausbildung kultureller Bewusstheit in der Germanistik am Beispiel Griechenland.” Jahrbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache 32: 113–125.Google Scholar
2008 “Μεταφορά και επιχειρηματολογία στον λόγο της πολυπολιτισμικότητας [Metaphor and Argumentation in the Multiculturalism Discourse].” Studies in Greek Linguistics 28: 279–292.Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne
2008 “Metaphor Shifting in the Dynamics of Talk.” In Confronting Metaphor in Use. An applied Linguistic Approach, edited by Mara Sophia Zanotto, Lynne Cameron, and Marilda C. Cavalcanti, 45–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, Lynne, and Alice Deigman
2006 “The Emergence of Metaphor in Discourse.” Applied Linguistics 27 (4): 671–690. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan
2004 Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014 Analysing Political Speeches. Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave, Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Colleyer, Michael, and Russell King
2015 “Producing transnational space: International migration and the extra-territorial reach of state power.” Progress in Human Geography 39 (2): 185–204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Correa-Beningfield, Margarita Gitte Kristiansen, Ignasi Navarro-Ferrando, and Claude Vandeloise
2005 “Image schemas vs. “Complex Primitives” in cross-cultural spatial cognition.” In From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Beate Hampe, 343–366. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf
2006 “Desiderata einer gesprächsanalytischen Argumentationsforschung.” In Argumentieren in Gesprächen. Gesprächsanalytische Studien, edited by Arnulf Deppermann, and Martin Hartung, 10–26. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Demertzis, Nikos
2002 Πολιτική επικοινωνία. Διακινδύνευση, Δημοσιότητα, Διαδίκτυο [ Political Communication. Risk, Publicity, Internet ]. Athens: Papazisis.Google Scholar
Entman, Robert M.
1993 “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43: 51–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1992 Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1995 Media Discourse. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman, and Ruth Wodak
1997 “Critical Discourse Analysis.” In Discourse as Social Interaction, edited by Teun A. van Dijk, 258–284. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Isabela, and Norman Fairclough
2012 Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J.
1982 “Frame Semantics.” Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul, South Korea: Hanshin Publishing Co.:111–137.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., and Collin Baker
2010 A Frame Approach to Semantic Analysis. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, edited by Bernd Heine, and Heiko Narrog, 313–339. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John, and Kim W. Leong
2007 “Metaphors in the Discursive Construction of Patriotism: the Case of Hong Kong’s Constitutional Reform Debate.” Discourse and Society 18(3): 273–294. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gazakis, Andonis, Despina Syrri, and Andreas Takis
2014 Racism and Discrimination in Greece today. Thessaloniki: Heinrich Böll Stiftung Greece http://​www​.selectrespect​.org​/_vars​/Interactive​_EN​.pdfGoogle Scholar
Girnth, Heiko, and Sascha Michel
2015 “Kommunikation in und über Polit-Talkshows. Zur Einführung in diesen Band.” In Polit-Talkshow. Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven auf ein multimodales Format, edited by Heiko Girnth, and Sascha Michel, 1–22. Stuttgart: Ibidem-Verlag.Google Scholar
Gotsbachner, Emo
2010 “Perspectives on Perspectives Alignment of Framings and Readings across Party Affiliations.” Discourse and Policy Practices: 5th Interpretive Policy Analysis Conference, Grenoble 23.-25. June 2010. Dept. of Political Science, Vienna University: http://​www​.univie​.ac​.at​/frame​-project/Google Scholar
Hampe, Beate
2005 “Image schemas in Cognitive Linguistics: Introduction.” In From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Beate Hampe, 1–12. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hart, Christopher
2010 Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science. New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Mark
1987 The body in the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kaitatzi-Whitlock, Sophia, and Clio Kenterelidou
2017 “The Greek Paradigm on the Migrant and Refugee Crisis.” In The Migrant Crisis: European Perspectives and National Discourses, edited by Melani, Barlai, Birte Fähnrich, Christina Griessler Markus Rhomberg, 127–146. Berlin, Münster, London, New York: LIT Verlag / Publishing House.Google Scholar
Kasimis, Charalambos
2012 “Greece: Illegal Immigration in the Midst of Crisis.” The online Journal of the MPI (Migration, Policy Institute). http://​www​.migrationpolicy​.org​/article​/greece​-illegal​-immigration​-midst​-crisis. Last accessed 8 March 2012.Google Scholar
Kienpointer, Manfred
2017 “Topoi.” In Handbuch Sprache in Politik und Gesellschaft, edited by Kersten Sven Roth, Martin Wengeler, and Alexander Ziem, 187–211. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kimmel, Michael
2005 “Culture regained: Situated and compound image schemas.” In From Perception to Meaning: Image Schemas in Cognitive Linguistics, edited by Beate Hampe, 285–311. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Κövecses, Zoltán
2017 “Levels of Metaphor.” Cognitive Linguistics 28 (2): 321–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark, Johnson
1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lefebvre, Henri
1991 The Production of Space. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lexicon of Common Modern Greek Language
1998. [ Λεξικό της Κοινής Νεοελληνικής ]. http://​www​.greek​-language​.gr​/greekLang​/modern​_greek​/tools​/lexica​/triantafyllides/. Last accessed on 05 June 2018.
Meyer, Thomas
2002 Media democracy: How the media colonise politics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas
2004 Metaphor and Political Discourse. Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse.” Metaphor and Symbol 2(1): 23–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2016 Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas, and Lorella, Viola
this volume “Introduction. Migration and Crisis Identity.” In Migration and Media: Discourses about Identities in Crisis, edited by Andreas Musolff, and Lorella, Viola. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
2001 Discourse and Discrimination. Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London, New York: Roudledge.Google Scholar
2009 “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, 87–121. (2. ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Richardson, Kay
2008 “Specific Debate Formats of Mass Media.” In Handbook of Communication in the Public Sphere, edited by Ruth Wodak, and Veronika Koller, 383–399. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ritter, Joshua
2010 Recovering Hyperbole: Re-Imagining the Limits of Rhetoric for an Age of Excess. scholarworks​.gsu​.edu. Georgia State University.Google Scholar
Semino, Elena, Zsófia Demjén, and Jane Demmen
2016 “An Integrated Approach to Metaphor and Framing in Cognition, Discourse, and Practice, with an Application to Metaphors for Cancer.” Applied Linguistics: 1–22:Google Scholar
Skleparis, Dimitris
2017 “The Greek Response to the Migration Challenge: 2015–2017.” Konrad Adenauer Stiftung. KAS Katoptron http://​www​.kas​.de​/wf​/doc​/kas​_48205​-544​-1​-30​.pdf​?170327142603Google Scholar
Steen, J. Gerard, Aletta G. Dorst, Berenike J. Herrmann, Anna Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Pasma Trijntje
2010 A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sullivan, Karen
2013 Frames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Toulmin, E. Stephen
1958 The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Triandafyllidou, Anna
2014 “Greek Migration Policy in the 2010s: Europeanization Tenses at a Time of Crisis.” Journal of European Integration 36(4): 409–425. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turner, Mark
1991 Reading Minds. The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive Sciences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A
2000 “On the Analysis of Parliamentary Debates on Immigration.” In Semiotics of Racism, edited by Martin Reisigl, and Ruth Wodak, 85–104. Vienna: Passagen Verlag.Google Scholar
2006 “Ideology and Discourse Analysis.” Journal of Political Ideologies 11(2): 115–140. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Eva Vetter
1999 “Competing Professions in Times of Change: The Discursive Construction of professional identities in TV talk-shows.” In Challenges in a Changing World. Issues in Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by Ruth Wodak, and Christoph Ludwig, 209–237. Vienna: Passagen Verlag.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth
2015 The Politics of fear. What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: Sage. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Salomi Boukala
2015 “(Supra)National Identity and Language: Rethinking National and European Migration Policies and the Linguistic Integration of Migrants.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35: 253–273. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth
2017 “Discourses about Nationalism.” Handbook of Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by John E. Richardson, and John Flowerdew, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Žagar, Igor Ž
2010 “Topoi in Critical Discourse Analysis.” Šolsko polje Letnik XX, Številka 5/6: 47–73.Google Scholar
Ziem, Alexander
2005 “Frame-Semantik und Diskursanalyse.” Zur Verwandtschaft zweier Wissensanalysen. Paper für die Konferenz Diskursanalyse in Deutschland und Frankreich. Aktuelle Tendenzen in den Sozial- und Sprachwissenschaften. 30. Juni – 2. Juli 2005, Paris, Université Val-de-Marne. Erscheint in: http://​www​.univ​-paris12​.fr​/www​/labos​/ceditec​/colloqueADFA​.htmlGoogle Scholar