In:New Vistas in Research on Metaphor and Metonymy: Their contexts and interaction across discourse types and modalities
Edited by Robert Kiełtyka, Mario Brdar, Marcin Kudła and Goran Milić
[Human Cognitive Processing 82] 2027
► pp. 164–181
Chapter 6Geopolitics meets journalism
The capital for government metonymy in US news media
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
In political journalism, capital cities often
represent administrations through the capital for
government metonymy. This metonymy is more prominent for
countries seen as allies or threats, and less for neutral
governments. However, it remains unclear whether the capital for
government metonymy shifts over time, particularly with
changes in political leadership. To address this, the chapter
analyzes how capital cities the American public perceives as threats
(Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, Pyongyang) and allies (London, Ottawa, Tel
Aviv, Brussels) were represented on CNN and Fox News during the
first two years of the Trump and Biden administrations. The findings
show that metonymic representation was more frequent for threats
than allies, regardless of presidential agenda or media outlet,
likely due to sensationalist reporting in American media.
Keywords: political journalism, foreign affairs, friend, foe, headline, space metaphor
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Figuration in foreign affairs
- 3.Corpus and methods
- 4.Results and discussion
- 4.1Metonymic representations during the Trump and Biden administrations
- 4.2Metonymic representations by media outlets
- 5.Summary
- Author queries
Notes References
References (57)
Aalberg, T., Papathanassopoulos, S., Soroka, S., Curran, J., Hayashi, K., Iyengar, S., Jones, P. K., Mazzoleni, G., Rojas, H., Rowe, D., & Tiffen, R. (2013). International
TV news, foreign affairs interest and public knowledge: A
comparative study of foreign news coverage and public
opinion in 11
countries. Journalism
Studies, 14(3), 387–406.
Barcelona, A. (2009). Motivation
of construction meaning and form: The roles of metonymy and
inference. In K.-U. Panther, L. L. Thornburg, & A. Barcelona (Eds.), Metonymy
and metaphor in
grammar (pp. 363–401). John Benjamins.
(2011). Reviewing
the properties and prototype structure of
metonymy. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona, & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining
metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus
view (pp. 7–57). John Benjamins.
(2024). Trends
in cognitive-linguistic research on
metonymy. Cognitive
Linguistic
Studies, 11(1), 51–74.
(2023). Metonymy-guided
discourse inferencing. A qualitative
study. Lublin Studies in
Modern Languages and
Literature, 47(2), 11–26.
Benczes, R. (2019). Visual
metonymy and framing in political
communication. In A. Benedek, & K. Nyíri (Eds.), Perspectives
on visual learning, vol. 3. Image and metaphor in the new
century (pp. 17–28). Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest University of Technology and Economics.
Benczes, R., & Szabó, L. P. (2020). Brussels
— boss, bully or the Big
Brother? Jezikoslovlje, 21(3), 345–69.
Benczes, R., Bozdag, U., & Szabó, L. P. (2006). All
work and no play make the weekend frame go away? Metonymic
micro-variation in online news
articles. In R. Brdar-Szabó, & M. Brdar (Eds.), Thinking
and speaking about time: A cognitive linguistic
approach (pp. 308–24). John Benjamins.
Biernacka, E. (2013). A
discourse dynamics investigation of metonymy in
talk [PhD
thesis]. [URL]
Brdar, M., & Brdar-Szabó, R. (2011). Metonymy,
metaphor and the “weekend frame of mind”: Towards motivating
the micro-variation in the use of one type of
metonymy. In K.-U. Panther, & G. Radden (Eds.), Motivation
in grammar and the
lexicon (pp. 233–250). John Benjamins.
(2021). Cross-cultural
variation in the use of one type of metonymic
synonyms. In M. Brdar, G. Milić, D. Vidaković Erdeljić, & R. Brdar-Szabó (Eds.) Figurative
thought and language in the Human
universe (pp. 127–149). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
(2022). Targetting
metonymic
targets. In M. Brdar & R. Brdar-Szabó (Eds.), Figurative
thought and language in action, Vol.
16, (pp. 59–86). John Benjamins.
Brdar-Szabó, R., & Brdar, M. (2011). What
do metonymic chains reveal about the nature of
metonymy? In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona, & F. J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez (Eds.), Defining
metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus
view (pp. 217–248). John Benjamins.
(2021). Metonymic
indeterminacy and metalepsis: Getting two (or more) targets
for the price of one
vehicle. In A. Soares da Silva (Ed.), Figurative
language: Intersubjectivity and
usage (pp. 175–212). John Benjamins.
Chantrill, P. A., & Mio, J. S. (1996). Metonymy
in political
discourse. In J. S. Mio & A. N. Katz (Eds.), Metaphor:
Implications and
applications (pp. 171–184). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Charteris-Black, J. (2011). Politicians
and rhetoric: The persuasive power of
metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chilton, P., & Lakoff, G. (1999). Foreign
policy by
metaphor. In C. Schäffne, & A. L. Wenden (Eds.), Language
&
peace (pp. 37–60). Routledge.
Demata, M. (2019). “The
state of our Union is strong.” Metaphors of the nation in
State of the Union
addresses. In L. Šarić, & M. Stanojević (Eds.), Metaphor,
nation and
discourse (pp. 201–224). John Benjamins.
Fetterolf, J., Clancy, L., & Lippert, J. (2025, July 8). Who
do people think is their country’s greatest
threat? Pew Research Center. [URL]
Gaebler, J. D., Westwood, S. J., Iyengar, S., & Goel, S. (2025). No
news is good news? The declining information value of
broadcast news in
America. PLoS
One, 20(10), e0331607.
Gorodnia, N. (2021). U.S.
policy toward China under the administration of Donald
Trump. American History &
Politics: Scientific edition.
Gypson, K. (2024). Biden,
Trump hold different views on key foreign policy
issues. Voice of
America. April 8. [URL]
Halverson, S. L., & Engene, J. O. (2010). Domains
and dimensions in metonymy: A corpus-based study of Schengen
and Maastricht. Metaphor and
Symbol, 25(1), 1–18.
Jones, T. M., van Aelst, P., & Vliegenthart, R. (2013). Foreign
nation visibility in U.S. news coverage: A longitudinal
analysis
(1950–2006). Communication
Research, 40(3), 417–436.
(1999). Philosophy
in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western
thought. Basic Books.
Lam, N., & Silver, L. (2023, July 27). Americans
name China as the country posing the greatest threat to the
U.S. Pew Research Center. [URL]
Lee, M. (2024). A
look at how Biden and Trump’s foreign policy records differ
from each other. NBC4
Washington. July 17. [URL]
Lestari, Y., & Kusumah, F. (2023). The
US foreign policy towards China during Trump
administration. Global
Focus.
Littlemore, J. (2015). Metonymy:
Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and
communication. Cambridge University Press.
Maier, S. R. (2020). The
world view(ed) through the English-speaking media lens:
Foreign news coverage steadfastly narrow and
uniform. Journal of
International
Communication, 26(2), 155–170.
Mead, W. R. (2017). The
Jacksonian Revolt: American populism and the liberal
order. Foreign
Affairs, 96(2), 2–7. [URL]
Milić, G., & Vidaković, D. (2007). Referential
metonymy of the type capital-for-government in
Croatian. In K. Kosecki (Ed.), Perspectives
on metonymy: Lodz Studies in
Language 14 (pp. 253–270). Peter Lang,
Mills-Brown, L. (2008). Journalism,
political. In L. L. Kaid, & C. Holtz-Bacha (Eds.), Encyclopedia
of political communication, Volume
1 (pp. 360–365). SAGE Publications.
Mio, J. S. (1996). Metaphor,
politics, and
persuasion. In J. S. Mio, & A. N. Katz (Eds.), Metaphor:
Implications and
applications (pp. 127–146). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mitchell, A., Gottfried, J., Kiley, J., & Matsa, K. E. (2014, October 21). Section
1: Media sources: Distinct favorites emerge on the left and
right (In Political polarization & media
habits). Pew Research Center. [URL]
Moeller, S. D. (2018). Media
and foreign policy. Great
Decisions, 47–56. [URL]
Norris, P. (1995). The
restless searchlight: Network news framing of the post-cold
war world. Political
Communication, 12(4), 357–370.
Olsen, G. R. (2022). “America
is Back” or “America First” and the Transatlantic
Relationship. Politics and
Governance, 10(2), 154–164.
Otto, L., Glogger, I., & Boukes, M. (2017). The
softening of journalistic political communication: A
comprehensive framework model of sensationalism, soft news,
infotainment, and
tabloidization. Communication
Theory, 27(2), 136–155.
Peake, J. S. (2001). Presidential
agenda setting in foreign
policy. Political Research
Quarterly, 54(1), 69–86.
Peña-Cervel, M. S., & Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J. (2022). Figuring
out figuration: A cognitive linguistic
account. John Benjamins.
Robinson, P. (1999). The
CNN effect: Can the news media drive foreign
policy? Review of
International
Studies, 25(2), 301–309.
Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez, F. J., & Pérez Hernández, L. (2003). Cognitive
operations and pragmatic
implication. In K.-U. Panther & L. L. Thornburg (Eds.), Metonymy
and pragmatic
inferencing (pp. 23–49). John Benjamins.
Salamurović, A. (2020). Metonymy
and the conceptualisation of nation in political
discourse. Yearbook of the
German Cognitive Linguistics
Association, 8(1), 181–196.
Shearer, E., Eddy, K., Lipka, M., & Matsa, K. E. (2025, June 10). The
political gap in Americans’ news sources: Exploring use of
and trust in 30 sources across U.S. political
lines. Pew Research Center. [URL]
Stanojević, M., & Šarić, L. (2019). Metaphors
in the discursive construction of
nations. In L. Šarić, & M. Stanojević (Ed.), Metaphor,
nation and
discourse (1–32). John Benjamins.
Segev, E. (2019). From
where does the world look flatter? A comparative analysis of
foreign coverage in world
news. Journalism, 20(7), 924–942.
Szabó, L. P. (2025). Making
a cardinal point: The conceptualization of EAST and WEST in
Hungarian public
discourse. Metaphor and
Symbol, 40(2), 140–152.
Szabó, L. P., & Szabó, G. (2022). Attack
of the critics: Metaphorical delegitimisation in Viktor
Orbán’s discourse during the Covid-19
pandemic. Journal of Language
and
Politics, 21(2), 255–276.
Szabó, L. P., Varga, D. E., & Bozdağ, U. (2025). A
“MEGA” Presidency: Viktor Orbán’s rhetoric during the 2024
Hungarian Presidency of the Council of the European
Union. [Unpublished
ms.]
Verniers, L., Papadopoulos, A., & Hermans, T. J. (2025). Brussels. Encyclopedia
Britannica. [URL]
