Article published in:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 12:1 (2022) ► pp. 46–68

Metaphors of cultural diversity at UNESCO

Legitimization strategies of a new keyword in institutional discourse

| Hebrew University of Jerusalem
This paper analyses metaphors and analogies of cultural diversity at UNESCO in a discursive and rhetorical-argumentative framework, to answer the following question: How do these rhetorical devices play a legitimizing role when introducing a new keyword into the public sphere? Conventional and creative metaphors are analyzed separately to examine if they represent different legitimization strategies. Conventional metaphors and analogies include variations on treasure, heritage, and biodiversity; creative metaphors include cultural diversity as a living treasure and a Rainbow River. The findings suggest that the wealth metaphor fulfills an evaluative meliorative function, while the heritage metaphor constructs a collective identity devoid of internal conflict, thereby depoliticizing the concept of cultural diversity. The biodiversity analogy further depoliticizes cultural diversity via naturalization and the invocation of the authority of science. Legitimization is also achieved by invoking past discourse and shared knowledge, and by tapping into UNESCO’s “discursive memory.” In contrast, the creative metaphors living treasure and Rainbow River play a different argumentative role: they offer a rhetorical solution of coexistence to two contradicting views on culture; one as a static, closed entity to be protected from extinction, and the other as a changing, dynamic process. They do so by fusing both views, represented by different metaphors, into one creative metaphor.
Keywords: cultural diversity, metaphor and argumentation, legitimation, institutional discourse, UNESCO, biodiversity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theory and methodology
    • 2.1Institutional discourse and epideictic genre
    • 2.2Metaphors, analogies, and argumentation
    • 2.3Conventional and creative metaphors
  • 3.Cultural diversity as a treasure
  • 4.Cultural diversity as the common heritage of humanity
    • 4.1The construction of a universal collective
    • 4.2Discursive memory
  • 5.The analogy to biodiversity
    • 5.1Legitimization based on previously shared knowledge
    • 5.2Legitimization based on nature and science
  • 6.Creative metaphors: The Rainbow River
    • 6.1Cultural diversity as a river
    • 6.2Cultural diversity as a Rainbow River
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 23 November 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.20018.kor
References
Amossy, R. & Koren, R.
(2009) Rhétorique et argumentation: approches croisées [Rhetoric and argumentation: Crossed approaches]. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours [Argumentation and Discourse Analysis], 2 1. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Arcimaviciene, L. & Baglama, S. H.
(2018) Migration, metaphor and myth in media. SAGE Open, April-June 2018, 1–13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle
(1928) The works of Aristotle (W. D., Ed.): Vol. 11. Rhetorica. De rhetorica ad Alexandrum. De poetica. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Arizpe, L. & Preis, A. B.
(2000) General introduction. In UNESCO (Ed.), World report on culture (pp. 14–19). Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Arizpe, L. et al.
(2000) Cultural diversity, conflict and pluralism. In UNESCO (Ed.), World report on culture (pp. 22–40). Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
Barnard, F. M.
(Ed.) (1969) J. G. Herder on social and political culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Berger, P. & Luckmann, T.
(1966) The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Bokova, I.
(2010) Mot introductif [ Introductory remarks ]. In UNESCO (Ed.), Rapport mondial de l’UNESCO. Investir dans la diversité culturelle et le dialogue interculturel [UNESCO World Report. Investing in cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue] (p. iii). Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved 13 October, 2021, from https://​unesdoc​.unesco​.org​/ark:​/48223​/pf0000187827​/PDF​/187827fre​.pdf​.multi
Bonhomme, M.
(1998) Les figures clés du discours [The key figures of discourse]. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
(2009) De l’argumentativité des figures de rhétorique [On the argumentativity of rhetorical figures]. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours [Argumentation and Discourse Analysis], 2 1. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Boyd, R.
(1993) Metaphor and theory change: What is “metaphor” a metaphor for? In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 481–532). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Busino, G.
(2000) Notes sur les métaphores fondatrices de la connaissance sociologique [Notes on the foundational metaphors of sociological knowledge]. Revue Européenne des Sciences Sociales [European review of Social Sciences], 38 (117), 69–81. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, J.
(2011) Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. London: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2019) Metaphors of Brexit. No cherries on the cake? London: Palgrave MacMillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Courtine, J.-J.
(1981) Quelques problèmes théoriques et méthodologiques en analyse du discours, à propos du discours communiste adressé aux chrétiens [Some theoretical and methodological problems in discourse analysis, concerning the communist discourse addressed to christians]. Langages, 62 1, 9–128. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Daston, L.
(2014) The naturalistic fallacy is modern. ISIS, A Journal of the History of Science Society, 105 (3), 579–587. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ervas, F. & Sangoi, M.
(2014) The Role of Metaphor in Argumentation. In F. Ervas & M. Sangoi, Metaphor and argumentation (pp. 7–23). University of Urbino: Isonomia – Epistemologica.Google Scholar
Ervas, F. et al.
(2018) Creative Argumentation: When and why people commit the metaphoric fallacy. Frontiers in Psychology 25 September 2018    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fahnestock, J.
(1999) Rhetorical figures in science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fasciolo, M. & Rossi, M.
(2016) Métaphore et métaphores: les multiples issues de l’interaction conceptuelle [Metaphor and metaphors: multiples outcomes of conceptual interaction]. Langue française [French Language], 189 1, 5–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M.
(1971) L’ordre du discours [The order of discourse]. Paris: GallimardGoogle Scholar
Hart, C.
(2018) ‘Riots engulfed the city’: An experimental study investigating the legitimating effects of fire metaphors in discourses of disorder. Discourse & Society, 29 (3), 279–298. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hilgert, E.
(2016) L’analogie est-elle plus explicite que la métaphore ? [Are analogies more explicit than metaphors?], Langue française [French Language], 1891, 67–86. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
International Society of Ethnobiology
(1988) Declaration of Belém. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from http://​www​.ethnobiology​.net​/what​-we​-do​/core​-programs​/global​-coalition​-2​/declaration​-of​-belem/
Koren, R.
(2016) Exemple historique, comparaison, analogie, métaphore : sont-ils interchangeables ? [Historical example, comparison, analogy, metaphor: Are they interchangeable?], Argumentation et Analyse du Discours [Argumentation and Discourse Analysis], 161, CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kroeber, A.
(1939) Cultural and natural areas of North America. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S.
(1993) Metaphor in science. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 533–542). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Le Hégarat, T. et al.
(2015) Introduction. In T. Le Hégarat et al. (Eds.), Faiseurs et passeurs du patrimoine XIXe-XXIe siècle. Actes de la journée d’études du 7 mai 2014 [Makers and passers of heritage 19th-21st century. Proceedings of the workshop on 7 May 2014] (pp. 6–12). Guyancourt: CHCSC & HAL online archive. Retrieved November 3, 2020, from https://​halshs​.archives​-ouvertes​.fr​/halshs​-01218197​/document
Macagno, F.
(2020) How can metaphors communicate arguments? Intercultural Pragmatics, 17 (3):335–363. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maffi, L.
(2001) Introduction: On the interdependence of biological and cultural diversity. In L. Maffi (Ed.), On biocultural diversity: Linking language, knowledge, and the environment (pp. 1–50). Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute Press.Google Scholar
(2018) Biocultural diversity. In The International Encyclopedia of Anthropology. Wiley Online Library. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Maingueneau, D.
(1991) L’analyse du discours. Introduction aux lectures de l’archive [Discourse Analysis. Introduction to archive readings]. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
(2002) Les rapports des organisations internationales: un discours constituant ? [International organizations reports: A constituting discourse ?] In G. Rist (Ed.) Les mots du pouvoir. Sens et non-sens de la rhétorique internationale [Words of power. Sense and nonsense of international rhetoric] (pp. 119–132). Geneva: Nouveaux Cahiers de l’IUED 13 & Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matsuura, K.
(2001) ‘The cultural wealth of the world is its diversity in dialogue.’ In UNESCO (Ed.), UNESCO Universal declaration on cultural diversity (p. 31). Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(2002) Préface [Preface]. In UNESCO (Ed.), Diversité culturelle. Patrimoine commun, identités plurielles [Cultural diversity. Common heritage, plural identities] (pp. 3–5). Paris: UNESCO. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Merriam-Webster
n.d.). Value. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved November 4, 2020, from https://​www​.merriam​-webster​.com​/dictionary​/value
Morgan, L. H.
(1907) Ancient society. New York: H. Holt.Google Scholar
Musolff, A.
(2016) Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London & New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Oger, C. & Ollivier-Yaniv, C.
(2006) Conjurer le désordre discursif. Procédés de ‘lissage’ dans la fabrication du discours institutionnel [Conjuring discursive disorder. ‘Smoothing’ procedures in the fabrication of institutional discourse]. Mots. Les langages du politique [Words. The languages of the political], 81 1, 63–77. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ouellet, P.
(2000) La métaphore perceptive. Eidétique et figurativité [Perceptive metaphor. Eidictics and figurativity]. Langages, 137 1, 16–28. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Perelman, C. & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L.
(1971) The new rhetoric. A treatise on argumentation. London: University of Notre Dame Press. Tr. by J. Wilkinson & P. Weaver.Google Scholar
Plantin, C.
(2011) Analogie et métaphore argumentative [Analogy and argumentative metaphor. A Contrario, 16 1 2011/2, 110–130. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Prandi, M.
(2016) Les métaphores conflictuelles dans la création de concepts et de termes [Conflictual metaphors in the creation of concepts and terms]. Langue française [French Language], 189 1, 35–48. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rist, G.
(2002) Le prix des mots [The price of words]. In G. Rist (Ed.), Les mots du pouvoir. Sens et non-sens de la rhétorique internationale [Words of power. Sense and nonsense of international rhetoric] (pp. 9–24). Geneva: Nouveaux Cahiers de l’IUED, 13 1 & Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rivière, F.
(2010) Introduction. In UNESCO (Ed.), Festival International de la diversité culturelle 2010 [2010 International Festival for cultural diversity] [Online Catalogue] (p. 4). Paris: UNESCO. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rossi, M.
(2016) Pour une typologie des avatars métaphoriques dans les terminologies spécialisées [Towards a typology of metaphorical changes in specialized terminology], Langue française [French Language], 1891, 87–102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, J.
(2010) Dictionnaire de droit international public [Dictionary of public international law]. Brussels: Bruylant.Google Scholar
Sholomon-Kornblit, I.
(2018) Biodiversité et diversité culturelle: trajectoire d’une analogie (2001–2010) [Biodiversity and cultural diversity: Trajectory of an analogy (2001–2010)]. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours [Argumentation and Discourse Analysis], 21 1. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spencer, H.
(1896) The study of sociology. New York: D. Appleton.Google Scholar
Steen, G.
(2008) The paradox of metaphor: Why we need a three-dimensional model of metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol, 23 (4), 231–241. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. et al.
(2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stocking, G. W.
(1968) Race, culture and evolution. New York: The Free Press & London: Collier-MacMillan.Google Scholar
Titchen, S. M.
(1995) On the construction of outstanding universal value. UNESCO’s World Heritage Convention (Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage, 1972) and the identification and assessment of cultural places for inclusion in the World Heritage List. PhD thesis. Canberra: Australian National University. Retrieved January, 20, 2016, from https://​digitalcollections​.anu​.edu​.au​/handle​/1885​/10039
Tomlinson, J.
(2003) Globalization and cultural identity. In D. Held & A. McGrew (Eds.), The global transformations reader (pp. 269–277). Cambridge & Oxford: Polity.Google Scholar
Tylor, E. B.
(1958) Primitive culture. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
UNESCO
(1972) Convention concerning the protection of the world cultural and natural heritage. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(1982) Mexico City Declaration on cultural policies. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(1996) Notre diversité créatrice [Our creative diversity]. Rapport de la Commission mondiale de la culture et du développement. Version condensée [World commission Report on culture and development. Condensed version]. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(1998) Notre Diversité créatrice [Our creative diversity]. Rapport de la Commission mondiale de la culture et du développement. Document de travail [World commission Report on culture and development. Working Paper]. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(2000) World culture report: Cultural diversity, conflict, and pluralism. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(2001) UNESCO Universal declaration on cultural diversity. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(2003) Convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(2009) World culture report: Investing in cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar
(2010) International conference on biological and cultural diversity: Diversity for development- development for diversity, June 8–10 2010, Montreal, Canada. Working Document. Retrieved November, 11, 2020 from https://​www​.cbd​.int​/doc​/meetings​/development​/icbcd​/official​/icbcd​-scbd​-unesco​-en​.pdf
United Nations
(1987)  Our common future. Report of the World commission on environment and development (Ed. G. H. Brundtland). New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
(1992) Convention on biological diversity. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
(2020) Indigenous Peoples: Culture. In Department for Economic and Social Affairs (website). Retrieved June 4, 2020, from https://​www​.un​.org​/development​/desa​/indigenouspeoples​/mandated​-areas1​/culture​.html
Van Leeuwen, T.
(2007) Legitimization in discourse and communication. Discourse and Communication, 1 (1), 91–112. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Poppel, L.
(2020) The Study of Metaphor in Argumentation Theory. Argumentation (2020)    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Winkin, Y.
(2002) Cultural diversity: A pool of ideas for implementation. In K. Stenou (Ed.), UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity: A vision, a conceptual platform, a pool of ideas for implementation, a new paradigm (pp. 17–59). [Document for the World summit on sustainable development, Johannesburg, 26 August – 4 September 2002], Paris: UNESCO, Cultural diversity series n. 1. Retrieved November, 3, 2021, from https://​unesdoc​.unesco​.org​/ark:​/48223​/pf0000127162Google Scholar
Wright, S.
(1998) The Politicization of ‘Culture’. Anthropology Today, 14 (1), 7–15. London: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. CrossrefGoogle Scholar