Cover not available
Article published In:
Metaphor and the Social World
Vol. 13:2 (2023) ► pp.197–220

Scepticism voiced through extended metaphors

Assessment of higher education reform in the media

| Vilnius University
When metaphors appear in a text in clusters within the same source domain, they are usually referred to as an extended metaphor (Gibbs, 2015; Naciscione, 2016; Semino, 2008; Shutova, 2015; Thibodeau, 2016; Werth, 1994). This creates a coherent narrative or a scenario (Musolff, 2016) encoding the evaluation of a particular socially-contested issue. The present study analyses how the evaluation of higher education reform in Lithuanian media is manifested through extended metaphor and whether negative evaluations prevail. For this investigation, a corpus of Lithuanian media texts on higher education reform was examined within the frameworks of Critical Metaphor Analysis (Charteris-Black, 2014) and scenarios (Musolff, 2016). The findings show that, when extended metaphors are ascribed positive, negative or mixed values and categorised into mini-narratives, leitmotif narratives and long narratives, they usually (24 out of 28) follow negatively and often death-related and ironically encoded narratives with differently twisted scenarios. This study, therefore, shows a persistent attempt by the media to evaluate the ongoing reform negatively.
Keywords: extended metaphor, narrative, framing, evaluation, higher education reform
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Evaluation and extended metaphor
  • 3.Data and methods
    • Metaphor identification
    • Metaphor interpretation
    • Metaphor explanation
  • 4.Extended metaphors framing the reform of higher education
    • 4.1Death-related metaphorical narratives
    • 4.2Other metaphorical narratives
  • 5.Ideological implications of extended metaphor
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Note
  • Cited sources
  • References
Published online: 30 May 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.22022.cib
References (47)
Cited sources
15min_1 Dideli premjero užmojai: aukštojo mokslo ir esminė mokesčių reformos – jau kitąmet (20–12–2017) [URL]
15 min_2 Aukštasis mokslas, arba Kieno ausys ilgiausios? (05–01–2017) [URL]
15min_3 Artėjant mūšiui Seime dėl aukštojo mokslo Lietuvoje (19–06–2017) [URL]
15min_4 „Fake law“ invazija universitetuose (09–03–2018) [URL]
TV3_1 Ministrė apie universitetų pertvarką: siūlėme vykti greitkeliu, pasirinktas plentas (24–06–2017) [URL]
TV3_2 Stabdo masinio stojimo į universitetus madą: net mokant pinigus, bus sunkiau gauti diplomą (14–05–2017) [URL]
LR_1 Lietuvos aukštojo mokslo laidotuvės – mokslininkai uždirba kaip vairuotojai (11–12–2017) [URL]
References
Ahrens, K., & Jiang, M. (2020). Source domain verification using corpus-based tools. Metaphor and Symbol, 35 (1), 43–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bednarek, M. (2006). Evaluation in media discourse. Analysis of a newspaper corpus. Research in Corpus and Discourse. Continuum.Google Scholar
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2012/2019). News discourse. Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Burgers, C., Konijn, E. A., & Steen, G. (2016). Figurative framing: Shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, irony. Communication Theory, 26 1, 410–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., & Low, G. (2010). Finding systematicity in metaphor use. Metaphor analysis. Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the Humanities (pp. 116–146). Equinox.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2014). Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coll-Florit, M., & Climent, S. (2019). A new methodology for conceptual metaphor detection and formulation in corpora: A case study on a mental health corpus. SKY Journal of Linguistics, 32 1, 43–74.Google Scholar
Crisp, P. (2005). Allegory and symbol – a fundamental opposition? Language and Literature, 14 (4), 323–338. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deignan, A. (2017). From linguistic to conceptual metaphors. In E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language (pp. 102–116). Routledge.Google Scholar
Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4), 51–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fogarty, B. J. (2005). Determining economic news coverage. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17 (2), 149–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuoli, M. (2018). A stepwise method for annotating APPRAISAL. Functions of Language, 25 (2), 229–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuoli, M., Littlemore, J., & Turner, S. (2021). Sunken ships and screaming banshees: metaphor and evaluation in film reviews. English Language and Linguistics, 26 (1), 75–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. (2015). The allegorical character of political metaphors in discourse. Metaphor and the Social World, 5 (2), 264–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphors in human life. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hidalgo-Downing, L., & Pérez-Sobrino, P. (in press). ‘Pushing Britain off the precipice’: A CDA approach to negative evaluative stance in opinion articles on Brexit. In J. Marín-Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing & J. R. Zamorano Mansilla (Eds.) Stance (inter)subjectivity and identity in discourse. Peter Lang.
(2022). Developing an annotation protocol for evaluative stance and metaphor in discourse: theoretical and methodological considerations. Text & Talk. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S. (2011). Corpus approaches to evaluation, phraseology and evaluative language. Routledge.Google Scholar
Koller, V. (2003). Metaphor clusters in business media discourse: a social cognition approach [Doctoral thesis, University of Vienna]. University of Vienna.
Kövecses, Z. (2021). A multilevel and contextualist view of conceptual metaphor theory. Journal of Language and Communication, 8 (2), 133–143.Google Scholar
Littlemore, J. (2019). Metaphors in the mind: Sources of variation in embodied metaphor. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Littlemore, J., & Turner, S. (2022, April 21–22). Creative metaphor, emotion and evaluation in conversations about work [Paper presentation]. Figurative Thought and Language Conference, Poznan, Poland.
Maíz-Arévalo, Carmen and Alfonso Sánchez-Moya (in press). ‘Histrionic, appalling, a major turkey’: The expression of evaluative stance in the discourse of online forums’. In J. Marín-Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing & J. R. Zamorano (Eds.), Stance, inter/subjectivity and identity in discourse. Peter Lang.
Martin, J., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MESS. 2018. Ministry of Education, Science and Sport of the Republic of Lithuania [URL] [Accessed 18 June 2019].
Musolff, A. (2016). Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Naciscione, A. (2016). Extended metaphor in the web of discourse. In R. Gibbs (Ed.), Mixing metaphors (pp. 241–266). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paulauskas, J. (2015). Sisteminis lietuvių kalbos žodynas [Systemic Dictionary of Lithuanian]. Mokslas. [URL]
Reinierse, G. (2021, February 8). Introducing MSDIP: A method for coding source domains in metaphor analysis [Webinar paper]. Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong.
Reijnierse, G. (2021, February 8). Introducing MSDIP: A method for coding source domains in metaphor analysis [paper presentation]. Joint online seminar by Department of English and Research Centre for English Communication, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong. [URL]
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shutova, E. (2015). Design and evaluation of metaphor processing systems. Computational Linguistics. 41 (4), 579–623. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soroka, S. (2006). Good news and bad news: Asymmetric responses to economic information. The Journal of Politics, 68 (2), 372–385. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G., Dorst, A., Herrmann, B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., Pasma, T. (2010). A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thibodeau, P. (2016). Extended metaphors are the home runs of persuasion: Don’t fumble the phrase. Metaphor and Symbol, 31 (2), 53–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, G., Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thomson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trussler, M., & Soroka, S. (2014). Consumer demand for cynical and negative news frames. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19 (3), 360–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Urbonaitė, J., Šeškauskienė, I., & Cibulskienė, J. (2019). Linguistic metaphor identification in Lithuanian. In S. Nacey, A. G. Dorst, T. Krennmayr & W. G. Reijnierse (Eds.), Metaphor identification in multiple languages. MIPVU around the world (pp. 159–181). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Werth, P. (1994). Extended metaphor – a text-world account. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics, 3 (2), 79–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Augé, Anaïs
2024. Are religion metaphors anti‑revolutionary?. Metaphor and the Social World 14:1 ► pp. 43 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.