Article In:
Review of Cognitive Linguistics: Online-First Articles

Metaphorical framing of political events through ENTERTAINMENT scenarios

A cross-cultural perspective

ORCID logo | Vilnius University
ORCID logo | Vilnius University
ORCID logo | Vilnius University
The article sets out to examine the entertainment source domain and its scenarios as realised in the media discourse surrounding political events in Belarus in 2021. Metaphorical scenarios are investigated considering different viewpoints, such as those presented in Lithuanian, German, and Russian media. The methodological framework is a blend of Cognitive Linguistics and Critical Discourse Studies, embracing the viewpoint (Sweetser, 2012), Critical Metaphor Analysis (Charteris-Black, 2005), metaphorical scenarios (Musolff, 2016) and framing (Hart, 2014). The results demonstrate that the entertainment domain acquires multiple scenarios depending on the viewpoint. The evaluation attached to the scenarios is mostly negative; however, the viewpoint adopted in the Lithuanian and German discourses is very different from the Russian discourse. The former is based on Western values and targets the authoritarian regime, whereas the latter is Russian-centric, with the Western world posited as a major threat to the Belarusian and Russian societies.
Keywords: metaphorical framing, scenario, viewpoint, media discourse, Belarusian political crisis
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data and methods
    • Metaphor identification
    • Metaphor interpretation
    • Metaphor explanation
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Scenario development in the lithuanian discourse
    • 3.2Scenario development in the german media discourse
    • 3.3Scenario development in the Russian media discourse
  • 4.Discussion
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • Author queries
  • Sources used in examples
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (66)
Sources used in examples
lrytas.lt_1, 25–05–21 Birutė Vyšniauskaitė. Buvęs Lietuvos užsienio reikalų ministras: Kremlius nori veikti mūsų rankomis, o Lietuva neturi kitos išeities [URL]
lrt.lt_1, 23–07–21 Remigijus Žilinskas. Neteisėta migracija kaip pamirštas hibridinės karybos elementas. [URL]
delfi.lt_1, 29–05–21 Romas Sadauskas-Kvietkevičius. Baltarusija: kas bus toliau? [URL]
delfi.lt_2 28–05–21 Paulius Gritėnas. Lietuvos dešimtmečio uždavinys — Baltarusija be Lukašenkos [URL]
15min.lt_1, 06–06–21 Vaidas Rusys. Neužgrimuoti Protasevičiaus riešai ir galia „perkurti“ žmogaus mąstymą [URL]
Focus.de_1: 10–11–21 Matthias Hochstätter. Im Flüchtlingsdrama klopft Merkel bei Putin an — und wir sind plötzlich erpressbar. [URL]
Focus.de_2: 28–05–2021 Wolfram Weimer. Offener Brief an Lukaschenko: Wir Europäer sind es leid — treten Sie ab, Herr Diktator! [URL]
Spiegel.de_1: 24–05–2021 Christina Hebel. Lukaschenko ist ein Risiko für ganz Europa. [URL]
Stern.de_1: 06–02–22. Ellen Ivits. Alexander Lukaschenko will den Landesvater mimen — aber entlarvt nur den Diktator. [URL]
Stern.de_2: 13–11–21 Niels Kruse. Drei Szenarien, wie das Flüchtlingsdrama an Polens Grenze beendet werden könnte. [URL]
Welt.de_1: 25–05–21 Jacques Schuster. Wenn die EU den Hammer auspackt. [URL]
Zeit.de_1: 18–02–22. Maxim Kireev. Russland und Belarus: Wladimir Putins falscher Vasall. [URL]
Zeit.de_2: 27–05–21. Maxim Kireev. Wladimir Putin: Widerwillige Verbrüderung. [URL]
Zeit.de_3: 07–12–21. Johanna Roth. Europäische Verdrängungsakrobatik. [URL]
AiF_1: 17–11–21 Глеб Иванов. « Это какой-то сюрреализм ». Приведет ли миграционный кризис к войне? [URL]
KP_1: 11–11–21 Александр Гришин. Мир сошел с ума, или это клоуны вырвались из цирков? [URL]
KP_2: 02–06–21. Александр Коц Протасевича мог подставить помощник Тихановской [URL]
RT_1: 06–07–21 Юлия Витязева. Говорящий манекен [URL]. [URL]
RT_2: 26–05–21 Юлия Витязева. Перевести стрелки. [URL]. [URL]
RT_3: 24–05–21. Дмитрий Петровский Приземление. [URL]. [URL]
References
Ahrens, K., & Jiang, M. (2020). Source domain verification using corpus-based tools. Metaphor and Symbol, 35 (1), 43–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Badryzlova, Y., Shekhtman, N., Isaeva, E., & Kerimov, R. (2013). Annotating a Russian corpus of conceptual metaphor: A bottom-up approach. Proceedings of the first workshop on metaphor in NLP. Atlanta: Association for Computational Linguistics, 77–86.Google Scholar
Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2019 [2012]). News discourse. London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Brugman, B. C., Burgers, C., & Vis, B. (2019). Metaphorical framing in political discourse through words vs. concepts: A meta-analysis. Language and Cognition, 11 (1), 41–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burgers, C., Konijn, E., & Steen, G. (2016). Figurative framing: shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony. Communication Theory, 26 1, 410–430. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameron, L., Low, G., & Maslen, R. (2010). Finding systematicity in metaphor use. In L. Cameron & R. Maslen (Eds.), Metaphor analysis. Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the Humanities (116–146). London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Politicians and rhetoric. The persuasive power of metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W., & Cruse, A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Landtsheer, Ch. (2015). Media rhetoric plays the market: The logic and power of metaphors behind the financial crises since 2006. Metaphor and the Social World, 5 (2), 205–222. 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). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43 (4), 51–58. 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. (2017). Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphor in human life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, grammar and ideology. Functional and cognitive perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Hermann, J. B., Woll, K., & Dorst, A. G. (2019). Linguistic metaphor identification in German. In S. Nacey, A. G. Dorst, T. Krennmayr & W. G. Reijnierse (Eds.), Metaphor identification in multiple languages. MIPVU around the world (pp. 113–135). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hidalgo-Downing, L., & Pérez-Sobrino, P. (2022). Developing an annotation protocol for evaluative stance and metaphor in discourse: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Text & Talk, 44 (2), 197–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joris, W., d’Haenens, L., & Van Gorp, B. (2014). The euro crisis in metaphors and frames: Focus on the press in the Low Countries. European Journal of Communication, 29 (5), 608–617. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended metaphor theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003 [1980]). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. (2007). Cognitive grammar. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 421–462). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Motyl, A. J. (2016). Putin’s Russia as a fascist political system. Communist and Post-Communist Studies, Special Issue: Between Nationalism, Authoritarianism, and Fascism in Russia: Exploring Vladimir Putin’s Regime, 49 (1), 25–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A. (2016). Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Ngai, J. (2022). Evaluation across newspaper genres. Hard news stories, editorials and feature articles. London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
OED (2014). [URL]
Rein, M., & Schön, D. (1993). Reframing policy discourse. In F. Fischer & J. Forester (Eds.), The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning (pp. 145–166). Durham, NC: Duke University. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reinierse, G. (2021). Introducing MSDIP: A method for coding source domains in metaphor analysis [Webinar paper]. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Polytechnic University.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. (2003). “ARGUMENT IS WAR” – Or is it a game of chess? Multiple meanings in the analysis of implicit metaphors. Metaphor and Symbol, 18 (2), 125–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosch, E. H. (1973). Natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4 (3), 328–350. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rundell, M. (Ed.). (2002). Macmillan English dictionary for advanced learners. Oxford: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Semino, E., Demjén, Z., Hardie, A., Payne, S., & Rayson, P. (2018a). Metaphor, cancer and the end of life. A corpus-based study. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Semino, E., Demjén, Z., & Demmen, J. (2018b). An integrated approach to metaphor and framing in cognition, discourse, and practice, with an application to metaphors for cancer. Applied Linguistics, 39 (5), 625–645.Google Scholar
Snyder, T. (2018). The road to unfreedom. Russia, Europe, America. New York: Tim Duggan Books.Google Scholar
Stanley, J. (2018). How fascism works. The politics of us and them. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Steen, G. (1999). From linguistic to conceptual metaphor in five steps. In R. Gibbs & G. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 57–78). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steen, G., Dorst, A., Herrmann, B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sweetser, E. (2012). Viewpoint and perspective in language and gesture, from the ground down. In B. Dancyger & E. Sweetser (Eds.), Viewpoint in language (pp. 1–2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, G., & Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text. Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford: University Press. 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). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Gorp, B. (2010). Strategies to take subjectivity out of framing analysis. In D’Angelo & J. A. Kuypers (Eds.), Doing news framing analysis: Empirical and theoretical perspectives (pp. 84–109). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Verhagen, A. (2007). Construal and perspectivisation. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics (pp. 48–81). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar