CONCEPTUAL BLENDING IN METAPHORS IN THE 2016 PRE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN

Main Article Content

Alzira Akhsianovna Minikeeva
Aida Gumerovna Sadykova
Edward Lazzerini

Keywords

Metaphor, Mental space, Cognitive aspect, Conceptual blending, Pre-election discourse

Abstract

Purpose: The article examines metaphor as transferring features of the social world onto the other elements of reality, the 2016 pre-election campaign in particular; the theory of conceptual integration of J. Fauconnier and M. Turner is used to analyzing the metaphor.


Methodology: As a material of the research, there were examined transcripts of the 2016 pre-election campaign debates for the presidential position of Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton.


Result: The analysis reveals convergent and divergent features of metaphor in the pre-election campaign of Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton. Metaphor in D. Trump’s texts tends to focus on conceptual models ‘we’ and ‘they’ which is deduced with the help of quantitative analysis whereas in H. Clinton’s texts ‘divided nation’ model is mostly described through metaphor.


Applications: This research can be used for universities, teachers, and students.


Novelty/Originality: In this research, the model of Conceptual Blending in Metaphors in the 2016 Pre-Election Campaign is presented in a comprehensive and complete manner.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Abstract 25 | PDF Downloads 21 XML Downloads 1 ePUB Downloads 12

References

1. Aldai, G., & Wichmann, S. (2018). Statistical observations on hierarchies of transitivity. Folia Linguistica, 52(2), 249-281. https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2018-0006
2. Ameen, A. M., Ahmed, M. F., & Hafez, M. A. A. (2018). The Impact of Management Accounting and How It Can Be Implemented into the Organizational Culture. Dutch Journal of Finance and Management, 2(1), 02. https://doi.org/10.20897/djfm/91582
3. Andrianova, N., Ostroumova, O., Zakamulina, M., & Vanchikova, E. (2017). Anglo-american borrowings in the political media discourse (a case study of modern french press). National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts Herald, 2, 79-82. ISSN: 2226-3209 (Print), ISSN 2409-0506 (Online)
4. Bentley, B., & Bossé, M. J. (2018). College Students’ Understanding of Fraction Operations. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 13(3), 233-247. https://doi.org/10.12973/iejme/3881
5. Dautova, L. A. & Badmatsirenova, D. B. (2014). Linguistic peculiarities of pre-election discourse, American preelection discourse. Filologicheskie nauki. Voprosy teori i praktiki, Tambov, Gramota, 39(9): 53-59.
6. Husnutdinov, D. H., Akalin, S. H., Giniyatullina, L. M., & Sagdieva, R. K. (2017). Linguistic means of expression in proverbs of Tatar, Russian, Turkish. Revista San Gregorio, (20), 194-201.
7. Ritchie, L. D. (2013). Metaphor (Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics). Cambridge university press, 1(2), 2-1.
8. Seredina, E. V. (2012). Features of American political cartoon as a sign. Vestnik Kostroskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta, 18(3): Available: http://dlib.rsl.ru/viewer/01005533016#?page=1
9. Taiwo, R. (2009). Legitimization and coercion in political discourse: A case study of Olusegun Obasanjo address to the PDP elders and stakeholders forum. Journal of political discourse analysis, 2(2), 191-205.
10. Yapparova, V. N., Ageeva, J. V., & Agmanova, A. Y. (2018). Pre-Election Discourse as a Special Type of Institutional Discourse. conscience, 9, 245. https://doi.org/10.29042/2018-2324-2327
11. Yazdekhasti, A., Erfan, N., & Nazari, N. (2015). Investigating the Relationship between Spiritual Intelligence and Social Adaptation among Girl High School Students in Shahreza City. UCT Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities Research, 3(1), 20-23.
12. Grady, J., Oakley, T., & Coulson, S. (1999). Blending and metaphor. AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE SERIES 4, 101-124.¬ https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.175.07gra
13. Yang, F. P. G., Bradley, K., Huq, M., Wu, D. L., & Krawczyk, D. C. (2013). Contextual effects on conceptual blending in metaphors: An event-related potential study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 26(2), 312-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2012.10.004
14. Tunner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (1995). Conceptual integration and formal expression. Metaphor and Symbol, 10(3), 183-204. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1003_3
15. Coulson, S., & Van Petten, C. (2002). Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event-related potential study. Memory & cognition, 30(6), 958-968. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195780
16. Gibbs Jr, R. W., & Steen, G. J. (Eds.). (1999). Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics: Selected Papers from the 5th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, 1997 (Vol. 175). John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.175
17. Joy, A., Sherry Jr, J. F., & Deschenes, J. (2009). Conceptual blending in advertising. Journal of Business Research, 62(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.11.015
18. Goguen, J. A., & Harrell, D. F. (2010). Style: A computational and conceptual blending-based approach. In The structure of style (pp. 291-316). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12337-5_12
19. Turner, M., & Fauconnier, G. (2003). Metaphor, metonymy, and binding. Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, 20, 469. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110894677.133
20. Coulson, S. (2006). Conceptual blending in thought, rhetoric, and ideology. APPLICATIONS OF COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS, 1, 187.
21. Cornelissen, J. P. (2006). Making sense of theory construction: Metaphor and disciplined imagination. Organization Studies, 27(11), 1579-1597. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840606068333
22. Ritchie, L. D. (2004). Lost in" conceptual space": Metaphors of conceptual integration. Metaphor and Symbol, 19(1), 31-50. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327868MS1901_2