A Cognitive Approach to the Figures of Speech of Political Rhetoric: With a Reference to the U.S. Presidential Election Debates from 2000 to 2016
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
As for political rhetoric, most of the previous studies of presidential election TV debates have been focused on the type and number of words and sentences used by individual candidates, the impact of the debates on polls, the turn-takings, and the roles of gender, whereas little attention has been paid to the figurative languages used in political debates. For these reasons, the purpose of this study is to analyze the figurative expressions of the U.S. presidential election debates from 2000 to 2016 from the perspective of cognitive semantics and find out the figures of speech and the strategies of the candidates and their parties in terms of a long-term changes of political rhetoric. The figurative speeches used for the analysis in this study are conceptual metaphor, conceptual metonymy, and combinational metaphor. The findings in this paper are as follows. First, Democrats mostly used figurative language in terms of human and social issues and tax-reduction. Second, Republicans mostly used figurative language in terms of collaborators, allies, places and date of terror. In other words, with regard to the uses of figurative language the main concerns of each party were domestic policy for Democrats and foreign policy for Republicans, respectively. Finally, figurative languages employed by each political party were found to be much more inclined to use conceptual metaphor by Democrats and to use conceptual metonymy by Republicans, respectively.
Abstract
As for political rhetoric, most of the previous studies of presidential election TV debates have been focused on the type and number of words and sentences used by individual candidates, the impact of the debates on polls, the turn-takings, and the roles of gender, whereas little attention has been paid to the figurative languages used in political debates. For these reasons, the purpose of this study is to analyze the figurative expressions of the U.S. presidential election debates from 2000 to 2016 from the perspective of cognitive semantics and find out the figures of speech and the strategies of the candidates and their parties in terms of a long-term changes of political rhetoric. The figurative speeches used for the analysis in this study are conceptual metaphor, conceptual metonymy, and combinational metaphor. The findings in this paper are as follows. First, Democrats mostly used figurative language in terms of human and social issues and tax-reduction. Second, Republicans mostly used figurative language in terms of collaborators, allies, places and date of terror. In other words, with regard to the uses of figurative language the main concerns of each party were domestic policy for Democrats and foreign policy for Republicans, respectively. Finally, figurative languages employed by each political party were found to be much more inclined to use conceptual metaphor by Democrats and to use conceptual metonymy by Republicans, respectively.
참고문헌 (21)
- Charteris-Black, J, "Politicians and rhetoric" (2005), Palgrave MacMillan
- "Commission on presidential debates"[URL]
- Croft, W, "Cognitive linguistics" (2004), Cambridge University Press
- Dirven, R, "Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast" (2003), Mouton de Gruyter
- Geer, J. G, "The effects of presidential debates on the electorate’s preferences for candidates", American Politics Quarterly, 16(4), pp.486~501 (1988)
- Glucksberg, S, "Understanding metaphorical comparisons: Beyond similarity", Psychological Review, 97(1), pp.3~18 (1990)
- "Words matter: A linguistic analysis of the presidential debates" (2017)[URL]
- Handy, C, "The citizen corporation", Harvard Business Review, 75(5), pp.18~ (1997)
- Harser, V, "Metaphor, metonymy, and experientialist philosophy: Challenging cognitive semantics" (1973), Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co
- Holbrook, T. M, "Political learning from presidential debates", Political Behavior, 21(1), pp.67~89 (1999)
- Huddy, L, "The Oxford handbook of political psychology" (2013), Oxford University Press
- Kövecses, Z, "Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human" (2000), Cambridge University Press
- Kövecses, Z, "Metaphor: A practical introduction", Oxford University Press
- Kövecses, Z, "Metaphor and culture. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae", Philologica, 2, pp.197~220 (2010)
- Lakoff, G, "Metaphors we live by" (2003), University of Chicago Press
- Raman, S. R, "Metaphors and managers: New ways of thinking and seeing", Vikalpa, 27(3), pp.3~12 (2002)
- Savoy, J, "Trump’s and Clinton’s style and rhetoric during the 2016 presidential election", Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 25(2), pp.168~189 (2017)
- Shim, H, "The figures of speech in politics: With a reference to the United States presidential debates from 2000 to 2016", Doctor, pp.2000
- Trucotte, J, "A case of more is less: The role of gender in U.S. presidential debates", Political Research Quarterly, 68(4), pp.773~784 (2015)
- Ungerer, F, "An introduction to cognitive linguistics" (2006), Longman
- Viljanen, J, "Interrupting and overlapping in the US presidential debates – A comparative study", MA, pp.2019