1887
Volume 48, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1810-7478
  • E-ISSN: 2589-5230

Abstract

Abstract

This study explored metaphorical expressions related to in 15 Taiwanese presidential inaugural addresses. The source domain concepts mapped to understand were examined and the relationship between these metaphorical expressions and ideologies was teased out by employing the discourse-historical approach. Our analysis demonstrates that various source domain concepts were utilized to discuss and most newly-emerged types occurred after the success of the first direct presidential election in 1996. A more detailed analysis of the source domain elements showed that different scenarios were highlighted, reflecting specific ideologies embedded along with the social, historical and political situation.

Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/consl.22006.hsu
2022-11-29
2023-02-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/consl.22006.hsu.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/consl.22006.hsu&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ahrens, Kathleen, and Menghan Jiang
    2020 Source domain verification using corpus-based tools. Metaphor and Symbol35.1:43–55. 10.1080/10926488.2020.1712783
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2020.1712783 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid Khosravinik, Michal Krzyżanowski, Tony McEnery, and Ruth Wodak
    2008 A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse & Society19.3:273–306. 10.1177/0957926508088962
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962 [Google Scholar]
  3. Burgers, Christian
    2016 Conceptualizing change in communication through metaphor. Journal of Communication66.2:250–265. 10.1111/jcom.12211
    https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12211 [Google Scholar]
  4. Burgers, Christian, and Kathleen Ahrens
    2020 Change in metaphorical framing: Metaphors of trade in 225 years of State of the Union addresses (1790–2014). Applied Linguistics41.2:260–279. 10.1093/applin/amy055
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy055 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chao, Linda, and Ramon H. Myers
    1994 The first Chinese democracy: Political development of the Republic of China on Taiwan, 1986–1994. Asian Survey34.3:213–230. 10.2307/2644981
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2644981 [Google Scholar]
  6. Charteris-Black, Jonathan
    2019Metaphors of Brexit: No Cherries on the Cake?Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑28768‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28768-9 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cibulskienė, Jurga
    2012 The development of the journey metaphor in political discourse: Time-specific changes. Metaphor and the Social World2.2:131–153. 10.1075/msw.2.2.01cib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.2.2.01cib [Google Scholar]
  8. Dorst, Aletta G., and Anna G. Kaal
    2012 Metaphor in discourse: Beyond the boundaries of MIP. Metaphor in Use: Context, Culture, and Communication, ed. byFiona MacArthur, José Luis Oncins-Martínez, Manuel Sánchez-García and Ana María Piquer-Píriz, 51–68. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/hcp.38.06dor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.38.06dor [Google Scholar]
  9. Dreyfuss, Caroline
    2015Taiwanese student sit-in for democratic reform (Wild Lily Movement) 1990. RetrievedJune 27, 2022, fromhttps://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/taiwanese-student-sit-democratic-reform-wild-lily-movement-1990
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fairclough, Norman
    1989Language and Power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2001Language and Power (2nd edition). London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Goatly, Andrew
    2007Washing the Brain: Metaphor and Hidden Ideology, vol.231. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/dapsac.23
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.23 [Google Scholar]
  13. Heywood, Andrew
    2017Political Ideologies: An Introduction. London: Macmillan International Higher Education. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑60604‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-60604-4 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hood, Steven J.
    2020The Kuomintang and the Democratization of Taiwan. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429312168
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429312168 [Google Scholar]
  15. Huang, Chu-Ren, and Shu-Kai Hsieh
    2010 Infrastructure for Cross-lingual Knowledge Representation – Towards Multilingualism in Linguistic Studies. Taiwan NSC-granted Research Project (NSC 96-2411-H-003-061-MY3). RetrievedMarch 10, 2021, fromhttps://lope.linguistics.ntu.edu.tw/cwn/
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Jacobs, J. Bruce
    2012Democratizing Taiwan. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004225909
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004225909 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kilgarriff, Adam, Pavel Rychlý, Pavel Smrž, and David Tugwell
    2004 The sketch engine. Proceedings of the 11th EURALEX International Congress, ed. byWilliams Geoffrey and Sandra Vessier, 105–116.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubíček, Vojtěch Kovář, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý, and Vít Suchomel
    2014 The Sketch Engine: Ten years on. Lexicography11:7–36. 10.1007/s40607‑014‑0009‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40607-014-0009-9 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kövecses, Zoltán
    2015Where Metaphors Come from: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lakoff, George
    2008The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics. New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 2014The All New Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Hartford: Chelsea Green Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2016Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think (3rd edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226411323.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226411323.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  23. Liu, Nancy
    2011Taiwanese Student Sit-in for Democratic Reform (Wild Lily Movement) 1990. RetrievedJune 27, 2022, fromhttps://nvdatabase.swarthmore.edu/content/taiwanese-student-sit-democratic-reform-wild-lily-movement-1990
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lu, Louis Wei-Lun, and Kathleen Ahrens
    2008 Ideological influence on building metaphors in Taiwanese presidential speeches. Discourse & Society19.3:383–408. 10.1177/0957926508088966
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088966 [Google Scholar]
  25. Musolff, Andreas
    2006 Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol21.1:23–38. 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2 [Google Scholar]
  26. 2014 Metaphor in the discourse-historical approach. Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies, ed. byChristopher Hart and Piotr Cap, 45–66. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2016Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2017 Truths, lies and figurative scenarios: Metaphors at the heart of Brexit. Journal of Language and Politics16.5:641–657. 10.1075/jlp.16033.mus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.16033.mus [Google Scholar]
  29. Niles, Ian, and Adam Pease
    2001 Towards a standard upper ontology. Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, vol. 2001, ed. byGuarino Nicola, Barry Smith, and Christopher Welty, 2–9. RetrievedMarch 10, 2021, fromhttps://www.ontologyportal.org/Pubs.html. 10.1145/505168.505170
    https://doi.org/10.1145/505168.505170 [Google Scholar]
  30. Pragglejaz Group
    Pragglejaz Group 2007 MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol22.1:1–39. 10.1080/10926480709336752
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752 [Google Scholar]
  31. Reisigl, Martin
    2008 Rhetoric of political speeches. Handbook of Communication in the Public Sphere, vol.41, ed. byRuth Wodak and Veronika Koller, 243–270. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110198980.3.243
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198980.3.243 [Google Scholar]
  32. Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
    2009 The discourse-historical approach (DHA). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 87–121. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Reisigl, Martin
    2017 The discourse-historical approach. The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, ed. byJohn Flowerdew and John E. Richardson, 44–59. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315739342‑4
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315739342-4 [Google Scholar]
  34. Roy, Denny
    2003Taiwan: A Political History. New York: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Tryntje Pasma
    2010A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU, vol.141. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  36. Van Dijk, Teun A.
    1998Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Wachman, Alan. M.
    1994Taiwan: National Identity and Democratization. Armonk, New York, and London: M.E. Sharpe.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Wei, Jennifer M., and Ren-feng Duann
    2019 Who are we?: Contesting meanings in the speeches of national leaders in Taiwan during the authoritarian period. Journal of Language and Politics18.5:760–781. 10.1075/jlp.17069.wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17069.wei [Google Scholar]
  39. Wodak, Ruth
    1999 Critical discourse analysis at the end of the 20th century. Research on Language & Social Interaction32.1–2:185–193. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI321&2_22
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI321&2_22 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2001 The discourse-historical approach. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 63–94. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer
    2009 Critical discourse analysis: History, agenda, theory and methodology. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis21:1–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Wodak, Ruth, and Salomi Boukala
    2015 European identities and the revival of nationalism in the European Union: A discourse historical approach. Journal of Language and Politics14.1:87–109. 10.1075/jlp.14.1.05wod
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.14.1.05wod [Google Scholar]
  43. Wong, Joseph
    2001 Dynamic democratization in Taiwan. Journal of Contemporary China10.27:339–362. 10.1080/10670560120045823
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10670560120045823 [Google Scholar]
  44. Zeng, Winnie Huiheng, Christian Burgers, and Kathleen Ahrens
    2021 Framing metaphor use over time: ‘Free Economy’ metaphors in Hong Kong political discourse (1997–2017). Lingua2521:102955. 10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102955
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102955 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/consl.22006.hsu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/consl.22006.hsu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error