Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2214-3157
  • E-ISSN: 2214-3165
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Brexit, i.e. the withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU), is a major event not only in European but also in global politics. Its effect is still to be witnessed and its future impact is debated from a variety of angles – social, economic, cultural, ethnic, religious, etc. The present paper offers a cognitive linguistic perspective on the phenomenon. It aims to investigate the conceptual metaphorization of Brexit on the first days after the 2016 referendum. That period seems of special importance as, arguably, it was then that for many UK citizens, Brexit suddenly became part of reality and not just a hypothetical possibility.

The paper presents data on the dynamics of employing different source domains on each of the first 4 days after the referendum. The main objective is to isolate regularities and tendencies in how the selected culturally-significant source domains help structure the concept. The analysis of the dataset of English-language EU online media texts appearing on the first 4 post-referendum days reveals that the most prominent source domains in the metaphoric conceptualization of are and .


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Barsalou, L.
    (2006) Ad Hoc Categories. Memory and Cognition, 11, 211–227. 10.3758/BF03196968
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196968 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bednarek, M.
    (2005) Construing the world: conceptual metaphors and event-construal in news stories. Metaphorik.de. RetrievedOctober 20, 2015, from: www.metaphorik.de/sites/www.metaphorik.de/files/journal-pdf/09_2005_bednarek.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Benedek, M., Beaty, R., Jauk, E., Koschutnig, K., Fink, A., Silvia, P. J., Dunst, B., & Neubauer, A. C.
    (2014) Creating metaphors: The neural basis of figurative language production. NeuroImage, 90, 99–106. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.12.046
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.12.046 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowdle, B. F., & Gentner, D.
    (2005) The Career of Metaphor. Psychological Review, 112 (1), 193–216. 10.1037/0033‑295X.112.1.193
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.193 [Google Scholar]
  5. Charteris-Black, J.
    (2005) Politicians and rhetoric. The persuasive power of metaphor. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230501706
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230501706 [Google Scholar]
  6. Coulson, S., & Oakley, T.
    (2005) Blending and coded meaning: Literal and figurative meaning in cognitive semantics. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1510–1536. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.09.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.09.010 [Google Scholar]
  7. Deignan, A.
    (2005) Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.6 [Google Scholar]
  8. Dulcinati, G., Mazzarella, D., Pouscoulous, N., & Rodd, J.
    (2014) Processing metaphor: The role of conventionality, familiarity and dominance. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 26, 72–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Evans, V., & Green, M.
    (2006) Cognitive Linguistics. An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Evans, V., & Pourcel, S.
    (2009) New Directions in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/hcp.24
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.24 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fairclough, N.
    (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fauconnier, G.
    (1997) Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139174220
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174220 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2014) Mental spaces, language modalities, and conceptual integration. InM. Tomasello & L. Erlbaum (Eds.), The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and Functional Approaches to Language Structure (I) (pp.230–258). New York: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M.
    (2002) The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Feldman, J., & Narayanan, S.
    (2004) Embodied Meaning in a Neural Theory of Language. Brain and Language, 89 (2), 385–392. 10.1016/S0093‑934X(03)00355‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00355-9 [Google Scholar]
  16. Feldman, J.
    (2006) From molecule to metaphor. A neural theory of language. Cambridge, MA and London: The MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/3135.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3135.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gentner, D., & Bowdle, B.
    (2008) Metaphor as structure-mapping. InR. Gibbs (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought (pp.109–128). New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.008 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gibbs, R.
    (2006) Embodiment and cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2011a) Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory. Discourse Processes, 48, 529–562. 10.1080/0163853X.2011.606103
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2011.606103 [Google Scholar]
  20. (2011b) Multiple constraints on theories of metaphor. Discourse Processes, 48, 375–584. 10.1080/0163853X.2011.606105
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2011.606105 [Google Scholar]
  21. Glucksberg, S.
    (2003) The psycholinguistics of metaphor. Trends in cognitive sciences, 7(2), 92–96. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(02)00040‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)00040-2 [Google Scholar]
  22. (2008) How metaphors create categories – quickly. InR. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought (pp.67–84). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.006 [Google Scholar]
  23. Grady, J., Taub, S., & Morgan, P.
    (1996) Primitive and Compound Metaphors. InA. Goldberg & C. Stanford (Eds.), Conceptual Structure, Discourse and Language. Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Greenfeld, L., & Malczewski, E.
    (2010) Politics as a Cultural Phenomenon. InK. T. Leicht & J. C. Jenkins (Eds.), Handbook of Politics (pp.407–422). New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑0‑387‑68930‑2_22
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-68930-2_22 [Google Scholar]
  25. Ishpekova, R.
    (2012) Policing the Naughty Newbies. Sofia: Unison Art.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Kövecses, Z.
    (2010) Metaphor: A Practical Introduction (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Lakoff, G.
    (1996) Moral Politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals Don’t. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. (2002) Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226471006.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471006.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2003) Metaphor and War, Again. RetrievedJanuary 08, 2016, from: www.alternet.org/story/15414/metaphor_and_war,_again
  30. (2009) The Neural Theory of Metaphor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.2139/ssrn.1437794
    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1437794 [Google Scholar]
  31. (2013) Obama Reframes Syria: Metaphor and War Revisited. RetrievedJanuary 08, 2016, from: www.huffingtonpost.com/george-lakoff/obama-reframes-syria-meta_b_3879335.html
  32. (2014) SOTU 2014: The Cognitive Power of the President. RetrievedJanuary 08, 2016, from: georgelakoff.com/2014/01/27/sotu-2014-the-cognitive-power-of-the-president/
  33. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (1999) Philosophy in The Flesh. London: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Musolff, A.
    (2004) Metaphor and Political Discourse. Analogical Reasoning in the debate about Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230504516
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230504516 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2006) Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–38. 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2 [Google Scholar]
  37. (2012) The study of metaphor as part of critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies, 9 (3), 301–310. 10.1080/17405904.2012.688300
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2012.688300 [Google Scholar]
  38. Neuman, Y., Assaf, D., Cohen, Y., Last, M., Argamon, S., Howard, N., & Frieder, O.
    (2013) Metaphor identification in large texts corpora. PloS ONE8(4). RetrievedAugust 10, 2016, from: journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0062343. 10.1371/journal.pone.0062343
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062343 [Google Scholar]
  39. Pragglejaz Group
    Pragglejaz Group (2007) MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse. Metaphor and symbol, 22 (1), 1–39. 10.1080/10926480709336752
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rapp, A. M., Leube, D. T., Erb, M., Grodd, W., & Kircher, T. T. J.
    (2007) Laterality in metaphor processing: Lack of evidence from functional magnetic resonance imaging for the right hemisphere theory. Brain and Language, 100, 142–149. 10.1016/j.bandl.2006.04.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2006.04.004 [Google Scholar]
  41. Ringmar, E.
    (2008) Metaphors of Social Order. InT. Carver & J. Pikalo (Eds.), Political Language and Metaphor (pp.57–93). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Ritchie, L. D.
    (2013) Metaphor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Rosch, E.
    (1973) Natural Categories. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 328–50. 10.1016/0010‑0285(73)90017‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(73)90017-0 [Google Scholar]
  44. Semino, E., Demje’n, Z., & Demmen, J.
    (2016) An Integrated Approach to Metaphor and Framing in Cognition, Discourse, and Practice, with an Application to Metaphors for Cancer. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sharifian, F.
    (2008) Distributed, Emergent Cultural Cognition, Conceptualisation, and Language. InR. M. Frank, R. Dirven, T. Ziemke & E. Bernandez (Eds.), Body, Language, and Mind (Vol. 2) (pp.109–137). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. (2011) Cultural Conceptualisations and Language: Theoretical Framework and Applications. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clscc.1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.1 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2013) Cultural Linguistics and intercultural communication. InF. Sharifian & M. Jamarani (Eds.), Language and intercultural communication in the New Era (pp.60–79). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203081365
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203081365 [Google Scholar]
  48. (2017) Cultural Linguistics. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clscc.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/clscc.8 [Google Scholar]
  49. Steen, G., Dorst, A., Herrmann, B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T. & Pasma, T.
    (2010a) A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  50. Steen, G., Dorst, A., Herrmann, B., Kaal, A., & Krennmayr, T.
    (2010b) Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics, 21 (4), 765–796. 10.1515/cogl.2010.024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2010.024 [Google Scholar]
  51. Stefanowitsch, A.
    (2006) Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy. InA. Stefanowitsch & Th. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (pp.1–16). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Stockwell, P.
    (1999) Towards a critical cognitive linguistics?InA. Combrink & I. Bierman (Eds.), Discourses of war and conflict (pp.510–28). Potchefstroom: Potchefstroom University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Taylor, J.
    (2003) Linguistic Categorization (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Tincheva, N.
    (2014) The Killer Sport of Politics: Conceptual Metaphors in Bulgarian Political Discourse. Balkanistica, 27, 141–160.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Turner, M.
    (2014) The Origin of Ideas: Blending, Creativity, and the Human Spark. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Ungerer, T., & Schmid, H.-J.
    (2006) An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics (2nd ed.). London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Walter, J., & Helmig, J.
    (2008) Discursive metaphor analysis: (De)construction(s) of Europe. InT. Carver & J. Pikalo (Eds.), Political language and metaphor: Interpreting and changing the world (pp.119–131). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Brexit; conceptualization; cultural cognition; dynamics; media; metaphor; referendum
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