Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2213-1272
  • E-ISSN: 2213-1280
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



A lockdown was imposed in Wuhan, China, the alleged epicentre of the COVID-19 outbreak, on 23 January 2020. Rattled by the short notice and severity of the restrictions, many grabbed the last opportunity to escape, an act widely criticised on Weibo, China’s popular microblogging site. This study aims to examine the unsavoury discourse deployed by Weibo users to express impoliteness and discursively construct negative identities of the lockdown escapees. Posts on Weibo criticising, reporting and threatening the escapees were analysed, revealing that the escapees were dehumanised through vivid animal metaphors to highlight their irresponsibility and call for their punishment. Animal metaphors can co-occur with various impoliteness triggers to intensify offensiveness, heightening the hostility of interlocutors towards a target.

This use of metaphors also showcases online users’ anger, distrust, and hatred towards the escapees, their solidarity-seeking behaviour online and their irrationality.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baider, Fabienne H., and Maria Constantinou
    2018 “Negotiating Empathy in the French and Cypriot-Greek Press: Christian Values or Social Justice in Migration Discourse?” Studii de Lingvistică81: 191–210.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baron, Robert A., and Deborah R. Richardson
    (1994) Human Aggression. New York: Plenum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bastian, Brock, and Nick Haslam
    2010 “Excluded from Humanity: The Dehumanizing Effects of Social Ostracism.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology46 (1): 107–113.   10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.022
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.022 [Google Scholar]
  4. Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann
    1966The Social Construction of Reality. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Boeva, Alyona
    2016 “Discursive Construction of Refugees, Migrants and Asylum Seekers in British and American News Sources.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences2361: 53–58.   10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.12.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.12.018 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bousfield, Derek
    2010 “Researching Impoliteness and Rudeness: Issues and Definitions.” InInterpersonal Pragmatics, ed. byMiriam A. Locher and Sage L. Graham, 101–134. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214338.1.101
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214338.1.101 [Google Scholar]
  7. Capozza, Dora, and Chiara Volpato
    2004Le intuizioni psicosociali di Hitler: Un’analisi del Mein Kampf [Hitler’s psychosocial intuitions: An analysis of the Mein Kampf]. Bologna: Pàtron.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cohen-Almagor, Raphael
    2018 “Taking North American White Supremacist Groups Seriously: The Scope and the Challenge of Hate Speech on the Internet.” International Journal of Crime, Justice, and Social Democracy71: 38–57.   10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i2.517
    https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i2.517 [Google Scholar]
  9. Culpeper, Jonathan
    2011Impoliteness: Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511975752
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511975752 [Google Scholar]
  10. Culpeper, Jonathan, and Marina Terkourafi
    2017 “Pragmatic Approaches (Im)politeness.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. byJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh and Dániel Z. Kádár, 32–69. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_2 [Google Scholar]
  11. Dalsklev, Madeleine, and Jonas R. Kunst
    2015 “The Effect of Disgust-Eliciting Media Portrayals on Outgroup Dehumanization and Support of Deportation in a Norwegian Sample.” International Journal of Intercultural Relations471: 28–40.   10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.03.028
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.03.028 [Google Scholar]
  12. de Fina, Anna, Deborah Schiffrin, and Michael Bamberg
    (eds.) 2006Discourse and Identity. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511584459
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511584459 [Google Scholar]
  13. Deignan, Alice
    2005Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.6 [Google Scholar]
  14. Demjén, Zsófia, and Claire Hardaker
    2017 “Metaphor, Impoliteness, and Offence in Online Communication.” InThe Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language, ed. byElena Semino and Zsófia Demjén, 371–386. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dooley, Julian J., Jacek Pyżalski, and Donna Cross
    2009 “Cyberbullying versus Face-to-Face Bullying: A Theoretical and Conceptual Review.” Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology217 (4): 182–188.   10.1027/0044‑3409.217.4.182
    https://doi.org/10.1027/0044-3409.217.4.182 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dynel, Marta
    2015 “The Landscape of Impoliteness Research.” Journal of Politeness Research11 (2): 329–354. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0013 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fairclough, Norman
    2003Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Psychology Press. 10.4324/9780203697078
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203697078 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ferreira, Paula da Costa, Ana Margarida Veiga Simao, Nadia Salgado Pereira, Paula Paulino, and Sofia Oliveira
    2021 “Online Verbal Aggression, Social Relationships, and Self-Efficacy Beliefs.” New Media & Society23 (5): 960–981. 10.1177/1461444820905531
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820905531 [Google Scholar]
  19. Flowerdew, John, David C. S. Li, and Sarah Tran
    2002 “Discriminatory News Discourse: Some Hong Kong Data.” Discourse & Society13 (3): 319–345.   10.1177/0957926502013003052
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926502013003052 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fuchs, Christian
    2014Digital Labour and Karl Marx. New York, NY: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315880075
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315880075 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gal, Susan
    1991 “Between Speech and Silence.” InGender at the Crossroads of Knowledge: Feminist Anthropology in the Postmodern Era, ed. byMicaela di Leonardo, 175–203. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 10.1525/9780520910355‑007
    https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520910355-007 [Google Scholar]
  22. Giddens, Anthony
    1991Modernity and Self-Identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Goatly, Andrew
    2006 “Humans, Animals, and Metaphors.” Society & Animals14 (1): 15–37.   10.1163/156853006776137131
    https://doi.org/10.1163/156853006776137131 [Google Scholar]
  24. Goff, Phillip Atiba, Jennifer L. Eberhardt, Melissa J. Williams, and Matthew Christian Jackson
    2008 “Not yet Human: Implicit Knowledge, Historical Dehumanization, and Contemporary Consequences.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology94 (2): 292–306.   10.1037/0022‑3514.94.2.292
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.292 [Google Scholar]
  25. Graham, Sage L., and Claire Hardaker
    2017 “(Im) politeness in Digital Communication.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ed. byJonathan Culpeper, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 785–814. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_30
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_30 [Google Scholar]
  26. Gray, Kurt, Liane Young, and Adam Waytz
    2012 “Mind Perception is the Essence of Morality.” Psychological Inquiry23 (2): 101–124.   10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840X.2012.651387 [Google Scholar]
  27. Hall, Stuart
    1996 “Who Needs ‘Identity’?” InQuestions of Cultural Identity, ed. byStuart Hall and Paul du Gay, 1–17. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Haugh, Michael
    2010 “When is an Email Really Offensive? Argumentativity and Variability in Evaluations of Impoliteness.” Journal of Politeness Research61: 7–31.   10.1515/jplr.2010.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.002 [Google Scholar]
  29. Haslam, Nick
    2006 “Dehumanization: An Integrative Review.” Personality & Social Psychology Review101: 252–264.   10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jang, In Chull, and Lee Jin Choi
    2020 “Staying Connected during COVID-19: The Social and Communicative Role of an Ethnic Online Community of Chinese International Students in South Korea.” Multilingua39 (5): 541–552. 10.1515/multi‑2020‑0097
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2020-0097 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kellow, Christine L., and H. Leslie Steeves
    1998 “The Role of Radio in the Rwandan Genocide.” Journal of Communication48 (3): 107–128.   10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1998.tb02762.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1998.tb02762.x [Google Scholar]
  32. Khan, Aalia M., Iffat Sardar, and Muhammad Yousaf
    2017 “Gender Representation through Animal Metaphors: An Analysis of Urdu Proverbs.” Journal of Gender and Social Issues16 (1): 61–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. KhosraviNik, Majid
    2010 “The Representation of Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Immigrants in British Newspapers: A Critical Discourse Analysis.” Journal of Language and Politics9 (1): 1–28.   10.1075/jlp.9.1.01kho
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.9.1.01kho [Google Scholar]
  34. KhosraviNik, Majid, and Johann Unger
    2016 “Critical Discourse Studies and Social Media: Power, Resistance and Critique in Changing Media Ecologies.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, 3rd ed., ed. byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 206–233. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kimmel, Michael
    2010 “Why we Mix Metaphors (and Mix them Well): Discourse Coherence, Conceptual Metaphor, and Beyond.” Journal of Pragmatics421: 97–11.   10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kövecses, Zoltán
    2002Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kubiszewski, Violaine, Roger Fontaine, Catherine Potard, and Laurent Auzoult
    2015 “Does Cyberbullying Overlap with School Bullying when Taking Modality of Involvement into Account?” Computers in Human Behavior431: 49–57. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.049
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.049 [Google Scholar]
  38. Lakoff, George
    2008The Political Mind: Why you can’t Understand 21st-century American Politics with an 18th-century Brain. New York, NY: Penguin Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Lakoff, George, and Mark Turner
    1989More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226470986.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226470986.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  40. Leach, Edmund
    1964 “Anthropological Aspects of Language: Animal Categories and Verbal Abuse.” InNew Dimensions in the Study of Language, ed. byEric H. Lenneberg, 23–64. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Leyens, Jacques-Philippe, Armando Rodriguez-Perez, Ramon Rodriguez-Torres, Ruth Gaunt, Maria-Paola Paladino, Jeroen Vaes, and Stéphanie Demoulin
    2001 “Psychological Essentialism and the Differential Attribution of Uniquely Human Emotions to Ingroups and Outgroups.” European Journal of Social Psychology31 (4): 395–411.   10.1002/ejsp.50
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.50 [Google Scholar]
  42. Li, Na, and Yan Liu
    2012 “A Comparison of Cultural Connotations between Chinese and English Animal Words.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies2 (10): 2178–2182. 10.4304/tpls.2.10.2178‑2182
    https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.10.2178-2182 [Google Scholar]
  43. Locher, Miriam A.
    2010 “Introduction: Politeness and Impoliteness in Computer-mediated Communication.” Journal of Politeness Research: 1–5. 10.1515/jplr.2010.001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.001 [Google Scholar]
  44. López Rodríguez, Irene
    2009 “Of Women, Bitches, Chickens and Vixens: Animal Metaphors for Women in English and Spanish.” Cultura, lenguaje y representación: revista de estudios culturales de la Universitat Jaume I71: 77–100.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Mao, Weiwei
    2017 “A Critical Discourse Study of Chinese Professors’ Image Construction in Microblogging Discourse.” Theory and Practice in Language Studies71: 1113–1118.   10.17507/tpls.0711.21
    https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0711.21 [Google Scholar]
  46. Marshall, Shantal R., and Jenessa R. Shapiro
    2018 “When ‘Scurry’ vs. ‘Hurry’ Makes the Difference: Vermin Metaphors, Disgust, and Anti-Immigrant Attitudes.” Journal of Social Issues74 (4): 774–789.   10.1111/josi.12298
    https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12298 [Google Scholar]
  47. Morera, María D., María N. Quiles, Ana D. Correa, Naira Delgado, and Jacques-Philippe Leyens
    2018 “Perception of Mind and Dehumanization: Human, Animal, or Machine?” International Journal of Psychology53 (4): 253–260.   10.1002/ijop.12375
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12375 [Google Scholar]
  48. Musolff, Andreas
    2015 “Dehumanizing Metaphors in UK Immigrant Debates in Press and Online Media.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict3 (1): 41–56.   10.1075/jlac.3.1.02mus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.1.02mus [Google Scholar]
  49. 2016Political Metaphor Analysis. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 2017 “Metaphor and Cultural Cognition.” InAdvances in Cultural Linguistics, ed. byFarzad Sharifian, 325–344. Singapore: Springer. 10.1007/978‑981‑10‑4056‑6_15
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4056-6_15 [Google Scholar]
  51. Nasaw, Daniel
    2008 “US Election: Put Lipstick on a Pig? Obama and McCain Both Use the Expression that Set off ‘Smear’ Claims.” The Guardian, September10 2008 AccessedJuly 15, 2021. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/sep/10/uselections2008.barackobama
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Neurauter-Kessels, Manuela
    2011 “Im/polite Reader Responses on British Online News Sites.” Journal of Politeness Research71: 187–214. 10.1515/jplr.2011.010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2011.010 [Google Scholar]
  53. Parvaresh, Vahid, and Tahmineh Tayebi
    2018 “Impoliteness, Aggression and the Moral Order.” Journal of Pragmatics1321: 91–107. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.05.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.05.010 [Google Scholar]
  54. Rancer, Andrew S.
    2009 “Aggressive Communication.” InEncyclopedia of Human Relationships, ed. byHarry T. Reis and Susan Sprecher, 65–68. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781412958479.n21
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412958479.n21 [Google Scholar]
  55. Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
    2009 “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd ed., ed. byRuth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 87–121. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Ritzer, George, and Nathan Jurgenson
    2010 “Production, Consumption, Prosumption: The Nature of Capitalism in the Age of the Digital ‘Prosumer.”’ Journal of Consumer Culture101: 13–36.   10.1177/1469540509354673
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540509354673 [Google Scholar]
  57. Semino, Elena
    2008Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 2021 “‘Not soldiers but fire-fighters’: Metaphors and COVID-19.” Health Communication36 (1): 50–58. 10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989 [Google Scholar]
  59. Semino, Elena, Zsófia Demjén, Jane Demmen, Veronika Koller, Sheila Payne, Andrew Hardie, and Paul Rayson
    2015 “The Online Use of Violence and Journey Metaphors by Patients with Cancer, as Compared with Health Professionals: A Mixed Methods Study.” BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care71: 60–66.   10.1136/bmjspcare‑2014‑000785
    https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000785 [Google Scholar]
  60. Shi, Ding-le, and Yuan Hong
    2011 “Nine-Headed Bird and Cultural Image Building of Hubei Province.” Journal of Wuhan Polytechnic10 (3): 5–7.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Soral, Wiktor, Michal Bilewicz, and Mikolaj Winiewski
    2018 “Exposure to Hate Speech Increases Prejudice through Desensitization.” Aggressive Behavior44 (2): 136–146.   10.1002/ab.21737
    https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21737 [Google Scholar]
  62. Stapleton, Karyn
    2010 “Swearing.” InInterpersonal Pragmatics, ed. byMiriam A. Locher, and Sage L. Graham, 289–306. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214338.2.289
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214338.2.289 [Google Scholar]
  63. Statista
    Statista 2020 “Number of Sina Weibo Users in China from 2017 to 2021.” AccessedMay 15, 2021. https://www.statista.com/statistics/941456/china-number-of-sina-weibo-users/
  64. Steen, Gerard, Aletta G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Tryntje Pasma
    2010A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  65. Talebinejad, M. Reza, and H. Vahid Dastjerdi
    2005 “A Cross-cultural Study of Animal Metaphors: When Owls are not Wise!” Metaphor and Symbol20 (2): 133–150. 10.1207/s15327868ms2002_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2002_3 [Google Scholar]
  66. Tong, Yanqui, and Shaohua Lei
    2013 “War of Position and Microblogging in China.” Journal of Contemporary China221: 292–311.   10.1080/10670564.2012.734084
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2012.734084 [Google Scholar]
  67. Torkington, Kate, and Filipa P. Ribeiro
    2019 “‘What are these People: Migrants, Immigrants, Refugees?’: Migration-Related Terminology and Representations in Portuguese Digital Press Headlines.” Discourse, Context & Media271: 22–31.   10.1016/j.dcm.2018.03.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2018.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  68. Udanor, Collins, and Chinatu Anyanwu
    2019 “Combating the Challenges of Social Media Hate Speech in a Polarized Society.” Data Technologies and Applications53 (4): 501–527.   10.1108/DTA‑01‑2019‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.1108/DTA-01-2019-0007 [Google Scholar]
  69. UN News
    UN News 2020 “COVID-19: Impact Could Cause Equivalent of 195 Million Job Losses, Says ILO Chief.” April8 2020 AccessedMay 15, 2021. https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/04/1061322
  70. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1996 “Power and the News Media.” InPolitical Communication in Action: States, Institutions, Movements, Audiences, ed. byDavid L. Paletz, 9–36. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 2008Discourse and Power. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑07299‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-07299-3 [Google Scholar]
  72. Waśniewska, Małgorzata Patrycja
    2018 “A Dog or a Wolf: The Role of Connotations in Animalistic Metaphors and the Process of Dehumanisation.” New Horizons in English Studies3 (1): 3–17. 10.17951/nh.2018.3.3
    https://doi.org/10.17951/nh.2018.3.3 [Google Scholar]
  73. Wicke, Philipp, and Marianna M. Bolognesi
    2020 “Framing COVID-19: How we Conceptualize and Discuss the Pandemic on Twitter.” Plos One15 (9): e0240010.   10.1371/journal.pone.0240010
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240010 [Google Scholar]
  74. Wu, Xiaoping
    2018 “Discursive Strategies of Resistance on Weibo: A Case Study of the 2015 Tianjin Explosions in China.” Discourse, Context & Media261: 64–73.   10.1016/j.dcm.2018.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2018.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  75. Yakub, Mohammed
    2019 “The Wisdom of our Forefathers: Animal Metaphors and Imagery in Nzema Proverbs.” European Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies2 (1): 175–195.   10.5281/zenodo.3564782
    https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3564782 [Google Scholar]
  76. Zhu, Hongqiang
    2020 “Countering COVID-19-Related Anti-Chinese Racism with Translanguaged Swearing on Social Media.” Multilingua39 (5): 607–616.   10.1515/multi‑2020‑0093
    https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2020-0093 [Google Scholar]

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