Volume 8, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-4070
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4097
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Set against the backdrop of a separation process between Britain and the EU, popularly referred to as , our paper explores how the metaphor scenario structures the Brexit discourse via vivid metaphorical images of political reality describing complicated relations between Britain and the EU. We use a critical approach to metaphor ( Charteris-Black, 2004 , 2005 ) and especially apply Musolff’s (2006) concept of ‘metaphor scenario’ to the data collection gathered from various media sources published in English during the period closely preceding and following the Brexit vote. As “the scenario is applicable to any bilateral […] relationship” ( Musolff, 2006 , p. 34), by exemplifying the Britain-EU relationship via numerous lexical instantiations (e.g., , , ), we attest to a great generative potential of the scenario as well as its argumentative use. Our main aim is to point out how the metaphor scenario is used in political discourse both to simplify and enable the understanding of the tangled relationship between Britain and the EU at a crucial point in their history.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Chaban, N. , Bain, J. , & Stats, K.
    (2006) “Political Frankenstein” or “fiscal Gargantua”? Metaphors of personification in the Australasian news reports of the EU enlargement. Proceedings of Ural State Pedagogical University, 19, 76–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Charteris-Black, J.
    (2000) Metaphor and vocabulary teaching in ESP economics. English for Specific Purposes, 19, 149–165. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(98)00025‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00025-8 [Google Scholar]
  3. (2004) Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230000612
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230000612 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2005) Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230501706
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230501706 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chilton, P. , & Lakoff, G.
    (1995) Foreign policy by metaphor. In C. Schäffner , & A. Wenden (Eds.), Language and peace (pp.37–60). Aldershot: Ashgate.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Drulák, P. , & Beneš, V.
    (2015) Czech metaphors about Europe: Havel vs Klaus. Journal of International Relations and Development, 18(4), 532–555. doi: 10.1057/jird.2014.11
    https://doi.org/10.1057/jird.2014.11 [Google Scholar]
  7. Dueck, C.
    (2001) Gendered Germanies: The fetters of a metaphorical marriage. German Life and Letters, 54(4), 366–376. doi: 10.1111/1468‑0483.00210
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0483.00210 [Google Scholar]
  8. Đurović, T. , & Silaški, N.
    (2010) Metaphors we vote by – The case of ‘marriage’ in contemporary Serbian political discourse. Journal of Language and Politics, 9(2), 237–259. doi: 10.1075/jlp.9.2.04dur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.9.2.04dur [Google Scholar]
  9. Fillmore, C.
    (1975) An alternative to checklist theories of meaning. Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 1, 123–131.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Koteyko, N. , & Ryazanova-Clarke, L.
    (2009) The path and building metaphors in the speeches of Vladimir Putin: Back to the future?Slavonica, 15(2), 112–127. doi: 10.1179/136174209X12507596634810
    https://doi.org/10.1179/136174209X12507596634810 [Google Scholar]
  11. Kövecses, Z.
    (2002) Metaphor. A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (2006) Language, mind, and culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Lakoff, G.
    (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Lakoff, G. , & Johnson, M.
    (1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Mio, J. S.
    (1997) Metaphor and politics. Metaphor and Symbol, 12(2), 113–133. doi: 10.1207/s15327868ms1202_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1202_2 [Google Scholar]
  16. Musolff, A.
    (2004) Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230504516
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230504516 [Google Scholar]
  17. (2006) Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–38. doi: 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2009)  Love, parenthood and gender in the European family: The British perspective. In A. -B. Renger , & R. A. Iβler (Eds.), Europa – Stier und Sternenkranz. Von der Union mit Zeus zum Staatenverbund (pp.536–548). Göttingen: V&R unipress: Bonn University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (2010) The eternal outsider? Scenarios of Turkey’s ambitions to join the European Union in the German press. In Lj. Šarić , A. Musolff , S. Manz , & I. Hudabiunigg (Eds.), Contesting Europe’s eastern rim: Cultural identities in public discourse (pp.157–173). Bristol, Buffalo & Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (2016) Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (2017) Truths, lies and figurative scenarios – Metaphors at the heart of Brexit. Journal of Language and Politics. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1075/jlp.16033.mus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.16033.mus [Google Scholar]
  22. Pragglejaz Group
    Pragglejaz Group (2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22, 1–39. doi: 10.1080/10926480709336752
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752 [Google Scholar]
  23. Silaški, N. , & Đurović, T.
    (2014) ‘And now – a velvet divorce!’ Or, how metaphors communicate values. In V. Lopičić , B. Mišić-Ilić (Eds.), Values across cultures and times (pp.37–50). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Wee, L.
    (2001) Divorce before marriage in the Singapore-Malaysia relationship: The invariance principle at work. Discourse & Society, 12(4), 535–549. doi: 10.1177/0957926501012004006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012004006 [Google Scholar]
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