Volume 7, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2210-4070
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4097
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Direct metaphor has been widely studied from the cognitive perspective, but its functions in the communicative dimension ( Steen, 2011 ) remain less well understood. This study investigates direct metaphor as a tool of metaphorical framing ( Ottati et al., 2014 ; Ritchie & Cameron, 2014 ) in discourse, by examining a corpus of British newspaper texts on the topic of language and language change. The analysis of direct metaphors is sufficient to point to major ideologies of language and communication in the observed media context, which echo broader anxieties over social change, social organization and control. Most notably, unlike the meanings stressed in existing studies, the vast majority of direct metaphors are here found to serve the specific role of relational argumentation. This function is achieved through a kind of ‘corrective framing’, which explicitly juxtaposes two conflicting representations through an ‘A is B and not C’ type of metaphor. The findings are discussed with respect to deliberateness, metaphorical framing and rhetorical goals in discourse. It is hypothesized that corrective framing is among the major functions of direct metaphor in public discourse, which can influence public opinion in ways different from other metaphorically created representations.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Bakhtin, M. M.
    (1981) The dialogic imagination: Four essays (trans. C. Emerson & M. Holquist ). Austin, TX: Austin University.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barnden, J.
    (2015) Metaphor, simile, and the exaggeration of likeness. Metaphor and Symbol, 30(1), 41–62. doi: 10.1080/10926488.2015.980692
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2015.980692 [Google Scholar]
  3. Beger, A.
    (2011) Deliberate metaphors? An exploration of the choice and functions of metaphors in US-American college lectures. Metaphorik.de, 20, 39–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Benford, R. D. , & Snow, D. A.
    (2000) Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639. doi: 10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.611 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bogetić, K.
    (2016) Metalinguistic comments in teenage personal blogs: Bringing youth voices to studies of youth, language and technology. Text & Talk, 36(3), 245–268. doi: 10.1515/text‑2016‑0012
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2016-0012 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brugman, B.
    (2015) The reclassification of political frames: A metaphorical perspective. MA Thesis, VU University Amsterdam.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cameron, D.
    (2012) Verbal hygiene. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2013) The one, the many, and the Other: Representing multi-and mono-lingualism in post-9/11 verbal hygiene. Critical Multilingualism Studies, 1(2), 59–77.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Cameron, L. , & Maslen, R.
    (2010) Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. London: Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Charteris-Black, J.
    (2012) Forensic deliberations on ‘purposeful metaphor’. Metaphor and the Social World, 2(1), 1–21. doi: 10.1075/msw.2.1.01cha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.2.1.01cha [Google Scholar]
  11. Chiappe, D. L. , Kennedy, J. M. , & Chiappe, P.
    (2003) Aptness is more important than comprehensibility in preference for metaphors and similes. Poetics, 31(1), 51–68. doi: 10.1016/S0304‑422X(03)00003‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-422X(03)00003-2 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dimitrova, D. V. , & Strömbäck, J.
    (2005) Mission accomplished? Framing of the Iraq War in the elite newspapers in Sweden and the United States. Gazette, 67(5), 399–417. doi: 10.1177/0016549205056050
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0016549205056050 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dorst, A. G. , & Reijnierse, W. G.
    (2015) A dictionary gives definitions, not decisions: On using a dictionary to identify the basic senses of words. Metaphor and the Social World, 5(1), 137–144. doi: 10.1075/msw.5.1.08dor
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.1.08dor [Google Scholar]
  14. Entman, R. M.
    (1993) Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. doi: 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1993.tb01304.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Gamson, W. , Croteau, D. , Hoynes, W. , & Sasson, T.
    (1992) Media images and the social construction of reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 373–393. doi: 10.1146/annurev.so.18.080192.002105
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.so.18.080192.002105 [Google Scholar]
  16. Gibbs, R. W.
    (2015) Does deliberate metaphor theory have a future?Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 73–76. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.016 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gentner, D. , & Bowdle, B. F.
    (2001) Convention, form, and figurative language processing. Metaphor and Symbol, 16(3–4), 223–247. doi: 10.1080/10926488.2001.9678896
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2001.9678896 [Google Scholar]
  18. Glucksberg, S.
    (2008) How metaphors create categories–quickly. In R. W. Gibbs (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp.67–83). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511816802.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802.006 [Google Scholar]
  19. Israel, M. , Harding, J. R. , & Tobin, V.
    (2004) On simile. In M. Achard & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Language, culture, and mind (pp.123–135). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Jaworski, A. , Coupland, N. , and Galasinski, D.
    (Eds) (2004) Metalanguage: Social and ideological perspectives. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter doi: 10.1515/9783110907377
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110907377 [Google Scholar]
  21. Low, G. D.
    (2010) Wot no similes? The curious absence of simile in university lectures. In G. Low , Z. Todd , A. Deignan , & L. Cameron (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor in the real world (pp.291–308). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.26.17low
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.26.17low [Google Scholar]
  22. Macmillan Dictionary | Free English Dictionary and Thesaurus Online
    Macmillan Dictionary | Free English Dictionary and Thesaurus Online . (n.d.). RetrievedJan. 2016fromwww.macmillandictionary.com/
  23. Milroy, J.
    (2001) Language ideologies and the consequences of standardization. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 5(4), 530–555. doi: 10.1111/1467‑9481.00163
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00163 [Google Scholar]
  24. Ottati, V. C. , Renstrom, R. A. , & Price, E.
    (2014) The metaphorical framing model: Political communication and public opinion. In M. Landau , M. Robinson , & B. Meier (Eds.), The power of metaphor: Examining its influence on social life (pp.179–202). Washington, DC: APA Press. doi: 10.1037/14278‑009
    https://doi.org/10.1037/14278-009 [Google Scholar]
  25. Negrea-Busuioc, E. , & Ritchie, L. D.
    (2015) When ‘seeking love is travel by bus’: Deliberate metaphors, stories and humor in a Romanian song. Metaphor and the Social World, 5(1), 60–81. doi: 10.1075/msw.5.1.04neg
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.1.04neg [Google Scholar]
  26. Reijnierse, W. G. , Burgers, C. , Krennmayr, T. , & Steen, G. J.
    (2015) How viruses and beasts affect our opinions (or not): The role of extendedness in metaphorical framing. Metaphor and the Social World, 5(2), 245–263. doi: 10.1075/msw.5.2.04rei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.2.04rei [Google Scholar]
  27. Perrez, J. , & Reuchamps, M.
    (2014) The “Belgian Tetris”: assessing the political impact of metaphors on citizens’ perception of, and attitude towards Belgian federalism. Metaphorik.de, 25, 7–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Ritchie, L. D. , & Cameron, L.
    (2014) Open hearts or smoke and mirrors: Metaphorical framing and frame conflicts in a public meeting. Metaphor and Symbol, 29(3), 204–223. doi: 10.1080/10926488.2014.924303
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2014.924303 [Google Scholar]
  29. Roncero, C. , Kennedy, J. M. , & Smyth, R.
    (2006) Similes on the internet have explanations. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13(1), 74–77. doi: 10.3758/BF03193815
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193815 [Google Scholar]
  30. Shibata, M. , Toyomura, A. , Motoyama, H. , Itoh, H. , Kawabata, Y. , & Abe, J. I.
    (2012) Does simile comprehension differ from metaphor comprehension? A functional MRI study. Brain and Language, 121(3), 254–260. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2012.03.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2012.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  31. Steen, G.
    (2008) When is metaphor deliberate. In G. Steen (Ed.), Selected papers from the Stockholm Metaphor Festival, (pp.43–63). Stockholm: Stockholm University.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Steen, G. , Dorst, A. G. , Herrmann, J. B. , Kaal, A. , Krennmayr, T. , & Pasma, T.
    (2010) A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  33. Steen, G.
    (2011) From three dimensions to five steps: The value of deliberate metaphor. Metaphorik. de, 21, 83–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (2015) Developing, testing and interpreting deliberate metaphor theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 90, 67–92. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.013 [Google Scholar]
  35. Thibodeau, P. , McClelland, J. L. , & Boroditsky, L.
    (2009) When a bad metaphor may not be a victimless crime: the role of metaphor in social policy. In N. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society (pp.809–814). Amsterdam: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Thibodeau, P. , & Boroditsky, L.
    (2011) Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS One, 6(2), e16782. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782 [Google Scholar]
  37. (2013) Natural language metaphors covertly influence reasoning. PloS one8(1): e52961. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052961
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0052961 [Google Scholar]
  38. Thurlow, C.
    (2006) From statistical panic to moral panic: The metadiscursive construction and popular exaggeration of new media language in the print media. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11(3), 667–701. doi: 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2006.00031.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00031.x [Google Scholar]
  39. (2007) Fabricating youth: New-media discourse and the technologization of young people. In S. Johnson & A. Ensslin (Eds.), Language in the media: Representations, identities, ideologies (pp.213–233). London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Van Gorp, B.
    (2007) The constructionist approach to framing: Bringing culture back in. Journal of Communication, 57(1), 60–78.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. De Vreese, C. H.
    (2005) News framing: Theory and typology. Information Design Journal, 13(1), 51–62. doi: 10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre [Google Scholar]
  42. Xu, X.
    (2010) Interpreting metaphorical statements. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1622–1636. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.005 [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