Volume 27, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



Political cartoons make meaning by drawing on scenarios that must be immediately recognizable by their intended audience. Crucial meaning-making mechanisms in these scenarios are verbo-visual ensembles of metaphors and metonymies. In this paper we investigate 69 Chinese and 60 American political cartoons published in 2018 and 2019 that pertain to the two nations’ trade conflict. By examining the cross-cultural similarities and differences between metaphors and metonymies, we chart how Chinese and American cartoonists portray this trade conflict. We end by showing how a complete interpretation of the cartoons requires enrichment with insights provided by yet other analytical instruments.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Abdel-Raheem, Ahmed
    2019Pictorial framing in moral politics: A corpus-based experimental study. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Al-Masri, Hanada
    2016 Jordanian editorial cartoons: A multimodal approach to the cartoons of Emad Hajjaj. Language and Communication50. 45–58. 10.1016/j.langcom.2016.09.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2016.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barcelona, Antonio
    (ed.) 2000Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads: A cognitive perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Barthes, Roland
    1986 [1964] Rhetoric of the image. InRoland Barthes, The responsibility of forms, 21–40. Translated byRichard Howard. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bergen, Benjamin
    2003 To awaken a sleeping giant: Cognition and culture in September 11 political cartoons. InMichel Achard & Suzanne Kemmer (eds.), Language, culture, and mind, 23–35. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Black, Max
    1979 More about metaphor. InAndrew Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 19–43. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bolognesi, Marianna & Paola Vernillo
    2019 How abstract concepts emerge from metaphorical images: The metonymic way. Language and Communication69. 26–41. 10.1016/j.langcom.2019.05.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2019.05.003 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bounegru, Liliana & Charles Forceville
    2011 Metaphors in editorial cartoons representing the global financial crisis. Visual Communication10(2). 209–229. 10.1177/1470357211398446
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357211398446 [Google Scholar]
  9. Brzezinski, Mika
    2018 (13June). Morning Joe. https://dailycaller.com/2018/06/13/mika-trump-flintstone/, accessed14-12-2019.
  10. Charteris-Black, Jonathan
    2019Metaphors of Brexit: No cherries on the cake. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑28768‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28768-9 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cienki, Alan & Cornelia Müller
    2008Metaphor and gesture. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/gs.3
    https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.3 [Google Scholar]
  12. Dancygier, Barbara & Eve Sweetser
    (eds.) 2012Viewpoint in language: A multimodal perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139084727
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139084727 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dirven, René & Ralf Pörings
    (eds.) 2002Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Đurović, Tatjana & Nadežda Silaški
    2016 Multimodality and the construal of reality in political cartoons: The case of Serbia-EU relationship. Facta Universitatis, Series: Linguistics and Literature14(2). 117–128.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. El Refaie, Elisabeth
    2003 Understanding visual metaphors: The example of newspaper cartoons. Visual Communication2(1). 75–95. 10.1177/1470357203002001755
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357203002001755 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2009 Multiliteracies: How readers interpret political cartoons. Visual Communication8(2). 181–205. 10.1177/1470357209102113
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357209102113 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fauconnier, Gilles & Mark Turner
    2002The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Forceville, Charles
    1996Pictorial metaphor in advertising. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203064252
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203064252 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2004 Review of Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner, The way we think: Conceptual blending and the mind’s hidden complexities. Metaphor and Symbol19. 83–89.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 2006 The source-path-goal schema in the autobiographical journey documentary: McElwee, Van der Keuken, Cole. New Review of Film and Television Studies4(3). 241–261. 10.1080/17400300600982023
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17400300600982023 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2009 Metonymy in visual and audiovisual discourse. InEija Ventola & Arsenio Jésus Moya Guijarro (eds.), The world told and the world shown: Issues in multisemiotics, 56–74. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2011 Pictorial runes in Tintin and the Picaros. Journal of Pragmatics43. 875–890. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.014 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2013a Metaphor and symbol: searching for one’s identity is looking for a home in animation film. Review of Cognitive Linguistics11(2). 250–268. 10.1075/rcl.11.2.03for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.11.2.03for [Google Scholar]
  24. 2013b Creative visual duality in comics balloons. InTony Veale, Kurt Feyaerts & Charles Forceville (eds.), Creativity and the agile mind: A multi-disciplinary exploration of a multi-faceted phenomenon, 253–273. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110295290.253
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110295290.253 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2017 Visual and multimodal metaphor in advertising: Cultural perspectives. Styles of Communication9(2). 26–41.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 2020Visual and multimodal communication: Applying the relevance principle. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190845230.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190845230.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  27. Forceville, Charles & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi
    (eds.) 2009Multimodal metaphor. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110215366
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110215366 [Google Scholar]
  28. Forceville, Charles & Marloes Jeulink
    2011 “The flesh and blood of embodied understanding”: The source-path-goal schema in animation film. Pragmatics & Cognition19(1). 37–59. 10.1075/pc.19.1.02for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.19.1.02for [Google Scholar]
  29. Forceville, Charles, Elisabeth El Refaie & Gert Meesters
    2014 Stylistics and comics. InMichael Burke (ed.), The Routledge handbook of stylistics, 485–499. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Forceville, Charles & Nataša van de Laar
    2019 Metaphors portraying right-wing politician Geert Wilders in Dutch political cartoons. InEncarnación Hidalgo-Tenorio, Miguel Ángel Benítez-Castro & Francesca De Cesare (eds.), Populist discourse: Critical approaches to contemporary politics, 292–307. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429026751‑18
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429026751-18 [Google Scholar]
  31. Gibbs, Raymond W., Jr.
    (ed.) 2008The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511816802
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816802 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2015 The allegorical character of political metaphors in discourse. Metaphor and the Social World5(2). 264–282. 10.1075/msw.5.2.05gib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.2.05gib [Google Scholar]
  33. 2016 (ed.). Mixing metaphor. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/milcc.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/milcc.6 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2017Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphors in human life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781107762350
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781107762350 [Google Scholar]
  35. Goossens, Louis
    1995By word of mouth: Metaphor, metonymy and linguistic action in a cognitive perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.33
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.33 [Google Scholar]
  36. Guan, Yue & Charles Forceville
    2020 Making cross-cultural meaning in five Chinese promotional clips: Metonymies and metaphors. Intercultural Pragmatics17(2). 123–149. 10.1515/ip‑2020‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2020-0007 [Google Scholar]
  37. Hartmann-Mahmud, Lori
    2002 War as metaphor. Peace Review14(4). 427–432. 10.1080/1040265022000039213
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1040265022000039213 [Google Scholar]
  38. Jansen, Sue Curry & Don Sabo
    1994 The sport/war metaphor: Hegemonic masculinity, the Persian Gulf War, and the new world order. Sociology of Sport Journal11(1). 1–17. 10.1123/ssj.11.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1123/ssj.11.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kashanizadeh, Zahra & Charles Forceville
    2020 Visual and multimodal interaction of metaphor and metonymy: A study of Iranian and Dutch print advertisements. Cognitive Linguistic Studies7(1). 78–110. 10.1075/cogls.00050.kas
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.00050.kas [Google Scholar]
  40. Kashyap, Usha & Neha Bothra
    2019 Sino-US trade and trade war. Management and Economics Research Journal5. 1–12. 10.18639/MERJ.2019.879180
    https://doi.org/10.18639/MERJ.2019.879180 [Google Scholar]
  41. Kövecses, Zoltán
    2010Metaphor: A practical introduction. 2nd edn.New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 2015Where metaphors come from: Reconsidering context in metaphor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  43. Kövecses, Zoltán & Günther Radden
    1998 Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics9(1). 37–77. 10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kwon, Iksoo
    2019 Conceptual mappings in political cartoons: A comparative study of the case of nuclear crises in US-North Korean relations. Journal of Pragmatics143. 10–27. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.01.021 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson
    1980Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Lakoff, George
    1991 Metaphor and war: The metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. Peace Research23(2/3). 25-32.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Lan, Chun & Danyu Zuo
    2016 Pictorial-verbal metaphors in Chinese editorial cartoons on food safety. Metaphor and the Social World6(1). 20–51. 10.1075/msw.6.1.02lan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.6.1.02lan [Google Scholar]
  48. Li, Chunding, Chuantian He & Chuangwei Lin
    2018 Economic impacts of the possible China-US trade war. Emerging Markets Finance & Trade54. 1557–1577. 10.1080/1540496X.2018.1446131
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1540496X.2018.1446131 [Google Scholar]
  49. Li, Minghao, Edward J. Balistreri & Wendong Zhang
    2019The U.S.-China trade war: Tariff data and general equilibrium analysis. Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University. https://ideas.repec.org/p/ias/cpaper/19-wp595.html, accessed9-12-20.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Lin, Tiffany Ying-Yu & Wen-Yu Chiang
    2015 Multimodal fusion in analyzing political cartoons: Debates on U.S. beef imports into Taiwan. Metaphor and Symbol30(2). 137–161. 10.1080/10926488.2015.1016859
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2015.1016859 [Google Scholar]
  51. Littlemore, Jeannette
    2015Metonymy: Hidden shortcuts in language, thought and communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107338814
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107338814 [Google Scholar]
  52. Marín-Arrese, Juana I.
    2019 Political cartoon discourse: Creativity, critique and persuasion. Cultura, Lenguaje y Representación22. 117–134. 10.6035/CLR.2019.22.7
    https://doi.org/10.6035/CLR.2019.22.7 [Google Scholar]
  53. Master Metaphor List
    Master Metaphor List 1991 1st edn compiled by George Lakoff, Jane Espenson & Adele Goldberg; 2nd edncompiled byGeorge Lakoff, Jane Espenson & Alan Schwartz. araw.mede.uic.edu/~alansz/metaphor/METAPHORLIST.pdf (last accessed9-12-20).
  54. Mittelberg, Irene & Linda R. Waugh
    2009 Metonymy first, metaphor second: A cognitive-semiotic approach to multimodal figures of thought in co-speech gesture. InCharles Forceville & Eduardo Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor, 329–356. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Musolff, Andreas
    2016Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Negro Alousque, Isabel
    2013 Visual metaphor and metonymy in French political cartoons. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada26. 365–384.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Peirsman, Yves & Geeraerts, Dirk
    2006 Metonymy as a prototypical category. Cognitive Linguistics17(3). 269–316. 10.1515/COG.2006.007
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2006.007 [Google Scholar]
  58. Pérez-Sobrino, Paula
    2017Multimodal metaphor and metonymy in advertising. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/ftl.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ftl.2 [Google Scholar]
  59. Prendergast, Muireann
    2019 Political cartoons as carnivalesque: A multimodal discourse analysis of Argentina’s Humor Registrado magazine. Social Semiotics29(1). 45–67. 10.1080/10350330.2017.1406587
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2017.1406587 [Google Scholar]
  60. Radden, Günter & Zoltán Kövecses
    1999 Towards a theory of metonymy. InKlaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), Metonymy in language and thought, 17–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.4.03rad
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.4.03rad [Google Scholar]
  61. Rojo López, Ana María & María Ángeles Orts Llopis
    2010 Metaphorical pattern analysis in financial texts: Framing the crisis in positive or negative metaphorical terms. Journal of Pragmatics42. 3300–3313. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  62. Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco
    1997 Metaphor, metonymy and conceptual interaction. Atlantis19(1). 281–295.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 2000 The role of mappings and domains in understanding metonymy. InAntonio Barcelona (ed.), Metaphor and metonymy at the crossroads, 109–132. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Silaški, Nadežda & Tatjana Đurović
    2019 The journey metaphor in Brexit-related political cartoons. Discourse, Context & Media31. 1–10. 10.1016/j.dcm.2019.100318
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2019.100318 [Google Scholar]
  65. Sweetser, Eve
    2017 Metaphor and metonymy in advertising: Building viewpoint in multimodal multi-space blends. Journal of Pragmatics122. 65–76. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.012
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.10.012 [Google Scholar]
  66. Wales, Katie
    2001A dictionary of stylistics, revised edn. London: Pearson Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Wawra, Daniela
    2018 Multimodal literacy: Meaning negotiations in political cartoons on the refugee crisis. System77. 10–18. 10.1016/j.system.2018.02.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.02.018 [Google Scholar]
  68. Wikipedia
    Wikipedia 2020 George Armstrong Custer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Armstrong_Custer#cite_note-b540-117, accessed9-12-2020.
  69. Zhao, Xiufeng & Dezheng Feng
    2017 Multimodal metaphtonymy and the construction of China image: A case of China-related political cartoon discourses in the Economist. Journal of Xi’an International Studies University25(2). 31–36.
    [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