Metaphor and the Social World - Online First

This article compares diachronic and cross-linguistic uses of source domains for framing the target domain of trade in governmental discourses under the presidencies of Bill Clinton, Jiang Zemin, Donald Trump, and Xi Jinping. Taking a socio-cognitive approach, we examine trade metaphor use across time periods (1993–1997 vs. 2017–2021) and languages (American English vs. Mandarin Chinese) in nationally dominant discourses. At the micro-level of trade corpora, both the quantitative and qualitative analyses show that the higher-level source domains (e.g., building) and their (re)constructed lower-level source domains (e.g., cornerstone vs. pillar) are semantic fields whose use varies with discourse contexts. The usages of the distinct lower-level source domains highlight divergent cognitive forms of trade ideologies, which are embedded in dynamic political structures; they help reveal the implicit trade relations and ideological motivations at the macro-level of trade discourse contexts. The macro-level analyses reveal that nationally dominant discourses are constructed around domestic and global interests, and that power relations are (re)constructed diachronically and challenged transnationally through dominant discursive practices.

Science communication is highly important in present-day society. But mere factual information transfer does not suffice for enhancing public understanding of scientific results, theories, and concepts. In this paper we compare science communication among experts with communication from experts to laypeople, to better understand the role of metaphors in constructing understanding of abstract scientific concepts. As a case study, we analyze specialist and non-specialist scientific articles on epigenetics, the study of heritable changes in gene expression not altering DNA sequence. The results of our analysis show that there is no substantial difference between the two types of articles in frequency of metaphors and in their content. However, the function of the metaphors is different: the figurative aspect of metaphors is employed for public understanding but plays no role in specialist scientific articles. We outline the implications of these results for current philosophical debates on scientific understanding and public understanding of science: (1) metaphors are tools for rendering theoretical concepts intelligible, for both expert and lay audiences; (2) expert and public understanding differ in degree rather than in kind; (3) conveying understanding crucially involves skills: metaphors in this context do not so much add knowledge as enhance relevant conceptual reasoning abilities.

Metaphors and proverbs are an indispensable sociocultural aspect of language. In this paper, we look at the sociocultural linguistic heterogeneity codified through metaphors and proverbs among three Arabic dialects, namely the Qatari, the Palestinian, and the Tunisian ones. The corpora of metaphors and proverbs have been elicited through interviews with relatives and friends, who live in Qatar, Palestine, and Tunisia respectively. The data are analyzed in the context of cognitive metaphor theory with a focus on comparative and interactionist perspectives. With a focus on two emerging themes, namely physical appearance, and sexual orientation, we argue that the Qatari dialect seems to be more inventive in the sexual orientation theme, while the Palestinian dialect foregrounds appearance due to the importance of marriage in Palestinian society, and the Tunisian dialect shows no emphasis on a specific theme. The differences we have found in metaphors and proverbs offer a glimpse of the various social orders, symbolic meanings, and lifestyles found in the three respective cultures, which are a vital aspect of cultural literacy in the Arab world. In this sense, the study is a suggestion on how to analyze qualitatively sociocultural linguistic heterogeneity at the level of figurative language and its symbolic meanings.

Incels, or involuntary celibates, are a community of typically heterosexual young men who wish to, but do not, have sexual and romantic relationships with women. As a community, they have previously been characterised by their hatred for women and violent acts against members of society who they believe prevent them from having relations with women. In this paper, we highlight the pervasiveness of metaphor in incel communication, so far unaddressed in the budding studies of incel language. Specifically, using a sample of circa 22,500 words from the banned incel Reddit forum r/Braincels, we focus on how members of this community use metaphoric expressions to dehumanise gendered social actors, both as individuals and as groups. We discuss our findings against the backdrop of metaphor approaches to language, gender, and sexuality, and the relevance of dehumanising metaphorical rhetoric for online misogynist groups.

The framing impact of political discourses has long been attested for. Metaphors in particular are known to ease the understanding of complex concepts and processes. Yet, the question remains to what extent metaphors do work the same on different recipients? Based on an experimental design, we test a potentially key moderating variable in the study of political metaphors: political knowledge. Our experiment aims at determining the extent to which the confrontation of individuals to arguments and metaphors impacts their preferences regarding the implementation of a basic income in Belgium. In particular, we hypothesize that the marginal effect of metaphors as cognitive shortcuts decreases when political knowledge increases. Our findings suggest that some metaphorical frames are more successful than others, hereby supporting the idea that the aptness of the metaphorical frame is a key factor when conducting experiments. We conclude that political knowledge is an important variable when analyzing the framing effect of metaphors, especially when it goes about very low or very high levels of political knowledge. The insertion of metaphors in political discourses may easily succeed in rallying individuals behind a given cause, but this would only work if participants have a lower knowledge of politics.