Metaphors are, next to parallels and comparisons, one of the most important rhetorical devices in political speeches. They were defined by Aristotle as ‘giving the thing a name that belongs to something else's. Metaphors establish a connection between a subject that may be new or uncommon in our lives and something that feels familiar and near to the heart. This makes them successful and turns them into a useful tool in politics. The ways to analyse metaphors are manifold, but the preferred way for political speeches is the Critical Metaphor Analysis. It enables the researcher to not only identify and classify a metaphor, but also to determine which use a metaphor has and which tone it carries. This paper will compare a total of four speeches from two different politicians with each other with regard to the usage of metaphors and the effect those metaphors have on a biopolitical
base.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Framework
2.1 Biopolitics
2.2 Political Rhetoric
2.2.1 Introduction
2.2.2 Figures of Speech
2.2.3 Conceptual metaphor
2.3 State of the Art
2.4 Methodology
3. Results and Discussion
3.1 General findings
3.2 Specific Findings of metaphors in Trump’s Corpus
3.3 Specific Findings of metaphors in Biden’s Corpus
3.4 Discussion of Findings
3.4.1 Introduction
3.4.2 Disaster metaphors
3.4.3 War and Conflict metaphors
3.4.4 Container metaphors
3.4.5 Animal metaphors
3.4.6 Journey metaphors
4. Conclusion
5. Bibliography
6. Transcripts
7. Metaphors
Objectives and Research Themes
This paper investigates how political metaphors shape public perception of immigration, comparing the rhetorical strategies used by Donald Trump and Joe Biden during the 2020 U.S. election campaign. By applying Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the research seeks to uncover how these metaphors influence the framing of immigrants as either threats or contributors to the state-body within a biopolitical context.
- Comparison of metaphorical source domains between Republican and Democratic discourse.
- Application of the biopolitical "Us vs. Them" framework to explain immigration rhetoric.
- Identification of metaphors serving functions of persuasion, simplification, and emotional arousal.
- Analysis of how specific politicians justify their immigration policies through rhetorical devices.
Excerpt from the Book
2.2.3 Conceptual metaphor
The term Conceptual metaphor has been established in modern times by the linguists Lakoff and Johnson. It is defined as ‘understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another’ (Lakoff, Johnson, 1980, 5). The reason why conceptual metaphors can act in this way is linked to the construction of the human mind. The human mind can think through visual processing (Arnheim, 1969). This phenomenon is known as visual thinking or picture thinking and occurs in 60 – 65 % of humanity (Deza, 2009). Thinking in visuals is closely linked to thinking illustratively, therefore, metaphors can act within a metaphorical concept (Lakoff, Johnson. 1980).
A metaphorical concept consists of conceptual elements. These elements are often bound to general knowledge and activate a wide range of associations, or, as Charteris-Black names them, ‘entailments’ (Charteris-Black, 2014, 157).
An example of a metaphorical concept that can also be found in the corpora of this paper is HATE IS FIRE. A metaphor that is based on this metaphorical concept follows: ‘[…] fanning the flames of fear and racism against Latinos.’ (Biden, 2020).
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Introduces the field of biopolitics and the central role of metaphors in shaping political discourse regarding immigration.
2. Framework: Establishes the theoretical foundation, covering biopolitical theory, political rhetoric, and the Conceptual Metaphor Theory.
3. Results and Discussion: Presents the quantitative findings of the metaphor analysis and qualitatively discusses specific source domains and their political functions.
4. Conclusion: Synthesizes the findings, confirming that metaphors play a crucial, ideology-driven role in framing immigration policy differently across the two political parties.
Key Words
Biopolitics, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Critical Discourse Analysis, Immigration, Political Rhetoric, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Metaphor, Source Domain, State Racism, Us vs Them, Persuasion, Discourse, Public Opinion, Election Campaign.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper examines how Donald Trump and Joe Biden utilize metaphors in political speeches to shape the public's perception of immigration as a biopolitical issue.
What are the central thematic fields explored?
The core themes include biopolitical control, the "Us vs. Them" mentality, the framing of immigration as a threat or a journey, and the role of rhetoric in political persuasion.
What is the primary research goal?
The goal is to determine which conceptual metaphors are prevalent in the speeches of Trump and Biden, and to explain their function in justifying different immigration policies.
Which scientific methods are applied?
The research employs Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) for identification and categorization, alongside Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) for interpreting the usage and tone of the metaphors.
What does the main body cover?
It provides a detailed analysis of source domains like disaster, war, container, animal, and journey, contrasting how these domains are employed by the two politicians.
Which keywords define this study?
Key terms include Biopolitics, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Critical Discourse Analysis, Political Rhetoric, and Immigration.
How does Trump’s usage of disaster metaphors differ from Biden's?
Trump significantly favors disaster metaphors to frame immigration as an uncontrollable, dangerous event, whereas Biden uses these metaphors much less frequently, opting for different framing strategies.
What is the significance of the "Container" metaphor?
It reflects the biopolitical need for an "inside" (citizens) and "outside" (immigrants), serving to dehumanize outsiders and justify their exclusion from the state-body.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Luisa van Gansewinkel (Autor:in), 2020, The Effect of Metaphors on portraying Immigration in Political speeches. A Biopolitical View on Rhetorics, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1127957
