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.
Inhaltsverzeichnis (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
Zielsetzung und Themenschwerpunkte (Objectives and Key Themes)
This paper analyzes the use of metaphors in political speeches regarding immigration, focusing on how these metaphors shape public opinion. The study compares the use of metaphors by Donald Trump and Joe Biden, representing the center-right and center-left parties in the US, respectively. The main objective is to explore the biopolitical implications of this rhetorical strategy. * The biopolitical framing of immigration in American political discourse. * The role of metaphors in shaping public perception of immigration. * A comparative analysis of metaphor usage between center-right and center-left politicians. * The identification and categorization of dominant metaphor types related to immigration. * The persuasive and emotional impact of metaphors on audience understanding.Zusammenfassung der Kapitel (Chapter Summaries)
1. Introduction: This chapter introduces the concept of biopolitics, tracing its development from Kjellen's 1905 work to contemporary applications. It establishes immigration as a key biopolitical issue and highlights the longstanding interest in the use of rhetoric, specifically metaphors, to influence public opinion on such topics. The chapter cites existing research on metaphor use in political discourse, particularly Charteris-Black's work on immigration metaphors in British politics, which frequently frame immigration negatively using disaster metaphors. The chapter then lays the groundwork for the current study, focusing on a comparison of metaphor usage by Trump and Biden regarding immigration, and emphasizing the role of metaphors in shaping perceptions of immigration and justifying policy decisions. It sets the stage for a deeper analysis using Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). 2. Framework: This chapter provides the theoretical framework for the study. It delves into the concept of biopolitics, explaining its relevance to the study of political rhetoric on immigration. It further details the different aspects of political rhetoric, including the use of figures of speech and the specific function of conceptual metaphors in shaping political discourse. This section discusses the state-of-the-art research on metaphors in political communication and lays out the methodology used in this research. The integration of CMT and CDA allows for both a detailed analysis of the metaphors used and an understanding of their function within the broader political context. This chapter functions as a crucial bridge between the introduction and the results chapters. 3. Results and Discussion: This chapter presents the findings of the analysis. It begins with general observations about the overall metaphor usage patterns identified in both corpora (Trump and Biden speeches). Then, it dives into the specific metaphors found in each corpus, outlining the distinct types of metaphors used by each politician. The chapter proceeds to analyze the identified metaphors, categorized and interpreted with the combined theoretical lens of CMT and CDA. Each major category of metaphors (disaster, war, container, animal, journey) is given specific discussion, emphasizing their potential effects on public perception of immigration, and comparing and contrasting Trump's and Biden's usage in each category. The chapter systematically details the findings, demonstrating how metaphor use potentially influences opinions about immigration policy.Schlüsselwörter (Keywords)
Biopolitics, political rhetoric, metaphor analysis, immigration, Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), Donald Trump, Joe Biden, persuasive communication, emotional appeals, public opinion, border security.
Frequently Asked Questions: Analysis of Metaphors in Political Speeches on Immigration
What is the main topic of this paper?
This paper analyzes the use of metaphors in political speeches about immigration, focusing on how these metaphors shape public opinion. It compares the use of metaphors by Donald Trump and Joe Biden, examining the biopolitical implications of their rhetorical strategies.
What are the key objectives of the study?
The study aims to explore the biopolitical framing of immigration in American political discourse; investigate the role of metaphors in shaping public perception of immigration; conduct a comparative analysis of metaphor usage between center-right and center-left politicians; identify and categorize dominant metaphor types related to immigration; and analyze the persuasive and emotional impact of metaphors on audience understanding.
What theoretical frameworks are used in this research?
The research utilizes Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to analyze the metaphors used and understand their function within the broader political context.
Which politicians' speeches are analyzed?
The study compares the use of metaphors in speeches by Donald Trump (representing the center-right) and Joe Biden (representing the center-left).
What types of metaphors are discussed?
The analysis identifies and discusses several categories of metaphors, including disaster metaphors, war and conflict metaphors, container metaphors, animal metaphors, and journey metaphors.
What is the structure of the paper?
The paper is structured into three main chapters: An introduction which establishes the context and research questions; a framework chapter outlining the theoretical underpinnings and methodology; and a results and discussion chapter presenting the findings of the metaphor analysis and interpreting their implications.
What are the key findings of the analysis?
The results chapter presents general observations on metaphor usage patterns in both corpora (Trump and Biden's speeches), followed by a detailed analysis of specific metaphors used by each politician. Each major category of metaphor is discussed, highlighting their potential effects on public perception of immigration and comparing and contrasting Trump's and Biden's usage.
What is the significance of the study?
The study aims to shed light on how political language, specifically the use of metaphors, shapes public understanding and attitudes towards immigration, and ultimately influences policy decisions. Understanding the biopolitical implications of this rhetoric is central to the research.
What keywords describe this research?
Biopolitics, political rhetoric, metaphor analysis, immigration, Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT), Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), Donald Trump, Joe Biden, persuasive communication, emotional appeals, public opinion, border security.
Where can I find more information about the specific findings related to each type of metaphor (disaster, war, etc.)?
The detailed findings regarding each category of metaphors (disaster, war, container, animal, and journey metaphors) are presented and discussed in the "Results and Discussion" chapter of the paper. This chapter provides a systematic analysis of each category, comparing and contrasting the usage of these metaphors by Trump and Biden.
- Citar trabajo
- Luisa van Gansewinkel (Autor), 2020, The Effect of Metaphors on portraying Immigration in Political speeches. A Biopolitical View on Rhetorics, Múnich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1127957
