Advertisement

Self and Other Metaphors as Facilitating Features of Populist Style in Diplomatic Discourse: A Case Study of Obama and Putin’s Speeches

  • Liudmila Arcimavičienė
Chapter

Abstract

The contestability of the concept of populism and the variability of its application have given rise to long-lasting discussions about what populist features in discourse are and how these can be empirically determined and tested. This chapter offers a cognitive socio-linguistic approach to evaluating how populist framing in political (diplomatic) discourse can be facilitated through the use of Self and Other metaphors. Its specific aims involve the identification of metaphors in the context of political identity construction and their populist use vis-à-vis the discursive strategies of legitimisation and delegitimisation in the political speeches delivered by Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin, two leaders representing opposite leadership styles and ideologies. To achieve the above aims, Arcimavičienė examined the interrelated speeches delivered by President Obama and President Putin in the time span of two years (2014–2015) in the analytical framework of Critical Metaphor Analysis by applying Pragglejaz Group’s Metaphor Identification Procedure (2007). This analysis demonstrated that their metaphor use contributes to the framing of these leaders’ populism through the metaphorical extension of the core concept of ‘the people’ onto the concept of ‘the nations,’ and, more importantly, that the discursive strategies of legitimisation and delegitimisation can be used in parallel but with different metaphoric intensity and ideological purposes.

Keywords

Populism framing Metaphor analysis Legitimisation Delegitimisation Political discourse 

References

  1. Arcimavičienė, L., & Jonaitienė, V. (2015). Metaphor evaluation of leadership styles: A case study of presidential New Year greetings. Open Linguistics, 1(1), 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aslanidis, P. (2016). Is populism an ideology? A refutation and a new perspective. Political Studies, 64(1 suppl), 88–104.Google Scholar
  3. Borshchevskaya, A. (2016). Vladimir Putin and the Shiite Axis. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/30/vladimir-putin-and-the-shiite-axis-russia-iran-syria/.
  4. Byer, A. (2015). Obama’s soft power. The Kyiv Post. Retrieved from https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/alexei-bayer-obamas-soft-power-392727.html.
  5. Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  6. Canovan, M. (2002). Taking politics to the people: Populism as the ideology of democracy. In Democracies and the populist challenge (pp. 25–44). Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Charteris-Black, J. (2011). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Chilton, P., & Lakoff, G. (1995). Foreign policy by metaphor. Language and Peace, 37, 61.Google Scholar
  11. Chilton, P., & Schäffner, C. (2011). Discourse and politics. In Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 303–330). London and New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Dreyfuss, R. (2013, November 5). How American foreign policy is hurting American power. Mother Jones.Google Scholar
  13. Feldman, J. (2008). From molecule to metaphor: A neural theory of language. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gibbs, R. W. (1992). Categorization and metaphor understanding. Psychological Review, 99(30), 572–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goatly, A. (2007). Washing the brain: Metaphor and hidden ideology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Group, P. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. Retrieved from http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/staff/eiaes/Pragglejaz_Group_2007.pdf.
  17. Hanson, V. D. (2016, May 19). How Barack Obama’s foreign policy de-stabilized the world. National Review. Tribune Media Services, Inc.Google Scholar
  18. Hawkins, K. A. (2009). Is Chávez populist? Measuring populist discourse in comparative perspective. Comparative Political Studies, 42(8), 1040–1067.Google Scholar
  19. Heinisch, R. (2003). Success in opposition–Failure in government: Explaining the performance of right-wing populist parties in public office. West European Politics, 26(3), 91–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Horvath, R. (2011). Putin’s ‘preventive counter-revolution’: Post-Soviet authoritarianism and the spectre of Velvet revolution. Europe-Asia Studies, 63(1), 1–25.Google Scholar
  21. Howarth, D. (2000). Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press Google Scholar. http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/staff/eiaes/Pragglejaz_Group_2007.pdf.
  22. Jagers, J., & Walgrave, S. (2007). Populism as political communication style: An empirical study of political parties’ discourse in Belgium. European Journal of Political Research, 46(3), 319–345. Google Scholar
  23. Johnson, M. (1994). Moral imagination: Implications of cognitive science for ethics. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor. A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Kövecses, Z. (2003). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body in human feeling. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Kövecses, Z. (2004). Introduction: Cultural variation in metaphor. European Journal of English Studies, 8(3), 263–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Krugman, P. (2016, January 11). The Obama boom. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  28. Laclau, E. (1980). Populist rupture and discourse. Screen Education, 34(99), 87–93.Google Scholar
  29. Laclau, E. (2005). On populist reason. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  30. Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor and war: The metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. Peace Research, 23(2/3), 25–32.Google Scholar
  31. Lakoff, G. (1996). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Lakoff, G. (2003). Metaphor and war, again. Alternet. Retrieved from http://www.alternet.org/story/15414/metaphor_and_war%2C_again.
  33. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  35. March, L. (2012). Towards an understanding of contemporary left-wing populism. In Political Studies Association (PSA) Annual International Conference, Belfast (pp. 3–5).Google Scholar
  36. Marques, J. (2013). Understanding the strength of gentleness: Soft-skilled leadership on the rise. Journal of Business Ethics, 116(1), 163–171. Google Scholar
  37. McIlwain, C. (2010). Leadership, legitimacy and public perceptions of Barack Obama. In Whose black politics (pp. 155–172). Google Scholar
  38. Meltzoff, A. N., & Prinz, W. (Eds.). (2002). The imitative mind: Development, evolution and brain bases (Vol. 6). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Moffitt, B., & Tormey, S. (2014). Rethinking populism: Politics, mediatisation and political style. Political Studies, 62(2), 381–397.Google Scholar
  40. Mudde, C. (2004). The populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition, 39(4), 542–563. Retrieved from http://politiki.bg/downloads/261071628/popzeitgeist.pdf.
  41. Mudde, C., & Kaltwasser, C. R. (2013). Exclusionary vs. inclusionary populism: Comparing contemporary Europe and Latin America. Government and Opposition, 48(2), 147–174.Google Scholar
  42. Musolff, A. (2006). Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Musolff, A. (2015). Dehumanizing metaphors in UK immigrant debates in press and online media. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 3(1), 41–56.Google Scholar
  44. Musolff, A. (2016). Political metaphor analysis: Discourse and scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  45. Nye, J., Jr. (2008). The powers to lead. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Ritchie, L. D. (2013). Metaphor (Key topics in Semantics and Pragmatics). Cambridge University Press, 1(2), 2–1. Google Scholar
  47. Sakwa, R. (2008). Putin and the oligarchs. New Political Economy, 13(2), 185–191.Google Scholar
  48. Sakwa, R. (2010). The dual state in Russia. Post-Soviet Affairs, 26(3), 185–206.Google Scholar
  49. Schäffner, C. (1991). Zur Rolle von Metaphern für die Interpretation der außersprachlichen Wirklichkeit. Folia Linguistica, 25(1–2), 75–110. Google Scholar
  50. Shear, M. D., & Baker, P. (2014, March 26). Obama renewing U.S. commitment to NATO alliance. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  51. Sikk, A. (2009). Parties and populism (Working Paper). Centre for European politics, security and integration, University College London. Retrieved from http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1400395/1/PartiesandPopulism.pdf.
  52. Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU (Vol. 14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  53. Taguieff, P. A. (1995). Political science confronts populism: From a conceptual mirage to a real problem. Telos, 103, 9–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Torfing, J. (1995). From the Keynesian welfare state to the Schumpeterian workfare state: A comparative study of new trends in social policy. Institut for Statskundskab, Københavns Universitet.Google Scholar
  55. Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Van Dijk, T. A. (2014). Discourse and knowledge: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Van Kessel, S. (2014). The populist cat-dog: Applying the concept of populism to contemporary European party systems. Journal of Political Ideologies, 19(1), 99–118. Google Scholar
  58. Vasilopoulou, S., Halikiopoulou, D., & Exadaktylos, T. (2014). Greece in crisis: Austerity, populism and the politics of blame. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(2), 388–402.Google Scholar
  59. Žižek, S. (2008). Tolerance as an ideological category. Critical Inquiry, 34(4), 660–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Data Sources

  1. Putin, V. 2014. Address by president of the Russian Federation. Kremlin. Retrieved from http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/20603.
  2. Putin, V. 2015. 70th session of the UN General Assembly. Kremlin. Retrieved from http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/50385.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Liudmila Arcimavičienė
    • 1
  1. 1.Vilnius UniversityVilniusLithuania

Personalised recommendations