The present paper focuses on the variation and dynamics of cross-cultural conceptual metaphor national DEVELOPMENT is a journey in Lithuanian political discourse. The paper aims to answer the question: To what extent do we share the same or different understanding of politics as a journey? Employing Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA) (Charteris-Black, 2005) as methodological background, an attempt is made to look at variation of conceptual metaphor and metaphorical linguistic expressions within one political party, i.e. the Conservative Party, but at different periods of time. It is assumed that linguistic metaphorical expressions underlying the conceptual metaphor NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT IS a JOURNEY are likely to have a temporal character. The results show that metaphorical linguistic expressions underlying the JOURNEY metaphor alter significantly within one political discourse before joining the European Union and NATO and after it. Moreover, marked changes in conceptual metaphor have also been observed. Thus, the development of the JOURNEY metaphor shows ideological implications emerging in the political discourse of Lithuania.

No abstract

Metaphor analysis in real-world discourse is increasingly becoming the focus of many cognitive studies. Accordingly, this paper seeks to investigate how euro adoption in Lithuania in 2015 was metaphorically communicated by the media. The study is carried out within the framework of Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA), which was developed by Charteris-Black (2005, 2011), Musolff (2008), Hart (2010). Thus, a three-step metaphor analysis procedure (Identified→ Interpreted→ Explained) was employed in order to analyze the attitude towards euro adoption presented in Lithuanian media. The findings show that the euro is most frequently conceptualized as a living organism with different scenarios (active agent and passive agent) being realized linguistically. In the final stage – explanation – metaphors were analyzed from a rhetorical perspective, which means that an attempt was made to look into how metaphors communicate positive or negative attitudes about euro adoption in the media. The results demonstrate that personification of the euro makes the idea of euro adoption more understandable, it activates a range of emotions and evaluates it. This leads to further insights about the way the media exercises its power in an attempt to persuade people and manipulate their attitudes, emotions and opinions.

The philosophical idea of anthropocentrism viewing human beings as the most significant entities has been put forward in various metaphor studies within cognitive linguistics. As Talmy (2002) claims, people choose to animate a very large part of their reality and this happens due to embodiment, as Lakoff (1987), and Lakoff and Johnson (1999) argue. Anthropocentricity can also be explained by Croft’s Extended Animacy Hierarchy system (2002) in terms of human beings outranking animate and inanimate entities, strongly implying that inanimate entities tend to be perceived as inferior. However, this paper argues that anthropocentrism is bidirectional, since not only do we ascribe human or animate qualities to inanimate objects or phenomena, but we also tend to “de-animate” human beings by attributing inanimate qualities to them. This paper further explores the idea of anthropocentricity by focusing on the metaphorical conceptualization of issues concerning the euro adoption in 2015 and the refugee crisis in 2015–2016, two real-life phenomena that have significantly affected social life in Lithuania. The paper thus aims to investigate how animation of the euro and de-animation of refugees is metaphorically conceptualized in the Lithuanian media and what rhetorical implications arise from this. The research is conducted within the framework of Critical Metaphor Analysis (Charteris-Black, 2005/2011, 2014; Musolff, 2004; Hart 2010, etc.), which suggests that metaphors are used as an argumentative tool seeking to manipulate the audience. The paper therefore argues that the animation of the euro and “de-animation” of refugees carry serious rhetorical implications and reveal the attitudes of society towards the phenomena analyzed.

Kognityvinėje lingvistikoje metafora yra suvokiama ne tik kaip patogus būdas kalbėti apie kasdienius realaus gyvenimo reiškinius, bet ir kaip mąstymo bei komunikacijos priemonė, t. y. metafora susieja mintis, paaiškina abstrakčius ir sunkiai suvokiamus reiškinius, perteikia esmę, emocijas ir kt. Gausūs politinio diskurso metaforų tyrimai rodo, kad metafora yra suvokiama kaip ideologinė priemonė, kuria bandoma paveikti, įtikinti ir manipuliuoti žmonėmis. Kaip teigia Jonathanas Charteris-Blackas, politikai bando kuo geriau pateikti save, t. y. legitimizuotis, parodydami esantys charizmatiški lyderiai, kurie geba sėkmingai valdyti šalį. Legitimizacija yra glaudžiai susijusi su delegitimizacija, t. y. neigiamu kito pristatymu. Metafora, kaip ideologijos kognityvinis mechanizmas, tampa teigiamo savęs ir neigiamo „kito“ pateikimo įrankiu. Straipsnyje bandoma pažvelgti, kaip dvi Lietuvos politinės jėgos – 2008–2012 m. valdančioji partija (Tėvynės sąjunga-Lietuvos krikščionys demokratai) ir opozicinė koalicija (Lietuvos socialdemokratų, Darbo ir „Tvarkos ir teisingumo“ partijos) – legitimizuoja save ir delegitimizuoja kitas politines jėgas per jėgos metaforą, konceptualizuojant 2008 metų ekonominę ir finansinę krizę. Tyrimas atliktas taikant kritinės metaforos analizės metodą (KMA) (Charteris-Black, 2005), kurio esmę sudaro trijų žingsnių procedūra: 1) kalbinis lygmuo – lingvistinės metaforos yra identifikuojamos tekste; 2) mąstymo lygmuo – lingvistinės metaforos interpretuojamos, siejant jas su konceptualiomis metaforomis; 3) retorinis lygmuo – metaforos aiškinamos, siejant jas su legitimizacijos ir delegitimizacijos procesais.