‘QUO VADIS, CORONA?’: METAPHORICAL FRAMING OF THE PANDEMIC IN DAILY PRESS
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The paper deals with the ways Croatian and Serbian daily newspapers wrote about the Covid-19 pandemic at its outbreak in 2020. The aim of the paper was to identify and describe metaphors in the selected corpus of texts in order to determine the metaphorical framing used in newspapers. This corpus-based research of media discourse was based on a qualitative bottom-up analysis that started from lexical metaphors found in the texts.
The results of this study suggest that a whole range of metaphorical mappings is used to frame the pandemic in the media in Croatian and Serbian. The results indicate that in both languages the same conventional metaphors were used. The pandemic was metaphorically conceptualized as an opponent, as some kind of disaster such as fire, or war. Different elements of the metaphorical mapping were made salient and foregrounded, depending on the text type. The obtained results are largely in line with previous research on using metaphors to describe the process of dealing with diseases.
Downloads
Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Begonja, H.‒Rončević, I. (2014). ‘Das nächste Sorgenkind heißt Kroatienʼ Konzeptuelle Metaphern in deutschen Pressetexten über die Beziehung zwischen der EU und Kroatien. In: Zelić, T.‒ Sambunjak, Z. & Pavić-Pintarić, A. (eds.) (2007). Europa? Zur Kulturgeschichte einer Idee. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann. 327‒347.
Bieber, F. (2020). Global Nationalism in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Nationalities Papers, 1−13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/nps.2020.35
Brugman, B. C.‒ Burgers, C. & Vis, B. (2019). Metaphorical framing in political discourse through words vs. concepts: A meta-analysis. Language and Cognition, 11,1. 41−65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2019.5
Burgers, C.‒ Konijn, E. A. & Geerard J. S. (2016). Figurative framing: Shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony. Communication theory, 26,4. 410−430. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12096
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in Educational Discourse. London: Continuum.
Cameron, L. (2007). Confrontation or complementarity: Metaphor in language use and cognitive metaphor theory. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 5.107−135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.5.06cam
Cameron, L.‒ Maslen, R.‒ Zazie, T.‒Maule, J.‒ Stratton, P. & Stanley, N. (2009). The discourse dynamics approach to metaphor and metaphor-led discourse analysis, Metaphor and Symbol 24,2. 638−9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480902830821
Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43,4. 51−58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
Flusberg, S. J.‒Matlock, T.‒ Thibodeau, P. T. (2018). War metaphors in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol , 33,1. 1−18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1407992
Gibbs, R. W. (2014). Conceptual Metaphor in Thought and Social Action. In: Landau, M. J.‒Robinson, M. D. & Meier, B. P. (eds.), (2014). The Power of Metaphor. Examining Its Influence on Social Life. Washinton DC: American Psychologocal Association. 17−40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/14278-002
Grady, J.‒ Johnson, C. (2002). Converging evidence for the notions of subscene and primary scene. In: Dirven, R.‒ Pörings, R. (eds.), (2002). Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 533−554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219197.4.533
Koller, V. (2008). Brothers in arms: Contradictory metaphors in contemporary marketing discourse. In: Zanotto, M. S.‒ Cameron, L. & Cavalcanti, M. C. (eds), (2008). Confronting Metaphor in Use: An Applied Linguistic Approach. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 103−125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.173.08kol
Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in culture: Universality and variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614408
Kövesces, Z. (2017). Conceptual metaphor theory. In: Semino, E.‒ Demjén, Z. (eds.), (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Metaphor and Language. London: Routledge. 13−27.
Kranert, M.‒Attolino, P.‒ Berrocal, M.‒Bonatti, J. A.‒Santos, S. G. S.‒Henaku, N.‒Lezou Koffi, A-D.‒ Marziani, C.‒ Mažeikienė, V.‒ Pérez, D. O.‒Kumaran R. & Salamurović, A. (2020). COVID-19: The World and the Words. Linguistic means and discursive constructions. DiscourseNet Collaborative Working Paper Series 2/9, Special Issue: Discourse Studies Essays on the Corona Crisis. Accessed 15 January 2022, at https://discourseanalysis.net/dncwps.
Krennmayr, T. (2011). Metaphor in Newspaper. Utrecht: LOT Vrije University.
Lakoff, G.‒Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff, G.‒ Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh. The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic Books
Mundwiler, V. (2013). Catch it, bin it, kill it: on the metaphorical conceptualisation of the 2009 swine flu pandemic in British media texts. Metaphorik.de 24. Accessed 15 January 2022, at https://www.metaphorik.de/de/journal/24/catch-it-bin-it-kill-it-metaphorical-conceptualisation-2009-swine-flu-pandemic-british-media-texts.html.
Pinero-Pinero, G. (2017). A Matrix of Cognitive Domains at the Service of the Metaphoric Delegitimisation of Politicians. Discourse, Context & Media, 18, 20−30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.04.004
Semino, E. (2008). Metphor in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Semino E., ‒Demjén, Z.‒ Demmen, J.‒Koller, V.‒ Payne, S.‒Hardie Andrew & Rayson, P. (2017). The online use of Violence and Journey metaphors by patients with cancer, as compared with health professionals: a mixed methods study. BMJ supportive & palliative care 7,1, 60−66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000785
Semino E. (2021). ‘Not Soldiers but Fire-fighters” – Metaphors and Covid-19.’ Health Communication, 36, 1, 50−58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989
Sontag, S. (1979). Illness as Metaphor. London: Allen Lane.
Sopory, P.‒Dillard, J. P. (2002). ‘Figurative language and persuasion’. In: James Price Dillard & Michael Pfau (eds.), (2002). The persuasion handbook: Developments in theory and practice. New York: Sage Publishing. 407−426. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412976046.n21
Steen, G.J. (2005). ‘Basic Discourse Acts: Towards a Psychological Theory of Discourse Segmentation’. In: Ruíz de Mendoza Ibañez, F.J., & Peña Cervel, M.S. (eds.), (2005). Cognitive Linguistics, Functionalism, Discourse Studies: Common Ground and New Directions. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 283–312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197716.4.283
Steen, G. J. (2007). Finding metaphor in grammar and usage. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.10
Steen, G. J. (2009). From linguistic form to conceptual structure in five steps: analyzing metaphor in poetry. In Brône, G.‒ Vandaele, J. (eds.), (2009). Cognitive poetics. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 197−226.
Stefanowitsch, A.‒Gries, S. Th. (2006). Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199895
Thibodeau, P. H.‒ Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning. PLoS ONE, 6(2): e16782. Accessed 15 January 2022, at https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
Van Stee, S. K. (2018). A meta-analysis of the persuasive effects of metaphorical vs. literal messages. Communication Studies 69. 545−566. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2018.1457553
Wicke, P.‒ Bolognesi, M. M. (2020). Framing COVID-19: How we conceptualize and discuss the pandemic on Twitter. PloS ONE, 15,9. Accessed 15 January 2022, at https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0240010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240010
Yang, Z. (2020). Military metaphors in contemporary Chinese disease coverage: a case study of the People’s Daily, 1946–2019. Chinese Journal of Communication. 1−19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2020.1818593