Encouraging Local Unity and Regional Solidarity: A Cross-audience Metaphor Analysis of Dr. Mahathir’s Business Speeches
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11113/lspi.v2n1.13Abstract
Metaphors are one of the most common discourse tools used by orators as a communication strategy to persuade, communicate with, and convey their ideologies to their audience. This power of metaphor comes from its ability to create a clear and vivid picture of a concept or a topic in the audience’s mind making the audience perceive that concept or topic as the orator wants them to. Thus the usage of metaphors seems to be bound to the audience in the first place. Hence, drawing upon Charteris-Black’s (2004) Critical Metaphor Analysis Approach, this study analyzed 10 national and 15 international business speeches delivered by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in the year 2000 in order to understand how ‘economic development’ as the main topic in both speech types was represented by metaphors across national and international audience. The findings revealed a significant relationship between the used metaphors and the addressed audience: metaphors of War, Unfair Game, and Miracle were used in international speeches to portray the economic gap between the developed and developing countries and to call for unity and solidarity among Southeast Asian countries; while metaphors of Plant, Cake/Pie, and Music were used in national speeches to call for Malaysians’ patience, trust in the government’s policies, and national harmony promising economic prosperity in return.References
Beard, A. 2005. The Language of Politics. Oxon: Routledge.
Charteris-Black, J. 2004. Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. New York: Macmillan.
Chiang, W. & Duann, R. 2007. Conceptual Metaphors for SARS: ‘war’ between whom? Discourse & Society. 18(5): 579-602.
David, M. K. & Dumanig, F. 2011. National Unity in Multi-ethnic Malaysia: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Tun Dr. Mahathir s
Political Speeches. Language, Discourse & Society: RC25 of the International Sociological Association of Language. 1 (1): 11-31.
De Leonardis, F. 2008. War as a Medicine: The Medical Metaphor in Contemporary Italian Political Language. Social Semiotics. 18 (1): 33–45.
Dedaić, M. N. 2006. Political Speech and Persuasive Argumentation. In K. Brown (Ed.). Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, (700–707). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Duranti, A. 2006. Narrating the Political Self. Language in Society. 35(4): 467–497.
Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Flowerdew, J. & Leong, S. 2007. Metaphors in the Discursive Construction of Patriotism: The Case of Hong Kong’s Constitutional Reform Debate. Discourse & Society. 18(3): 273–294.
Ghazali, K. 2004. The Rhetoric of Dr. Mahathir Mohamad: A Critical Discourse Perspective. Kuala Lumpur: University of Malaya
Press.
Haque, M. S. & Hassan Khan, M. 2004. Muslim Identity in the Speeches of Mahathir Mohamad, Intellectual Discourse. 12 (2):
–193.
Hobbs, P. (2008) Surging Ahead to a New Way Forward: The Metaphorical Foreshadowing of a Policy Shift. Discourse &
Communication. 2(1): 29–56.
Kennedy, V. 2000. Intended Tropes and Unintended Metatropes in Reporting on the War in Kosovo. Metaphor and Symbol. 15 (4): 253–265.
Kövecses, Z. 2010. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. 2
nd ed. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Lu, L. W. & Ahrens, K. 2008. Ideological Influence on BUILDING Metaphors in Taiwanese Presidential Speeches. Discourse & Society. 19(3): 383–408.
Mio, J. S., Riggio, R. E., Levin, S., & Reese, R. 2005. Presidential Leadership and Charisma: The Effects of Metaphor. The Leadership Quarterly. 16: 287–294.
Morris, M. W., Sheldon, O. J., Ames, D. R., & Young, M. J. 2007. Metaphors and the Market: Consequences and Preconditions of
Agent and Object Metaphors in Stock Market Commentary. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 102
(2): 174–192.
Mullins, W. A. 1972. On the Concept of Ideology in Political Science. The American Political Science Review. 66 (2): 498–510.
Sandikcioglu, E. 2000. More Metaphorical Warfare in the Gulf: Orientalist Frames and News Coverage. In Barcelona A. (Ed.).
Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads: A Cognitive Perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 199–320.
Santibáñez, C. 2010. Metaphors and Argumentation: The Case of Chilean Parliamentarian Media Participation. Journal of Pragmatics. 42(4): 973–989.
Simon-Vandenbergen, A. 1996. Image-Building Through Modality: The Case of Political Interviews. Discourse Society. 7(3): 389–415.
Steinert, H. 2003. The Indispensable Metaphor of War: On Populist Politics and the Contradictions of the State’s Monopoly of Force. Theoretical Criminology. 7(3): 265–291.
Van Dijk, T. A. 2006. Politics, Ideology, and Discourse. In K. Brown (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier. 728–740.
Van Dijk, T. A. 2009. Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd ed. London: Sage. 62–86.
Wee, L. 2001. Discover before Marriage in Singapore-Malaysia Relationship: The Invariance Principle at Work. Discourse and
Society. 12(4): 535–549.
Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. 2009. Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory, and Methodology. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (Eds.). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. 2nd ed. London: Sage. 1–33.
Wodak, R., De Cillia, R., Reisigl, M. & Liebhart, K. 1999. The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
