Document Type : Research

Author

Department of Linguistics- Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages- Payame Noor University- Tehran- Iran

Abstract

INTRODUCTION
Critical Metaphor Theory is an approach to the study of metaphors in order to identify the intentions and ideologies behind language use. Chartris-Black (2005) believes that metaphor, myth, and ideology have persuasive function in discourse, especially in political texts. The systematic use of metaphor is part of an ideology because metaphor mediates between myth and ideology and facilitates the persuasive objectives of political discourse. Metaphor is an important characteristic of persuasive discourse because it mediates between cognition and emotion to create a moral perspective on life. Hence, it is a central strategy for legitimization in political discourse. This research is devised to discover how conceptual metaphors in political texts prompt political myths and communicate ideologies via language used in Iran''s Political Newspapers headlines. To do so, the Chartris-Black (2005) is utilized as the theoretical background of the research.

METHOD
Taking this approach (Chartris-Black 2005) into account, this article aims at the study of the role of conceptual metaphors in the creation of myth and ideology. The research objective is to explain the relationship between conceptual metaphor, myth and ideology in political discourse of election. The question is how the existing metaphors in newspapers election headlines can create political myth and ideology and legitimate the SELF and illegitimate the Other, and persuade the readers to elect the Self candidate. The research data were extracted from the election headlines of 12 political newspapers during a two-month period of 2017 presidential election in Iran. Having analysed 12 selected newspapers (belonging to the Conservatives and Reformists political trends in Iran) during two months advertisements of 2017 presidential election, this research found a number of conceptual metaphors like MORALITY, RELIGION, WALL, HERO, and KEY according to metaphor identification procedures of Pragglejaz Group (2007). Then, the research explores how these conceptual metaphors create imaginative unreal narrations about the Self and the Other. It is hypothesized that the emergence of metaphors in language can evoke the audiences'' feelings by narrating the myths instead of making them aware by telling the truth. In other words, metaphors can mediate myths and ideology and guarantee the favorite actions of discourse makers.

FINDINGS
The metaphorical expressions analyzed here represent a number of metaphors, including MORALITY, RELIGION, WALL, HERO, and KEY metaphors, all of them prompt a mythical unreal story about the SELF and the OTHER which cannot be verified. In other words, this research found that conceptual metaphors can create political myths for evaluating the SELF and the OTHER presidential candidates. As Chartris- Black (2005) predicts leaders employ ethical language as a basis for emotional invitation to share a perception of what is right and wrong. In the headlines evaluated here, mostly the quotations of politicians, they try to show the SELF ideology as the right one and the OTHER ideology as the wrong one through metaphors like POLITICA AS MORALITY/RELIGION and POLITICAL ACTIVITIES ARE MORAL/RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES (like Jihad). WALL metaphor creates a myth about the gender discrimination. A myth that pave the way to legitimate the SELF (as its opponent) and the OTHER as its very proponent. In both types of political newspapers, HERO metaphor creates a space in which SELF is a a brave hero. By Using KEY metaphor, the discourse makers create a myth of a country with lots of problems and the SELF savior who opens the doors and solve the problems. In all these cases metaphor act as a linguistic or rhetorical tool  for myth creation, then replace the real facts of election by the unreal story –like events to evoke the readers emotions instead of expressing knowledge and social awareness.   The resulting myths evoke the discourse makers'' favorite emotions in the readers, like making them interested in the Self and hatred from the Other, and eventually lead to the creation of the wished ideology of that medium. This is along with legitimating the Self and illegitimating the Other and persuading the addressees to elect the Self ideology.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This analysis illustrates that the emergence of cognitive metaphors in language can evoke the audiences'' feelings by narrating the myths instead of making them aware through telling them the truth. In other words, metaphors can mediate myths and ideology and guarantee the favorite actions of discourse makers. Therefore, metaphor can be used in different ways at the service of legitimating the SELF and illegitimating the OTHER as two competing ideologies. Critical Metaphor Analysis present a methodology for the analysis and interpretation of ideology and exhibits how legitimisation is performed linguistically.

Keywords

  1. Al-Harrasi, A. N. K. (2001). Metaphor in (Arabic-Into-English) translation with specific reference to metaphorical concepts and xpressions in political discourse( Doctoraldissertation). Aston Univerity, Aston, United Kingdom.
  2. Beer, F. A. & C. Landtsheer. (2004). Metaphorical world politics: rhethorics of democracy, war and globalization. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
  3. Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambrige: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Burkholder, T. R. & Henry, D. (2009). Criticism of metaphor. In J.A. Kuypers (Ed.), Rhetorical criticism: Perspectives in action (pp. 97-114). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
  5. Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
  6. Charteris-Black, J. (2011). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
  7. Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.
  8. Chilton, P., & Lakoff, G. (1995). Foreign policy by metaphor. In Christina Schaffner and Anita L. Wenden (Eds.), Language and peace (pp. 37-60. Aldershot: Darmouth.
  9. Drulak, P. (2006). Motion, container and equilibrium: Metaphors in the discourse about European integration. European Journal of International Relations, 12 (4), 499-531.
  10. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London & NewYork: Longman.
  11. Fowler, R. (1991). Language in the news: Discourse and ideology in the press. London: Routledge.
  12. Goatly, A. (2007). Washing the brain: Metaphor and hidden ideology. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  13. Knowles, M., & R. Moon (2005). Introducing metaphor. London and New York: Routledge.
  14. Kovecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. NewYork: Oxford University Press.
  15. Kovecses, Z. (2014) A practical introduction on metaphor (S. Pourebrahim, Trans.). Tehran: SAMT [In Persian].
  16. Lakoff, G. (1996). Moral politics: What conservatives know that liberals don’t. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
  17. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  18. Merelman, R. M. (1986). Revitalizing political socialization. In M. G. Hermann (Ed.), Political Psychology (pp. 279–319). San Francisco: Josset-Bass.
  19. Milliken, J. (1999). The study of discourse in international relations: Acritique of research and methods. European Journal of International, 5(2), 225–254.
  20. Mio, J. S. (1997). Metaphor and politics. Metaphor and Symbol, 12 (2), 113-33.
  21. Moshirzadeh, H., & Hamoei, F. (2012). Britain’s European policy discourse: Ametaphoric analysis. International Political Research, 4(12), 1-39. [In Persian].
  22. Musolff, A. (1995). Promising to end a war = language of peace? The rhetoric of allied news management in the Gulf War 1991. In C. Sch¨affner and A. L. Wenden (Eds)., Language and peace (pp. 93–110). Aldershot: Dartmouth.
  23. Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in bebates about Euorope. New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
  24. Musolff, A. (2012). The study of metaphor as part of critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies, 9 (3), 301-310.
  25. n. (2017). rectitude is the most important characteristic of government. Islamic Republican, 1 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  26. n.n. (2017) Rouhani has come this time with a bunch of keys. Etemad, 16 May 2017, 10 [In Persian].
  27. n.n. (2017) Rouhani saved the country from regression. Islamic Republican, 1 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  28.   n.n. (2017) Sacred dress on the body of customary politics. Etemad, 8 May 2017, 1 [In Persian].
  29. n.n. (2017) The president is keeping his half-baked promises: spiritual promises on the scales, Etemad, 22 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  30. n.n. (2017) You know and the Lord of promises. Kayhan, 16 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  31. n.n. (2017). A firerider going out of this fence / to let the new sun take the night out on its own: you must be free with those who do not vote. Etmad, 10 May 2017, 16 [In Persian].
  32.  n.n. (2017). Again crusade: Qalibaf built a bridge to the depth of the holy defense trenches, Javaneemrooz, 16 May 2017, 1 [In Persian].
  33. n.n. (2017). An exemplary insight of Ghalibaf. Vatanemrooz, 17 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  34. n.n. (2017). Do not come, they will build a wall between men and women. Etemad, 9 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  35. n.n. (2017). Here is the land of bridges, not walls. Etemad, 15 May 2017, 1 [In Persian].
  36. n.n. (2017). It is not possible to reach to justice roof by a ladder of lie. Islamic Republican, 9 April 2017, 1 [In Persian].
  37. n.n. (2017). Oh women do not vote for the building-walls. Aftab Yazd, 16 May 2017, 16 [In Persian].
  38. n.n. (2017). Rouhani is out of the way of honesty. Javaneemrooz,15 May 2017, 5 [In Persian].
  39. n.n. (2017). Snobbish government of national threat. Vatanemrooz, 9 May 2017, 1 [In Persian].
  40. n.n. (2017). They want to draw a wall between 4 years of performance and the realities. Honestly, say that we do not have a plan for the country. Kayhan, 13 May 2017, 2 [In Persian].
  41. n.n. (2017). Today we need an anti-lie crusade. Quds,11 May 2017, 4 [In Persian].
  42. n.n. (2017). We are building a wall between plundering the economy and the rights of the people. Quds, 11 May 2017, 4 [In Persian].
  43.  n.n. (2017). We vote for Rouhani to take the ship in the middle of the sea. Shargh, 17 May 2017, 13 [In Persian].
  44. n.n. (2017). Why Shah Sultan Husseins are the enemy of religious democracy: Appreciation of the people''s vote with the courage of agents against the enemy. Javaneemrooz, 20 May 2017, 5 [In Persian].
  45. Rezapour, E., Aghagolzadeh, F. (2012). The role of metaphor in glorification and marginalization of ideology in local newspapers.Journal of Language Research, 4 (7), 67-94. [In Persian].
  46. Schaffner, C. (1995). The “Balance” metaphor in relation to peace. In C. Schaffner and A. L. Wenden (Eds.), Language and peace (pp. 75–92). Aldershot: Dartmouth.
  47. Shahri B. (2012). Metaphor and ideology. Literary Criticism Quarterly. 5 (19), 121-150. [In Persian].
  48. Soltani, B., & Fazeli, F. (2015). The Persuasive model of metaphor in the socio-political discourse: Alteration, suggestion and consolidation of socio-political Perspectives. Literary Criticism Quarterly. 8 (31), 91-114. [In Persian].
  49. Van Dijk, T. A. (2002). Ideology: Political discourse and cognition. In P. A. Chilton & C. Schaffner (Eds.), Politics as text and talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse (pp. 203-237). John Benjamins: Amsterdam.