Page 168 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 168
What Do We Know about the World?
lyze in what way a metaphor corresponds to a given fragment of reality
or follow the merging of separate fields, by means of which it is possible
to explain something what is new through a reference to something al-
ready known, or we may have a revealing look at something already well
known but presented in a different than usual light due to the metaphor.
A metaphor is a main supportive frame of the communique since it is
able to structure ideas. It is also a very useful tool in constructing per-
suasive definitions, since it exposes or conceals selected contents (Char-
teris-Black, 2005; Musolff and Zinken, 2009; Cameron and Maslen,
2010). In this connection it is worth remembering that in the case of po-
litical rhetoric quite often we deal with a situation in which a new, ini-
tially effective metaphor loses quickly its persuasive thrust and by over-
use becomes sterile and thus of negligible cognitive and visual value,
as such cases were analyzed convincingly by Michael Biling and Katie
MacMillan (2005).
In the debates I have chosen I was interested in the metaphors play-
ing important roles in arguments of both sides of the conflict regard-
less of the degree of the metaphor‘s complexity. Additionally the de-
vices used by the politicians I treat as intentional actions rather than
as an expression of subconsciously coded cultural patterns or ideologi-
cal schemata. Naturally it is necessary to consider the fact that such fac-
tors as political orientation, biography or upbringing influence stylistic
and cognitive choices made by politicians. It is also worth considering
that in political rhetoric it is usually more important who listens than
who speaks. Biblical analogies in the mouth of the conservative politi-
cian may be closer to the imagination and value system of his potential
voters than himself. Therefore the cognitive approach attempting to an-
swer the question what a given metaphor changes in the way of think-
ing is useful first of all in the studies of communication effects. Hence,
in the cases referred to below it matters more to find the connection be-
tween the image used and its place in the adopted argumentative tactics
(Plantin, 2009).
3. How to Define Crisis?
In analyzed debates the participants were representatives of the par-
liamentarian clubs of the most important Polish parties. The coalition
government is made up of the two parties; Citizens’ Platform (PO) and
the Polish Peasant Party (PSL). The first one is the center liberal par-
ty universally associated (although not necessarily reflecting the actu-
al facts) with young, entrepreneurial citizens, rather than with wealth-
lyze in what way a metaphor corresponds to a given fragment of reality
or follow the merging of separate fields, by means of which it is possible
to explain something what is new through a reference to something al-
ready known, or we may have a revealing look at something already well
known but presented in a different than usual light due to the metaphor.
A metaphor is a main supportive frame of the communique since it is
able to structure ideas. It is also a very useful tool in constructing per-
suasive definitions, since it exposes or conceals selected contents (Char-
teris-Black, 2005; Musolff and Zinken, 2009; Cameron and Maslen,
2010). In this connection it is worth remembering that in the case of po-
litical rhetoric quite often we deal with a situation in which a new, ini-
tially effective metaphor loses quickly its persuasive thrust and by over-
use becomes sterile and thus of negligible cognitive and visual value,
as such cases were analyzed convincingly by Michael Biling and Katie
MacMillan (2005).
In the debates I have chosen I was interested in the metaphors play-
ing important roles in arguments of both sides of the conflict regard-
less of the degree of the metaphor‘s complexity. Additionally the de-
vices used by the politicians I treat as intentional actions rather than
as an expression of subconsciously coded cultural patterns or ideologi-
cal schemata. Naturally it is necessary to consider the fact that such fac-
tors as political orientation, biography or upbringing influence stylistic
and cognitive choices made by politicians. It is also worth considering
that in political rhetoric it is usually more important who listens than
who speaks. Biblical analogies in the mouth of the conservative politi-
cian may be closer to the imagination and value system of his potential
voters than himself. Therefore the cognitive approach attempting to an-
swer the question what a given metaphor changes in the way of think-
ing is useful first of all in the studies of communication effects. Hence,
in the cases referred to below it matters more to find the connection be-
tween the image used and its place in the adopted argumentative tactics
(Plantin, 2009).
3. How to Define Crisis?
In analyzed debates the participants were representatives of the par-
liamentarian clubs of the most important Polish parties. The coalition
government is made up of the two parties; Citizens’ Platform (PO) and
the Polish Peasant Party (PSL). The first one is the center liberal par-
ty universally associated (although not necessarily reflecting the actu-
al facts) with young, entrepreneurial citizens, rather than with wealth-
