Page 187 - 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. 187
the political discourse on croatia’s eu accession 187
Europhobes Europhiles
Entering the EU brings danger and a lack of The EU means stability, investments, higher
perspective (M. Bošnjak, representative of ci- standards in defending human rights and a
vil organization “EU – No, thank you”) better life for our families (V. Pusić, foreign
affairs minister)
The EU is not fulfilling its promises (R. Šikić, Croatia is becoming an important part of
representative of civil organization “I love the most influential Union in international po-
Croatia”) litics (A. Plenković, state secretary for Euro-
pean integrations)
We must fight the ideology of consumerism (B. We have reached a historic dream of the Cro-
Lukšić, representative of civil organization atian people (G. Jandroković, former foreign
“Truth about EU”) affairs minister)
They are selling national interests to imperiali- Croatia is fulfilling its goal by becoming a
sts such as the USA (M. Francisković, repre- member of EU, and that is happiness and good
sentative of civil organization “Be brave”) life (Z. Milanović, prime minister)
Differences between supporters and opponents of the EU are re-
flected in the figures of speech, especially metaphor. Figurative language
in political discourse has been of great interest for many scholars, regard-
less of the differences in their approaches. For instance, Norrick (2001:
78) uses a semantic approach, and attempts to demonstrate how an anal-
ysis of figures of speech in specific discourse contexts can contribute to
our understanding of figurative language. Proponents of Conceptual
Metaphor Theory such as Grady et al. (1999) hold that the metaphori-
cal meaning occurs in conceptual predication (some A is conceptualized
in terms of B) when source and target domains are different. Although
much of the research on hyperbole, tautology and paradox has been un-
dertaken within semantic theory, metaphor has often been of central in-
terest in CDA. CDA considers metaphor as the most important figure
of speech because of its connection to ideology. Fairclough (1989: 119)
concludes that “any aspect of experience can be represented in terms of
any number of metaphors, and it is the relationship between alternative
metaphors that is of particular interest [...] for different metaphors have
different ideological attachments.”
Analysis of metaphors used in political speeches shows differences
between Europhobes and Europhiles being reflected in the source of a
metaphor. For Europhobes, the source of a metaphor is often the Book
of Genesis, Christianity and history in general. The European Union
is compared with the Tower of Babel which, according to the Book of
Genesis, had been built by Noah’s descendants (who spoke a single lan-
Europhobes Europhiles
Entering the EU brings danger and a lack of The EU means stability, investments, higher
perspective (M. Bošnjak, representative of ci- standards in defending human rights and a
vil organization “EU – No, thank you”) better life for our families (V. Pusić, foreign
affairs minister)
The EU is not fulfilling its promises (R. Šikić, Croatia is becoming an important part of
representative of civil organization “I love the most influential Union in international po-
Croatia”) litics (A. Plenković, state secretary for Euro-
pean integrations)
We must fight the ideology of consumerism (B. We have reached a historic dream of the Cro-
Lukšić, representative of civil organization atian people (G. Jandroković, former foreign
“Truth about EU”) affairs minister)
They are selling national interests to imperiali- Croatia is fulfilling its goal by becoming a
sts such as the USA (M. Francisković, repre- member of EU, and that is happiness and good
sentative of civil organization “Be brave”) life (Z. Milanović, prime minister)
Differences between supporters and opponents of the EU are re-
flected in the figures of speech, especially metaphor. Figurative language
in political discourse has been of great interest for many scholars, regard-
less of the differences in their approaches. For instance, Norrick (2001:
78) uses a semantic approach, and attempts to demonstrate how an anal-
ysis of figures of speech in specific discourse contexts can contribute to
our understanding of figurative language. Proponents of Conceptual
Metaphor Theory such as Grady et al. (1999) hold that the metaphori-
cal meaning occurs in conceptual predication (some A is conceptualized
in terms of B) when source and target domains are different. Although
much of the research on hyperbole, tautology and paradox has been un-
dertaken within semantic theory, metaphor has often been of central in-
terest in CDA. CDA considers metaphor as the most important figure
of speech because of its connection to ideology. Fairclough (1989: 119)
concludes that “any aspect of experience can be represented in terms of
any number of metaphors, and it is the relationship between alternative
metaphors that is of particular interest [...] for different metaphors have
different ideological attachments.”
Analysis of metaphors used in political speeches shows differences
between Europhobes and Europhiles being reflected in the source of a
metaphor. For Europhobes, the source of a metaphor is often the Book
of Genesis, Christianity and history in general. The European Union
is compared with the Tower of Babel which, according to the Book of
Genesis, had been built by Noah’s descendants (who spoke a single lan-
