Milena Podolšak. Photo: private.

Research on metaphorical language, particularly in political discourse, has largely focused on the similarities between source and target domains, often emphasizing the continuity between the concrete and the abstract. While these studies have provided valuable insights, less attention has been given to the differences between counterpart metaphorical and non-metaphorical concepts. Situated within Cognitive Linguistics, this dissertation investigates how conventionalized expressions of metaphorical motion in political speeches differ from the typical signalling of non-metaphorical motion in general language use, and what these differences reveal about the mechanisms of metaphorical meaning-making. Through corpus-based analysis, the study investigates conventionalized linguistic patterns and describes the differences between concrete and abstract motion, explaining them from the perspective of political rhetoric. More specifically, metaphorical lexicogrammatical constructions in political speeches are juxtaposed with their concrete counterparts in lexicographic sources and a comparison corpus. The analysis draws on the theoretical and methodological frameworks of Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Blending Theory, Holistic Spatial Semantics, and Construction Grammar. Additionally, connotation and semantic prosody are examined to uncover evaluative patterns in metaphorical usage.

Photo on cover: Andrii Yalanskyi, MostPhotos.

The analysis focuses on three types of discrepancies between the source domain of concrete motion and the blended space of abstract motion in politics: systemic omissions of elements from the source domain, prominence shifts in the elements projected to the blend, and structure in the blend that cannot be traced back to the source domain and/or is incompatible with it. Among these, prominence shifts emerge as the most frequent. The findings demonstrate that metaphorical meaning should be seen as co-constructed by both the source and the target domains, rather than simply being transferred from one domain to the other. The analysis also shows that conventionalized motion-related metaphorical language tends to be more constrained compared to non-metaphorical motion-related language. The reason for conceptual discrepancies, as well as lexicogrammatical restriction, can be found in the rhetorical goals of political persuasion, with focus on future orientation, morality, dichotomy, and (de)legitimization. By systematically identifying discrepancies as indicators of conceptual integration of the two domains, this dissertation contributes to a deeper understanding of how metaphors operate in political discourse and in general language use, offering new insights into the mechanisms that shape metaphorical meaning.

Fulltext in Publication database DiVA: Motion Metaphors in Swedish Political Speeches