This paper is investigating how metaphors are used in political speeches to achieve persuasion. By analyzing three speeches dealing with the 2003 Iraq war delivered by Bush, Blair and Howard, I try to find out the similarities and differences in how metaphors are constructed; how they are used as a persuasive technique; and lastly if the different military contribution of the three countries affected how metaphors are constructed. The main theory used in this study is Critical Metaphor Analysis suggested by Charteris-Black (2011). The analysis suggests that the speeches contain different kinds of metaphors like THE-STATE-AS-PERSON metaphor, the POLITICS IS BUSINESS metaphor and JOURNEY metaphors. The analysis also suggests that Bush, Blair and Howard make use of THE FAIRY TALE OF THE JUST WAR scenario as well as THE RULER-FOR-STATE metonym. Metaphors are generally found to be used in a similar way in order to show that the politicians are ‘right’. Still, there are some differences that could be attributed to the different military contributions of the countries and their different roles in the war.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:umu-127562 |
| Date | January 2016 |
| Creators | Esmail, Shaymaa |
| Publisher | Umeå universitet, Institutionen för språkstudier |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds