夸张与情绪化:谚语和隐喻在“脱欧”辩论中的语用效果升级

IF 1.5 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Russian Journal of Linguistics Pub Date : 2021-12-15 DOI:10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-3-628-644
A. Musolff
{"title":"夸张与情绪化:谚语和隐喻在“脱欧”辩论中的语用效果升级","authors":"A. Musolff","doi":"10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-3-628-644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"(How) Can the use of hyperbole in metaphorical idioms and scenarios contribute to an increase in emotionalisation of public debates? Using a research corpus of quotations from British politicians speeches and interviews and of press texts 2016-2020, this paper investigates hyperbolic formulations in Brexit-related applications of the proverb You cannot have your cake and eat it and related scenarios of national liberation, which appear to have strongly boosted emotionalised public debates. For instance, Brexit proponents reversal of the cake proverb into the assertion, We can have our cake and eat it, and their figurative interpretation of Brexit as a war of liberation (against the EU) triggered highly emotional reactions: triumphant affirmation among followers, fear and resentment among opponents. The paper argues that the combination of figurative speech (proverb, metaphor) with hyperbole heightened the emotional and polemical impact of the pro-Brexit argument. Whilst this effect may be deemed to have been rhetorically successful in the short term (e.g. in referendum and election campaigns), its long-term effect on political discourse is more ambivalent, for it leads to a polarisation and radicalisation of political discourse in Britain (as evidenced, for instance, in the massive use of hyperbole in COVID-19 debates). The study of hyperbole as a means of emotionalisation thus seems most promising as part of a discourse-historical investigation of socio-pragmatic effects of figurative (mainly, metaphorical) language use, rather than as an isolated, one-off rhetorical phenomenon.","PeriodicalId":53426,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Linguistics","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hyperbole and emotionalisation: Escalation of pragmatic effects of proverb and metaphor in the “Brexit” debate\",\"authors\":\"A. Musolff\",\"doi\":\"10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-3-628-644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"(How) Can the use of hyperbole in metaphorical idioms and scenarios contribute to an increase in emotionalisation of public debates? Using a research corpus of quotations from British politicians speeches and interviews and of press texts 2016-2020, this paper investigates hyperbolic formulations in Brexit-related applications of the proverb You cannot have your cake and eat it and related scenarios of national liberation, which appear to have strongly boosted emotionalised public debates. For instance, Brexit proponents reversal of the cake proverb into the assertion, We can have our cake and eat it, and their figurative interpretation of Brexit as a war of liberation (against the EU) triggered highly emotional reactions: triumphant affirmation among followers, fear and resentment among opponents. The paper argues that the combination of figurative speech (proverb, metaphor) with hyperbole heightened the emotional and polemical impact of the pro-Brexit argument. Whilst this effect may be deemed to have been rhetorically successful in the short term (e.g. in referendum and election campaigns), its long-term effect on political discourse is more ambivalent, for it leads to a polarisation and radicalisation of political discourse in Britain (as evidenced, for instance, in the massive use of hyperbole in COVID-19 debates). The study of hyperbole as a means of emotionalisation thus seems most promising as part of a discourse-historical investigation of socio-pragmatic effects of figurative (mainly, metaphorical) language use, rather than as an isolated, one-off rhetorical phenomenon.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53426,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Russian Journal of Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Russian Journal of Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-3-628-644\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Russian Journal of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2021-25-3-628-644","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

在隐喻性成语和场景中使用夸张手法如何有助于增加公共辩论的情绪化?本文利用2016-2020年英国政治家演讲、采访和新闻文本引文的研究语料库,研究了“你不能鱼与熊食”这句谚语在英国脱欧相关应用中的夸张表述,以及民族解放的相关场景,这些场景似乎强烈地推动了情绪化的公共辩论。例如,脱欧支持者将蛋糕谚语逆转为“我们可以拥有我们的蛋糕并吃掉它”,他们将脱欧比喻为一场解放战争(反对欧盟),引发了高度的情绪反应:支持者的胜利肯定,反对者的恐惧和怨恨。本文认为,比喻性语言(谚语、隐喻)与夸张的结合增强了支持英国脱欧的论点的情感和辩论影响。虽然这种影响在短期内(例如在公投和竞选活动中)可能被认为在修辞上是成功的,但它对政治话语的长期影响则更加矛盾,因为它导致英国政治话语的两极分化和激进化(例如,在COVID-19辩论中大量使用夸张就证明了这一点)。因此,作为一种情感化手段的夸张研究似乎最有希望作为比喻(主要是隐喻)语言使用的社会语用效果的话语历史调查的一部分,而不是作为一个孤立的、一次性的修辞现象。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hyperbole and emotionalisation: Escalation of pragmatic effects of proverb and metaphor in the “Brexit” debate
(How) Can the use of hyperbole in metaphorical idioms and scenarios contribute to an increase in emotionalisation of public debates? Using a research corpus of quotations from British politicians speeches and interviews and of press texts 2016-2020, this paper investigates hyperbolic formulations in Brexit-related applications of the proverb You cannot have your cake and eat it and related scenarios of national liberation, which appear to have strongly boosted emotionalised public debates. For instance, Brexit proponents reversal of the cake proverb into the assertion, We can have our cake and eat it, and their figurative interpretation of Brexit as a war of liberation (against the EU) triggered highly emotional reactions: triumphant affirmation among followers, fear and resentment among opponents. The paper argues that the combination of figurative speech (proverb, metaphor) with hyperbole heightened the emotional and polemical impact of the pro-Brexit argument. Whilst this effect may be deemed to have been rhetorically successful in the short term (e.g. in referendum and election campaigns), its long-term effect on political discourse is more ambivalent, for it leads to a polarisation and radicalisation of political discourse in Britain (as evidenced, for instance, in the massive use of hyperbole in COVID-19 debates). The study of hyperbole as a means of emotionalisation thus seems most promising as part of a discourse-historical investigation of socio-pragmatic effects of figurative (mainly, metaphorical) language use, rather than as an isolated, one-off rhetorical phenomenon.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Russian Journal of Linguistics
Russian Journal of Linguistics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
33.30%
发文量
43
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
Linguistic pluricentrism and the Russian language Picture naming test: Linguistic challenges of the method and ways to solve them Cognitive complexity measures for educational texts: Empirical validation of linguistic parameters The image of Russia through animal metaphors: A diachronic case study of American media discourse The gentle craft of saying “No” in Persian and English: A cross-cultural and cross-linguistic slant
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1