Metaphors and Metonymy in Politics. Selected Aspects

Chapter 2 Metaphor in Politics

As seen in chapter 1, metaphors are directly connected with our speech. Debates are also better to analyse, because, apart from basic preparation, most of what is being said, is spontaneous. Which, linguistically, is more valid, and so it is more useful for this work.
The aim of this chapter is to present and then to analyse the use of metaphors and metonymies during Presidential debates. The main subject matter, or the question that is answered in this chapter is how does a politician speak to his voters, and how does it differ from the way he speaks to people who are supporters of his fellow candidate. There is a considerable difference in the choice of vocabulary used is the two situations. American politics is a phenomenon which illustrates this perfectly due to the characteristic form of their political elections. At first, each of the major party has to elect their candidate for the main election.
Thus, the so called primary debates are held. What this does, is it shows the duality of language. When a
Republican is speaking to other Republican candidates, with an audience comprised primarily of the GOP
(Grand Old Party – other name for the Republicans) supporters, he is sure to evoke the ‘classics’ i.e. the most successful and famous Republican Presidents. As it is shown, Ronald Reagan is the choice of the Right, and John F. Kennedy and Franklin D. Roosevelt are the people most often mentioned by the Left. However, as a side note, I want to turn to one detail of discussing politics. Namely, the supporters. Supporters meaning voters, but also people who are for a political bill. It can be supported by the voices of America, it can also mean that some people support a policy.
This, however, shows just one spectrum of metaphorical expressions which are the subject of this paper. The other one is when we contrast two opposite worlds and discuss to what extent metaphors and metonymy can be used to sway the voters from the opponent’s side. This clash of ideas gives a plethora of information and materials for this work, which are analysed. In chapter 2.1 and 2.2 I discuss the first problem, namely, politicians talking to their own voters, and discussing matters in their own ‘environment’. In chapter 2.3 the metaphors used to talk to a different voter are expressed and discussed.
Later in this work, there is also focus put on how politicians need to describe some unpopular decisions to their voters. What structures are used, and what words are carefully chosen for such an event. The question of how to hide unpleasant facts is answered as well.