The article examines cross-cultural aspects of metaphorical framing in political discourse. The author notes the importance of conceptual metaphor in framing the conceptual domain of politics, political discourse as a whole, its perception as well as political reality itself. The author shares an opinion that the metaphorical structure of basic concepts of a nation always correlates with its fundamental cultural values. However, the examination of political discourse from the cross-cultural perspective reveals the cases of metaphor uses that don’t meet the requirements of cultural coherence and may lead to negative cognitive and communicative consequences. Along with admitting a wide discrepancy between metaphorical models in western and oriental political discourse, the author gives some examples of metaphorical coherence as well as its violation in a number of basic metaphors in American, British and Russian political discourse. To illustrate how cross-cultural factors determine the specific character of metaphorical framing, the article analyses the dynamic character of metaphorical models that can realize diverse scenarios in different national varieties of political discourse. An observation is made about the dependence of metaphoric scenarios in different national varieties of political discourse on the cultural, historical, social and political components of the national cultural cognitive map. The latter is heterogeneous as it is structured by the objectified individual, group, and national verbal and nonverbal experience. This explains, for instance, why there are examples of similarity as well as discrepancy between metaphorical framing in ideologically different party varieties of political discourse within the national political discourse as well as in the rhetoric of politicians belonging to different generations. The observations are illustrated by cross-linguistic data proving the dynamic character of metaphorical models, their variability and potential for conveying new meaning nuances that reflect culture-specific characteristics of the political situation in discourse.
Key words: cross-cultural, political discourse, political metaphorology, metaphorical framing, evolutionary metaphorical model.
References
1. Baranov A.N., Karaulov Y.N. Slovar’ russkih politicheskih metafor [Dictionary of Russian Political Metaphors]. Moscow, Pomovsky i Partnyory Publ., 1994. 351 p. (In Russian).
2. Belyaevskaya E.G., Malyar T.N. Printsypy minimizatsii interferentsii rodnogo yazyka pri obuchenii inostrannomu yazyku (kontseptual’nye struktury prostranstva i vremeni v angliyskom i russkom yazykah) [minimization
of native tongue interference in teaching a foreign language]. Moscow, IPK MGLU “Rema” Publ., 2012. 180 p. (In Russian).
3. Budayev A.V., Chudinov A.P. Metodologicheskie grani politicheskoy metaforologii [Methodological Facets of Political Metaphorology]. Politicheskaya lingvistika - Political linguistics, no. 21(1), 2007, pp. 22-31 (In Russian).
4. Budayev A.V., Chudinov A.P. Kontseptual’naya metafora v politiicheskom diskurse: amerikanskiy, evropeyskiy i rossiyskiy varianty issledovaniya [Conceptual metaphor in political discourse: American, European and Russian
variants of research]. Politicheskaya lingvistika - Political linguistics, no. 17, 2006, pp. 35-70. (In Russian).
5. Chudinov A.P. Metaforicheskaya mozaika v sovremennoy politicheskoy kommunikatsii [Metaphorical Mosaic in Modern Political Communication]. Yekaterinburg, 2003. 248 p. (In Russian).
6. Chudinov A.P. Rossiya v Metaforicheskom zerkale: kognitivnoe issledovanie politicheskoy metafory [Russia in a metaphorical mirror: a cognitive study of political metaphor] (1991-2000). Yekaterinburg, 2001. 238 p. (In Russian).
7. Shmeleva T.V. Morbual’naya optika [Morbial optics]. Lingvistika: bulleten’ Ural’skogo lingvisticheskogo obschestva - Linguistics: Bulletin of Ural linguistic society, 2001, vol. 7, pp. 4-15. (In Russian).
8. Albritton D.W. When Metaphors Function as Schemas: Some Cognitive Effect of Conceptual Metaphors. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity, 1995, no. 10 (1), pp. 33-46.
9. Chilton P., Ilyin M. Metaphor in Political Discourse: The Case of the `Common European House'. Discourse and Society, 1993, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 7-31.
10. Koteyko N., Ryazanova-Clarke L. The Path and Building Metaphors in the Speeches of Vladimir Putin: Back to the Future? Slavonica, vol. 15, no. 2, 2009, pp. 112–127.
11. Lakoff G. Moral politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals Don't. University of Chicago Press, 1996. 413 p.
12. Lakoff G. The Political Mind: Why You Can't Understand 21st-Century American Politics with an 18th-Century Brain. Viking Adult, 2008. 292 p.
13. Lakoff G. The All New Don't Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Chelsea Green Publishing, 2014. 192. p.
14. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphor We Live By. University of Chicago Press, 2003. 256 p.
15. Lewis B. The Political Language of Islam. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988. 168 p.
16. Metaphor and Intercultural Communication. Ed. by Musolff A., MacArthur F., Pagani G. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2014. 233 p.
17. Musolff A. Metaphor and conceptual evolution. Metaphorik.de, no. 7, 2004, pp. 55-75.
18. Musolff A. Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. 224 p.
19. Musolff A. Political Imagery of Europe: A House Without Exit Doors? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 2000, no. 21 (3), pp. 216-229.
20. Musolff A. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. Bloomsbury Academic, 2016. 208 p.
21. Musolff A. Metaphor Interpretation and Cultural Linguistics. Language and Semiotic Studies, 2015, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 35-51.
