Article published In: Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 8:3 (2009) ► pp.416–432
Figurative language in international political discourse
The case of Iran
Published online: 15 December 2009
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.8.3.04sha
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.8.3.04sha
Figurative language is used in all domains of communication, including political discourse. And since figurative language is largely socio-culturally constructed it presents a significant locus for misinterpretation or even manipulation when it collides with the realm of international politics. This paper presents an analysis of several cases of the use of figurative language in Iranian political discourse. For example, it shows how transposing a Persian metaphor onto an English metaphor has led to a conceptual shift. Given the potential risks involved in misconstruing political discourse internationally, the paper concludes by calling for additional systematic comparative studies with respect to other languages.
References (25)
Adams, J. 2004. Father George? Brother John? The familial metaphor in presidential campaign discourse. Syracuse Post-Standard. Available at: [URL]
Anderson, R. D., Jr. 2002. The causal power of metaphor in politics. Available at: [URL]
Bates, B. R. 2004. Audiences, metaphors, and the Persian Gulf War. Communications Studies 55(3), 447—463.
Beer, F. A. and De Landtsheer, C. 2004. Metaphorical World Politics. East East: Michigan State University Press.
Bergen, B. 2003. To awaken a sleeping giant: Cognition and culture in September 11 political cartoons. In: M. Achard and S. Kemmer (eds). Language, Culture, and Mind. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications, 23—36.
Billig, M. and MacMillan, K. 2005. Metaphor, idiom and ideology: The search for ‘no smoking guns’ across time. Discourse and Society 16(4), 459—480.
Chilton, P. A. 1996. Security Metaphors. Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common House. New York: Peter Lang.
Chilton, P. A. and Ilyin, M. 1993. Metaphor in Political Discourse: The case of the ‘common European House’. Discourse and Society 4(1), 7—31.
Cibulskiene, J. 2002. The metaphorization of election as war in the 2001 general election campaign of Great Britain. Respectus Philologicus 2(7). Available at: [URL]
Howe, N. 1988. Metaphor in contemporary American political discourse. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 3(2), 87—104.
Iyengar, S. 2005. Speaking of values: The framing of American politics. The Forum 3(3), Article 7. Available at: [URL]
Lakoff, G. 1995. Metaphor, morality, and politics, or, why conservatives have left liberals in the dust. Social Research 62(2), 177—213.
. 1996. Moral Politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals Don’t. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mihas, E. 2005. Non-literal language in political discourse. LSO Working Papers in Linguistics 5: Proceedings of WIGL 2005, 124—159.
Rosati, J. A. 2000. The power of human cognition in the study of world politics. The International Studies Review 2(3), 45—75.
. 2001. Attitudes towards Europe � mediated by translation. In: A. Musolff, C. Good, P. Points, and R. Wittlinger (eds). Attitudes Towards Europe: Language in the Unification Process. Aldershot: Ashgate, 201—217.
. 2004. Political discourse analysis from the point of view of translation studies. Journal of Language and Politics 3(1), 117—150.
Cited by (9)
Cited by nine other publications
Maley, William
Duncombe, Constance
Peeters, Bert
2016. APPLIED ETHNOLINGUISTICS is cultural linguistics, but is it CULTURAL LINGUISTICS?. International Journal of Language and Culture 3:2 ► pp. 137 ff.
Peeters, Bert
Carta, Caterina
Carta, Caterina
Sharifian, Farzad
Collin, Richard Oliver
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
