“Brexit means…”
UK vs. continental online-media users and English-language metaphoric conceptualizations
Brexit, i.e. the withdrawal of the uk from the eu, is an event, which, regardless of its course
and destination, has had a lasting impact on international politics. This paper offers a cognitive linguistic perspective on
Brexit and investigates its conceptual metaphorizations on the first days after the uk referendum. The paper compares
data from uk and non-uk eu media. The perspective adopted is that of Socio-Cognitive Studies in combination with
quantitative analysis. The findings suggest there are significant differences between uk source domains and continental
eu ones, e.g. overall metaphor use throughout the period is more pronounced in the uk sub-dataset; in the
uk sub-dataset, divorce metaphorizations characterize either a ‘break-up’ between ‘two Britains’ or an
uk-eu ‘break-up’; journey, disaster and war are more frequently used in the uk, while
mechanical failure is more prominent in the continental sub-dataset. Overall, a preference for inanimate source
domains characterizes both sub-datasets.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Political and media background
- 3.Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) background
- 4.Dataset
- 5.Analytical procedures
- 6.Data and discussion
- 7.Conclusion
-
References
-
Internet sources
References (51)
References
Adler-Nissen, Rebecca. 2016. “The Vocal Euro-outsider: The UK in a Two-speed Europe.” The Political Quarterly 87 (2): 238–246. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, Charlotte Galpin, and Ben Rosamond. 2017. “Performing Brexit: How a Post-Brexit World Is Imagined Outside the United Kingdom.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 19 (3): 573–591. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Alexandre-Collier, Agnès. 2015. “Euroscepticism under Margaret Thatcher and David Cameron: From Theory to Practice”. Observatoire de la Société Britannique. [URL]. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Black, Jeremy. 2019. Britain and Europe: A Short History. London: Hurst and Company.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bowdle, Brian F., and Dedre Gentner. 2005. “The Career of Metaphor.” Psychological Review 112 (1): 193–216. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2005. Politicians and Rhetoric. The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. London: Palgrave Macmillan. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Clarke, Harold, Matthew Goodwin, and Paul Whiteley. 2017. “Why Britain Voted for Brexit: An Individual-Level Analysis of the 2016 Referendum Vote.” Parliamentary Affairs 70 (3): 439–464. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Beaugrande, Robert, and Wolfgang Dressler. 1981. Introduction to Text Linguistics. London: Longman. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
de Burca, Grainne. 2018. “How British was the Brexit vote?” In Brexit and Beyond, ed. by Benjamin Martill, and Uta Staiger, 46–54. London: UCL Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Glucksberg, Sam. 2008. “How Metaphors Create Categories – Quickly.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, ed. by Raymond W. Gibbs, 67–84. New York: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hanhimäki, Jussi. 2016. “What Can History Teach Us about Brexit?” [URL]
Hansson, Sten. 2019. “Brexit and Blame Avoidance: Officeholders’ Discursive Strategies of Self-preservation.” In Discourses of Brexit, ed. by Veronika Koller, Susanne Kopf, and Marlene Miglbauer, 191–207. Abingdon: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kalogeropoulos, Antonis, Richard Fletcher, and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen. 2019. “News Brand Attribution in Distributed Environments: Do People Know Where They Get Their News?” New Media and Society 21 (3): 583–601. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kalogeropoulos, Antonis, Samuel Negredo, Ike Picone, and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen. 2017. “Who Shares and Comments on News?: A Cross-National Comparative Analysis of Online and Social Media Participation.” Social Media and Society, Oct-Dec: 1–12.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koller, Veronika, Susanne Kopf, and Marlene Miglbauer. 2019. Discourses of Brexit. Abingdon: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2018. “Metaphor in Media Language and Cognition: A Perspective from Conceptual Metaphor Theory.” Lege Artis. Language Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. The Journal of University of SS Cyril and Methodius in Trnava, Warsaw: De Gruyter Open III (1): 124–141.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Krzyżanowski, Michał. 2019. “Brexit and the Imaginary of ‘Crisis’: A Discourse Conceptual Analysis of European News Media”. Critical Discourse Studies. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, George. 2002. Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, George. 2009. The Neural Theory of Metaphor. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Lakoff, George. 2014. “SOTU 2014: The Cognitive Power of the President.” [URL]
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh. London: Basic Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Martill, Benjamin, and Uta Staiger. 2018. Brexit and Beyond. London: UCL Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Morozova, Olena. 2017. “Monomodal and Multimodal Instantiations of Conceptual Metaphors of Brexit.” Lege Artis. Language Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow. The Journal of University of SS Cyril and Methodius in Trnava. Warsaw: De Gruyter Open II (2): 250–283.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Musolff, Andreas. 2006. “Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse.” Metaphor and Symbol 21 (1): 23–38. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Musolff, Andreas. 2016. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Musolff, Andreas. 2019. “Metaphor Framing in Political Discourse.” Mythos-Magazin: Politisches Framing 11. [URL]
Newman, Nic, Richard Fletcher, Antonis Kalogeropoulos, et al. 2017. Reuters Institute Digital News Report. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. “MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse.” Metaphor and Symbol 22 (1): 1–39. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ringmar, Erik. 2008. “Metaphors of Social Order.” In Political Language and Metaphor, ed. by Terrell F. Carver, and Jernej Pikalo, 57–93. New York: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rosch, Eleanor. 1973. “Natural Categories.” Cognitive Psychology 41: 328–50. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Rosch, Eleanor. 1975. “Cognitive Reference Points.” Cognitive Psychology 71: 532–47. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Semino, Elena. 2008. Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2006. “Dataset-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy.” In Dataset-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy, ed. by Anatol Stefanowitsch, and Stefan Th. Gries, 1–16. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Taylor, John R. 2003. Linguistic Categorization (3rd edn.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Ungerer, Friedrich, and Hans-Jorg Schmid. 2006. An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics (2nd edn.). London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
van Dijk, Teun A. 2017. Socio-Cognitive Discourse Studies. In The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse, ed. by John Flowerdew, and John E. Richardson, 26–44. Routledge: New York. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Walter, Jochen, and Jan Helmig. 2008. “Discursive Metaphor Analysis: (De)construction(s) of Europe.” In Political Language and Metaphor, ed. by Terrell F. Carver, and Jernej Pikalo, 119–131. New York: Routledge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Werth, Paul. 1999. Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wodak, Ruth. 2014. “Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA)”. In International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Karen Tracy, 275–287. Oxford: Elsevier.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Wodak, Ruth. 2016. “We Have the Character of an Island Nation: A Discourse-historical Analysis of David Cameron’s “Bloomberg Speech” on the European Union.” [URL]
Wodak, Ruth, and Michael Meyer, eds. 2015. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (3rd edn.). London: Sage.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Zappettini, Franco. 2018. “Europe at a Critical Legitimacy Juncture: Which People, Whose Values?” [URL]
Zappettini, Franco, and Michał Krzyżanowski. 2019. “The Critical Juncture of Brexit in Media and Political Discourses: From National-populist Imaginary to Cross-national Social and Political Crisis”. Critical Discourse Studies, 1–8. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
McCormick, Lisa
2020.
Marking time in lockdown: heroization and ritualization in the UK during the coronavirus pandemic.
American Journal of Cultural Sociology 8:3
► pp. 324 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.