Cover not available
Article published In:
The political impact of metaphors
Edited by Julien Perrez and Min Reuchamps
[Metaphor and the Social World 5:2] 2015
► pp. 177–204

Framing, metaphor and dialogue

A multimodal approach to party conference speeches

 | Université Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense
 | Université Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité
This paper considers the Party Conference Speech as a paradigmatic example of effective political discourse, so as to identify and analyse the elements that make for the successful reception of a speech, and determine the ways in which the leader brings about consensus and generates applause. Methodologically speaking, our framework for analysis combines (i) quantitative and qualitative methods, as well as (ii) textual and multimodal analyses of the performed text. We start with a quantitative overview of party conference speeches analysed as written corpora, before zooming in on Tony Blair’s 2006 party conference speech, in which we identify what non-verbal strategies come into play in the discursive construction of the leader’s individual and the party’s collective identities.
Keywords: Party conference speeches, discourse analysis, corpus-based methods, reception theory, gesture studies, conceptual metaphor theory, framing
Published online: 28 September 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.5.2.01deb
References (52)
Archer, D. (2009). Does frequency really matter? In D. Archer (Ed.), What’s in a word-list? Investigating word frequency and keyword extraction (pp.1–16). Farnham, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Baker, P. (2004). Querying keywords: Questions of difference, frequency, and sense in keywords analysis. Journal of English Linguistics 32(4), 346–359.Google Scholar
. (2006). Using corpora in discourse analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyżanowski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK Press. Discourse & Society, 19(3), 273–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bale, T. (2010). The conservative party: From Thatcher to Cameron. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Barlow, M. (2000). Usage, blends and grammar. In M. Barlow & S. Kemmer (Eds.), Usage-based models of language (pp.315–345). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bavelas, J., Chovil, N., Coates, L., & Roe, L. (1995). Gestures specialized for dialogue. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(4), 394–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benveniste, E. (1966). Problèmes de linguistique générale. Bibliothèque Des Sciences Humaines. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. (1983). Intonation and gesture. American Speech, 58(2), 156–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bull, P. (2012). The microanalysis of political discourse. Philologia Hispalensis, 261, 79–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Butterworth, B. (1975). Hesitation and semantic planning in speech. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 4(1), 75–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cienki, A. (2005a). Metaphor in the ‘strict father’ and ‘nurturant parent’ cognitive models: Theoretical issues raised in an empirical study. Cognitive Linguistics, 16(2), 279–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2005b). Image schemas and gesture. In B. Hampe (Ed.), From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics (pp.421–442). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cienki, A., & Müller, C. (Eds.). (2008). Metaphor and gesture. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semiotica, 1(1), 49–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Faucher-King, F. (2005). Changing parties : An anthropology of British political party conferences. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferré, G. (2012). Functions of three open-palm hand gestures. Multimodal Communication, 1(1), 5–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1982). Frame semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (Ed.), Linguistics in the morning calm: Selected papers from SICOL-1981 (pp.111–137). Seoul, Korea: Hanshin Pub. Co.Google Scholar
Finlayson, A., & Martin, J. (2008). ‘It ain’t what you say…’: British political studies and the analysis of speech and rhetoric. British Politics, 3(4), 445–464. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harré, R., & Langenhove, L. (1999). Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heritage, J., & Greatbatch, D. (1986). Generating applause: A study of rhetoric and response at party political conferences. American Journal of Sociology, 92(1), 110–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horton, D., & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 191, 215–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kita, S. (2008). Pointing: Where language, culture and cognition meet. Mahwah & London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
L’Hôte, E. (2014). Identity, narrative and metaphor: A corpus-based cognitive analysis of new labour discourse (1994–2007). London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). New Labour and globalization: Globalist discourse with a twist? Discourse & Society, 21(4), 355–376. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
L’Hôte, E., & Lemmens, M. (2009). Reframing treason: Metaphors of change and progress in new Labour discourse. CogniTextes, 31, [URL].Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd Edition, pp. 202–251). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2002). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2006). Thinking points: Communicating our american values and vision. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Lapaire, J.-R. (2011). Grammar, gesture and cognition: Insights from multimodal utterances and applications for gesture analysis. Вісник Львівського університету. Серія філологічна, 521, 87–107.Google Scholar
Mair, P. (1994). Party organizations: From civil society to the state. In R.S. Katz & P. Mair (Eds.), How parties organize: Change and adaptation in party organizations in Western democracies (pp.113–35). London, Thousand Oaks: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mariot, N. (2006). Le frisson fait-il la manifestation? Pouvoirs, 11, 97–109. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Le paradoxe acclamatif, ou pourquoi les institutions n’ont pas de première fois. In F. Buton & N. Mariot (Eds.), Pratiques et méthodes de la socio-histoire (pp.169–90). Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
McNeill, D. (2005). Gesture and thought. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McNeill, D., Cassell, J., & Levy, E.T. (1993). Abstract deixis. Semiotica, 95(1/2), 5–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meyer, C.F. (2002). English corpus linguistics: An introduction. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minkin, L. (1978). The Labour Party conference: A study in the politics of intra-party democracy. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Müller, C. (1998). Redebegleitende Gesten: Kulturgeschichte, Theorie, Sprachvergleich. Berlin: Spitz.Google Scholar
. (2004). Forms and uses of the palm up open hand: A case of a gesture family? In C. Müller & R. Posner (Eds.), The semantics and pragmatics of everyday gestures, Proceedings of the Berlin conference, April 1998 (pp.233–256). Berlin: Weidler Buchverlag.Google Scholar
Oakes, M.P. (1998). Statistics for corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Pettitt, R.T. (2012). Me, myself and I: ‘Self-referencing’ in Labour Party conference leaders’ speeches. British Politics, 7(2), 111–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rayson, P. (2003). Matrix: A statistical method and software tool for linguistic analysis through corpus comparison. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Lancaster University, Lancaster.
. (2008). From key words to key semantic domains. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 519–549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2009). Wmatrix: A web-based corpus processing environment. Computing Department, Lancaster University. [URL]Google Scholar
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Describing English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Steen, G., Dorst, A., Herrmann, B., & Kaal, A. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, J. (2009). Gesturecraft: The manu-facture of meaning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (1994). ‘Speech-handling’: The metaphorical representation of speech in gestures. A cross-cultural study. Austin (Texas): Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Adae, Eric Kwame & Godwin Etse Sikanku
2023. Mixing Business with Politics: A Framing Analysis of Sir Sam Jonah’s “Down the Up Escalator” Activist CEO Speech of April 22, 2021. In Public Relations Management in Africa Volume 2, ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo
Vandeleene, Audrey, François Randour, Jérémy Dodeigne, Pauline Heyvaert, Thomas Legein, Julien Perrez & Min Reuchamps
2023. Metaphors, political knowledge and the basic income debate in Belgium. Metaphor and the Social World 13:2 ► pp. 269 ff. DOI logo
Rossette-Crake, Fiona
2022. Oratory as Rhetorical Practice: The Renewal of Memoria and Actio. In Digital Oratory as Discursive Practice [Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse, ], ► pp. 103 ff. DOI logo
Rossette-Crake, Fiona
2022. Oratory as Communication Setup (I): Definitions. In Digital Oratory as Discursive Practice [Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse, ], ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo
Perrez, Julien, François Randour & Min Reuchamps
2019. De l’uniformité du discours politique : analyse bibliométrique et linguistique de la catégorisation des discours politiques. CogniTextes 19:Volume 19 DOI logo
Reuchamps, Min, Paul H. Thibodeau & Julien Perrez
2019. Introduction: Studying variation in political metaphor. In Variation in Political Metaphor [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 85], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Debras, Camille
2018. Petits et grands corpus en analyse linguistique des gestes. Corpus :18 DOI logo
Debras, Camille
2021. How to prepare the video component of the Diachronic Corpus of Political Speeches for multimodal analysis. Research in Corpus Linguistics 9:1 ► pp. 132 ff. DOI logo
Legein, Thomas, Audrey Vandeleene, François Randour, Pauline Heyvaert, Julien Perrez & Min Reuchamps
2018. Framing the Basic Income: An Experimental Study of How Arguments and Metaphors Influence Individuals’ Opinion Formation. Basic Income Studies 13:2 DOI logo
Rossette, Fiona
2017. Discursive divides and Rhetorical Staging, or the transcending function of oratory. Journal of Pragmatics 108 ► pp. 48 ff. DOI logo
Rossette, Fiona
2018. Intégrer une communauté dans une autre : Barack Obama et Amazing Grace. Argumentation et analyse du discours :21 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 october 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.