Article published In:
Metaphor and the Social WorldVol. 6:1 (2016) ► pp.103–133
“Pour water where it burns”
Dysphemistic conceptualizations of the enemy in Persian political discourse
While dysphemism has been extensively studied as a general phenomenon, there are not too many studies on how it is used in political discourse by top officials. This paper aims to examine the ways in which a sample of two high-level Iranian politicians offensively conceptualize their alleged enemies, namely the U.S., Israel, and the West, through conceptual metaphors and metonymies. A cognitive linguistic analysis of the speeches of Iran’s supreme leader and ex-president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad indicate that the selection of the metaphorical dysphemistic source domain is primarily determined by religion, previous discourse (pre-existing conventional dysphemistic metaphors), aspects of the target domain, and anger or hatred toward the enemies. The analysis indicates that most of the pejorative connotations are attributed to Israel as the alleged number one enemy of Iran via Israel is an animal, Israel is a tumor, and Israel is a bastard. The other presumed enemies, that is, the U.S. and the West are characterized via the u.s. is a devil, and the u.s. and the west are criminals. Moreover, the two politicians, while resorting to taboo concepts, remain loyal to the established discursive norms of delegitimizing the actions and thoughts of the enemies of the Islamic Republic.
Keywords: dysphemism, context, Iranian politicians, metonymy, metaphor, enemy
References
Allan, K., & Burridge, K
(1991) Euphemism and dysphemism. Language used as shield and weapon. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
(2006) Forbidden words: Taboo and the censoring of language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 
Anderson, L., & Trudgill, P.J
(1990) Bad language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Bostrom, R.N., Baseheart, J.R., & Rossiter, C.M
(1973) The effect of three types of profane language in persuasive messages. Journal of Communication, 231, 461–475.
Burridge, K
(2004) Blooming English: Observations on the roots, cultivation and hybrids of the English language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, L
(1999) Operationalizing ‘metaphor’ for applied linguistic research. In L. Cameron & G.D. Low (Eds.), Researching and applying metaphor (pp. 3–28). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Cavazza, N., & Guidetti, M
(2014) Swearing in political discourse why vulgarity works. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33(5), 537–547.
Chamizo Dominguez, P.J., & Zawislawska, M
(2006) Animal names used as insults and derogation in Polish and Spanish. Philologia Hispalensis, 201, 137–174.
Charteris-Black, J
(2004) Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
(2005) Politicians and rhetoric. The persuasive power of metaphor. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
(2007) The communication of leadership. London & New York: Routledge.
Chilton, P
(2004) Analyzing political discourse: Theory and practice. London & New York: Routledge.
Crespo-Fernández, E
(2008) Sex-related euphemism and dysphemism: An analysis in terms of conceptual metaphor theory. Journal of the Spanish Association of Anglo-American Studies, 30(2), 95–110.
(2013) Words as weapons for mass persuasion: Dysphemism in Churchill’s wartime speeches. Text & Talk, 33(3), 311–330.
Davis, H
(1989) What makes bad language bad. Language & Communication, 9(1), 1–9.
Gradecak-Erdeljic, T., & Milic, G
(2011) Metonymy at the crossroads: A case of euphemisms and dysphemisms. In R. Benczes, A. Barcelona, & F.J. Ruiz de Mendoza Ibanez (Eds.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view (pp. 147–166). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hamilton, M.A
(1989) Reactions to obscene language. Communication Research Reports, 61, 67–69.
Jay, T
(2009) The utility and ubiquity of taboo words. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 41, 153–161.
Jay, T., & Janschewitz, K
(2008) The pragmatics of swearing. Journal of Politeness Research, 41, 267–288.
Kövecses, Z
(2002) Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
(2006) Language, mind and culture. London: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, G
(1992) Metaphors and war: The metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. In M. Putz (Ed.), Thirty years of linguistic evolution (pp. 463–481). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M
(1980) Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Turner, M
(1989) More than cool reason: A field guide to poetic metaphor. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Musolff, A
(2010) Metaphor, nation, and the Holocaust. The concept of the body politic. New York & London: Routledge.
Pinker, S
(2008) Freedom’s curse. The Atlantic Monthly, 3021, 28–29.
Pragglejaz Group
(2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
Sagarin, E
(1962) The anatomy of dirty words. New York: Lyle Stuart.
Scherer, C.R., & Sagarin, B.J
(2006) Indecent influence: The positive effects of obscenity on persuasion. Social Influence, 11, 138–146.
Semino, E., & Masci, M
(1996) Politics is football: Metaphor in the discourse of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy. Society and Discourse, 7(2), 243–269.
Wainryb, R
(2005) Expletive deleted: A good look at bad language. New York: Free Press.
Warnaar, M
(2013) Iranian foreign policy during Ahmadinejad: Ideology and actions. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Cited by
Cited by 3 other publications
Juszczyk, Konrad, Barbara Konat & Małgorzata Fabiszak
2022. Speakers who metaphorize together – argue together. Metaphor and the Social World 12:2 ► pp. 245 ff. 
Khatin-Zadeh, Omid & Hooshang Khoshsima
2021. Homo-schematic Metaphors: A Study of Metaphor Comprehension in Three Different Priming Conditions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 50:4 ► pp. 923 ff.
Kujawiak, Aleksandra
2022. Dysfemistyczne konceptualizacje polityków i polityki w dyskursie internetowym (na przykładzie portali Wpolityce.pl i Newsweek.pl). Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Linguistica 56 ► pp. 283 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 april 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.