Masaryk University

Faculty of Arts
Department of English and American Studies
English-language Translation

Petr Dvok

Translating Metaphors
within Political Discourse:
The Case of EU
Masters Diploma Thesis

Supervisor: Mgr. Renata Kamenick, Ph.D.

2011

I declare that I have worked on this thesis independently,

using only the primary and secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Mgr. Renata

Kamenick, Ph.D., for her patient guidance and immense help throughout the
creation of this thesis. I would also like to thank my family for the support which
made my studies possible.

Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Remarks on the scope and aims of the thesis ......................................... 3
2. Area of interest and the research questions ................................................... 4
3. Method ........................................................................................................... 7
4. Metaphor as an issue in translation studies ................................................. 10
4.1 Prescription versus Description.............................................................. 10
4.2 Two main issues .................................................................................... 10
4.3 Translatability ......................................................................................... 12
4.3 Classical versus conceptual perspective ............................................... 13
4.4 Translatability revisited .......................................................................... 16
4.5 Types of metaphors and strategies of translation .................................. 19
5. Metaphors in political discourse. Context and challenges ............................ 24
5.1 Agenda setting and persuasion.............................................................. 26
5.2 Concepts and transitivity in politics ........................................................ 28
5.3 Intercultural communication ................................................................... 30
5.4 Specifics of the EU................................................................................. 32
6. The Corpus .................................................................................................. 34
6.1 Selection procedure ............................................................................... 37
6.2 Time range ............................................................................................. 38
7. Qualitative analysis of metaphors ................................................................ 39
7.1 General information on metaphors......................................................... 40
7.2 Nature and type of metaphors................................................................ 44
7.2.1 Unlexicalised metaphors proper ..................................................... 45

7.2.2 Lexicalised metaphors proper ......................................................... 48

7.2.3 Metonymy and synecdoche ............................................................ 51
7.3 Translation strategies ............................................................................. 54
7.4 Concepts and intercultural communication ............................................ 58
7.4.1 Concepts changed by translation .................................................... 61
8. Discussion. Avenues for future research ...................................................... 64
9. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 66
10. Sources and works cited ............................................................................ 69
List of schemata and tables ............................................................................. 74
Abstract ............................................................................................................ 75

Length of the text: about 115,400 characters

List of abbreviations
SL (L1)

Source language

ST

Source text

TL (L2)

Target language

TT

Target text

EN

English

CS

Czech

UK

United Kingdom

CZ

Czech Republic

EU

European Union

EP

European Parliament

CE

Council of the European Union

MEP

Member of the European Parliament

MIP

Metaphor Identification Procedure

TS

Translation studies

Subcorpora:
PRES

Speeches and texts of highest representatives of the Council

DOC

Texts and press releases from the Presidency of the Council

EP

Speeches from the floor and texts from the European Parliament

Motto
And this is the office of the supreme Figure of all: Metaphor. If Genius, & therefore
Learning, consists in connecting remote Notions & finding Similitude in things
dissimilar, then Metaphor, the most acute and farfetched among Tropes, is the only one
capable of producing Wonder, which gives birth to Pleasure, as do changes of scene in
the theater. And if the Pleasure produced by Figures derives from learning new things
without effort & many things in small volume, then Metaphor, setting our mind to flying
betwixt one Genus & another, allows us to discern in a single Word more than one
Object.
Umberto Eco: The Island of the Day Before

1. Introduction
Metaphor is a highly important tool of communication and quite a difficult phenomenon
to study. It often does not allow fully equivalent translation; it therefore provokes
important questions about its nature and possible transferability across languages and
cultures. These questions are being handled in many different ways by various scholarly
approaches, where most of them do not offer more than partial explanations and a
considerably limited scope of operation. For that reason, translation of metaphors will
be always seen as problematic no matter which approach to metaphor is chosen
(Olivera 1998: 5 as cited in Fernndez 2003: 66).
Moreover, metaphor is a topic where growing interest can be perceived, which is
given for one thing by the increasing importance of non-literary texts and the
implications of using English as lingua franca (Stlhammar 2006), for another by
increasing heterogeneity and multidimensionality of scholarly disciplines since
metaphor as such and particularly its practical use is a topic located on the borderline of
more fields, including linguistics, social science, anthropology, and philosophy.
However, this masters thesis does not aspire to cover the topic in its entirety and
complexity. It primarily employs the viewpoint of translation studies and it focuses
mainly on the practical perspective of everyday translation process within one particular
context, namely European Union, and more specifically between two different
languages, English and Czech. The thesis shall empirically analyse the features of
metaphors and the strategies of their translation in these settings. Knowledge of ways of
treatment of metaphors and creative language in general within EU (and possible
detection what the obvious priorities are) could tell us something about typical features
of intercultural communication within this peculiar entity.
1

The positive contribution of the thesis to TS should ideally consist in adding

some modest yet tangible results to the list of works dealing with the phenomenon in a
rather practical way. It seems that analytic papers of this kind are rather rare in terms of
quantity. Moreover, in my humble opinion, they rarely offer in-depth analysis of
complex features. These articles which are not openly theoretical often do not go
beyond the level of pure description of metaphorical concepts used by a particular actor.
These works which would dare to directly apply another, translation-related layer of
questions, such as the question of equivalence or interculturality, are truly sporadic.
This is, of course, no surprise with regard to the procession of problems which are
connected to the phenomenon and which tend to emerge during any serious analysis of
it.
Therefore, specifying the outline and desired practical outcomes of the research
was not an easy task. Having done an initial research of existing resources, I am of the
opinion that there currently is no such methodological tool available which would be
universal, clear-cut and robust enough to product results directly comparable with other
similar analyses.
This analysis focuses on both novel and older metaphors within political
communication, particularly such ones which bear some kind of metaphorical tension
and could be thus used strategically to provoke an intentional semantic shock or to
portray a particular concept in a desired way.

The thesis is divided into four logical parts:

I. Introductory part (covering aims and methods): chapters 1 3

II. Theoretical part (covering relevant concepts and specifics of the material analysed):
chapters 4 5
III. Information on corpus: chapter 6
IV. Results and conclusions: chapters 7 9

1.1 Remarks on the scope and aims of the thesis

Firstly, I would like to point out that the aim of this thesis is to apply selected
tools to one particular discourse in an attempt to explore the details discussed only
sporadically so far; in other words, the thesis should focus on a relatively narrowlyspecified area and it has no far-reaching theoretical or meta-theoretical goals. The
questions dealt with tend to open deeper epistemological and ontological problems, but
these are at any case beyond the frame of this text. The thesis does not lay a claim to
define general explanatory laws, and the results of the work should be interpreted as
such.
Secondly, the topic of metaphors raises the problem of multidisciplinarity. One
cannot escape the socio-political and socio-cultural factors which need to be addressed
when the analysis is to be carried out. This analysis of metaphor draws on the
perspective of linguistics while staying open to the perspective of social science, so the
conclusions of the analysis shall not be strictly limited to a single scholarly field a
certain overlap is expected.
Thirdly, the thesis also explores themes located on the borderline of approaches,
some of them having direct links to political reality, particular world views, socialscientific agendas and so forth. Not only for this reason should the strategy of the
3

argumentation be neutral, compatible with multiple scholarly disciplines, and

descriptive and empirical rather than prescriptive and normative. The search for the
essence of metaphor can even make researchers take extreme philosophical or political
positions something undesirable in the world of research. I personally have no
attachment to one particular approach, strategy, or even ideological interpretation.

2. Area of interest and the research questions

Metaphor is, without doubt, a practical challenge to a translator, as well as a theoretical
problem of translation and therefore a phenomenon worth studying, since transferring
metaphors across languages and culture systems is not a simple, straightforward
process.
At the same time, metaphor is literally ubiquitous: For instance, the analysis
carried out by Steen et al. (2010) discovered that one in about every seven and a half
lexical units in the British National Corpus is related to a metaphorical mapping
structure. Impressive as this figure may seem, it is of course not my intention to explore
that deep levels of language. The underlying problem is that a large part of our
communication has originated in metaphors, yet this is more a subject-matter for
theoretical linguistics than for translation scholars. Analysing the basis of the
phenomenon would require immensely intricate research, well beyond the framework of
this study.

To carry out a modest study, it is therefore crucial to define a portion of the

problem to look at. In this case, this tip of the iceberg (metaphorical pun intended)
shall be represented particularly by those metaphors used within political discourse
which may have pragmatic or strategic effect on general audience. These metaphors
may be novel (unlexicalised) and also older (lexicalised), provided their effect can be
interpreted as contextually relevant in political discourse.1 In other words, bearing the
inevitable risk of including even ambiguous cases, I will try to pick up those metaphors
which are capable of provoking intentional or unintentional effect or those that can be
regarded as strategic tools within the discourse. The analysis is thus focusing on such
language tools which constitute the figurative, creative layer of communication which
can have other, less known consequences in political environment.
Moreover, when picking up the metaphors to analyse, the complementary,
equally important criterion apart from relevance to political discourse and persuasive
strategies shall be the interestingness for real translation processes within the
European institutions, as metaphorical expressions are specific and can pose a challenge
to a translator who is supposed to transfer the meaning paying attention to various
traditions and intercultural differences. The European Union is classed as an entity
where distortion of culturally-specific message can be a real risk. The analysis of
metaphor is a good way to look at this problem, since some metaphors can be easily
regarded as conceptualizations of culture-bound phenomena or memes.
The phenomenon of metaphor translation can be studied from various points of
view, for example that of traditional linguistics (Is the metaphor equivalent as closely

See the terminology explanation and typology outlines in chapters 5 and 7.

as possible?) or functionalism (Does this strategy fulfil the intended function in the
text?). This thesis shall adopt the empirical and descriptive approach, paying attention
to both mentioned aspects.
The general key issue of the thesis is how important metaphorical constructions
are used in political discourse in EU. What are the specifics of metaphors used here and
what are the biggest perks and perils of their translation? Should a translator working
for EU be concerned about a specific set of problems? More specifically:
Is there any profound difference in applying metaphors and their strategic use
(see chapter 5) between the official (supposedly neutral) EU bodies and the
broad political actors representing European voters?
If so, do the translators tend to preserve the differences by adopting different
translation strategies? Which metaphor types, patterns, and translation strategies
are most common?
Which conceptual patterns are most common? Can any particular transitive
structures (structures describing types of relations between concepts) be
identified?
Is there a tendency to get rid of metaphors in EP altogether?2
Is the approach to translation of figurative tropes within EU ad-hoc or rather
uniform?
How are cultural differences tackled?3

There may be a tendency in case of simultaneous interpreting (used in EP) to kill [sic] metaphors,
owing to the effort for minimising the risks and (unlike the typical translation of texts) limitedness of
resources available in this particular type of inter-lingual mediation (Spinolo Garwood 2010 as cited in
Prandi 2010: 305).
3
Cultural differences have often been mentioned as obstacles to successful translation of metaphorical
expressions. The strategy used by a translator should probably reflect the difference of associations, the

Are there any particular high-risk areas to be identified?

The analysis should allow setting and comparing variables dependent on input
parameters and even their combinations. The results should be straightforward enough
to allow comparison with ease. The aim to bear in mind is to focus on typical patterns
and to find the most widely used types and strategies.

3. Method
My thesis shall make use of an empirical, descriptive approach integrating several
established approaches to the phenomenon of metaphors. I am going to create a research
material of my own, namely a parallel bilingual corpus compiled exclusively for the
purpose of this work (for the composition of the corpus, see chapter 6). Using this
corpus, I am going to perform an analysis of the metaphors found. This research process
should allow me to gain complex information about the types of metaphors used within
the corpus, the underlying conceptual metaphors, and strategies of translation.
The method of the thesis is largely inspired by the approach of Christine
Schffner (2004), who argues in favour of applying cognitive approach (drawing from
Lakoff and Johnsons theory) to the field of descriptive translation studies. In her
analysis of the treatment of metaphors (Schffner 2004: 1258 ff.), she used authentic ST
unfamiliarity of the concept to a foreign reader etc. (Schffner 2004: 1264). A plethora of other variables
has been mentioned as well (Fernndez 2003: 66), where most of them, I presume, could be assigned to
sub-topics of either cultural or language differences (the other ones being related to problems of context
or translators competence).

and TT pairs to analyse and describe the strategies to handle metaphorical expressions
with regard to both cross-linguistic and cross-cultural features making use of the
cognitive approach to compare possible effects of particular expressions on a reader.
Likewise, this thesis shall make use of the orientation of the research which she
describes as product-oriented, i.e. focused on functions of metaphors as agents in the
texts, with the explanation being linked to text, discourse, and culture (ibid.).4
Moreover, the thesis shall make use of Lakoff and Johnsons famous concept to
examine the metaphors analysed in terms of conceptual metaphors used (see chapter
4.3). I am convinced that this aspect of metaphors in use is one of the common
denominators of translation studies and other scholarly fields.
Throughout the thesis, such metaphors are discussed which do not pass
unnoticed when the text is read i.e. dead metaphors hidden in the literal expression
which cannot cause any kind of tension were usually unnoticed. The corpus shall be
searched for these interesting cases of metaphors and their translations, the metaphors
will be manually marked and analysed for (typical) conceptual patterns and translation
strategies using the procedure which has been inspired by the Metaphor Identification
Procedure (MIP) developed by the Pragglejaz Group (see Steen et al. 2010: 769 ff.),
which, according to its coordinator, provides an operational way of finding all
conventional metaphor in actual message (ibid.: 770).
The original MIP was developed over several years and tested by the Group on
various texts. It was an attempt to construct an explicit and systematic inductive5 tool of

The other side of the problem (not to be discussed here) is process-oriented part of analysis (focusing
on cognitive processes in translators mind).
5
In this respect, inductive refers to the analysis moving from the linguistic structures towards conceptual
ones (first, a word or phrase is found, then tagged and assigned). The opposite way of analysis, deductive,
would start with a set of metaphorical concepts which would be searched in the text analysed (the set of

metaphor identification. I will follow the basic logic behind the MIP, albeit with
regard to the obvious limits of resources not in the same depth as the Praggejaz Group
did. The (rather simplified) MIP can be summed up as follows:
1. Reading the text in its entirety,
2. Determining lexical units,
3. Establishing meaning and meaning connections,
4. Deciding about the existence of contextual contrast (such contrast can be used
both directly and indirectly) in my case, including the judgment about a
possible strategic and contextual effect from the point of view of political
discourse.

The metaphorical expressions marked will be then recorded along with their possible
metaphorical concepts and other data related to their use (possible transitive relations,
remarks on context, possible shift in meaning, cultural issues etc.). To sum up, the
resulting information on each metaphor should contain its nature and type, strategy (see
chapter 4.5), conceptual frame and perhaps transitive relations (see chapter 4.3 and 5.2),
and, if justified, a note on context. It is quite clear that the weakest spot in this strategy
is the identification of the expression itself. There are inevitable risks of ambiguity,
omission, or misinterpretation. Nevertheless, I cannot think of a better way of creating
the corpus, given the current circumstances.

possible metaphors would be defined even before reading the text). See Steen et al. 2010: 768 for more
details.

4. Metaphor as an issue in translation studies

4.1 Prescription versus Description
The problem of translating metaphors can be addressed both by prescriptive (as
advocated by e.g. Nida, van den Broeck, Newmark) and descriptive (Toury, SnellHornby, and Baker) approaches (Fernndez et al. 2003: 61). Those approaches seeking
ST faithfulness have been increasingly disregarded in favour of target-oriented studies,
which had an impact on the concept of equivalence. Translemic equivalence thus does
not pursue perfect but rather acceptable renderings (Rabadn lvarez 1991: 45 as
cited in ibid.), and the whole concept of faithfulness has become increasingly relaxed
there are authors who tend to see previously condemned choices as rather innovative.

4.2 Two main issues

So far, with regard to the phenomenon of metaphors, translation studies has been
concerned with two main questions (cf. Schffner 2004: 1256), namely
1. The problem of translatability (which somewhat resonates with the question
of equivalence). This is a question of the very nature of the metaphor as a figure,
as a part of communication, and as a tool used (in semantic and pragmatic sense)
with a particular purpose all of this in different systems (be it grammar, langue
/ parole, culture etc.). In short, there is a problem of equivalence versus systemic
difference. The important thing to realise is that the transfer of such a
complicated entity as a metaphor cannot be simple by definition.

10

2. The problem of procedure, strategy of translation. Once we admit that there

is a way to recreate the semantic entity (or purpose) of a metaphor in a target
text (depending on the approach one prefers), a myriad of other, practical
difficulties appear. Is there a general way to deal with the translation of
metaphors, based on their nature, type, or function in the text, or is this an adhoc process? Can a typology of strategies be constructed, or is it a foolish vanity
to try to capture such an individual flash of imaginative insight (Dagut 1976:
22 as cited in Schffner 2004: 1256)? For more information on translation
procedures, see chapter 4.5.

Both questions can be addressed from significantly different scholar positions.

Schffner herself (2004: 1254) warns that arguments brought forward need to be seen
within the context of a heterogenous discipline which translation studies indisputably
is. As for the first question, among possible sub-disciplines of translation studies
preoccupied with the problem of equivalence (ibid., 1254 ff.) are:
Linguistics: Preoccupied with translation as transferring meaning. The notion of
equivalence: Transfer of a text should be as faithful as possible, both in content
and form.
Text linguistics: Metaphor as a unit of translation. Treating source text and
target text in context of situational factors, conventions, text functions etc.
Equivalence is of communicational nature.
Functionalism: Translation as trans-cultural interaction, translation strategy is
dependent on appropriateness to purpose (in other words, importance of
equivalence is reduced).
11

The whole sub-domain is further complicated by the fact that no universally accepted
notion of equivalence exists, especially if various post-modern and cultural approaches
are to be incorporated to the discussion in their entirety and with all consequences.

4.3 Translatability
With regard to translatability, three or four main positions have crystallised inside TS
(according to Fernndez 2003: 67 ff.):
1. Metaphors are untranslatable (as argued by Nida (1964) or Dagut (1967), i.e.
any translation of metaphor brings about a different metaphor;
2. Metaphors are fully translatable (e.g. Kloepfer (1981) or Mason (1982)), i.e.
there cannot be a theory of metaphor as such, just a theory of translation applied
to metaphors;
3. Metaphors are translatable with a considerable degree of interlinguistic
inequivalence (e.g. van den Broeck (1981), Toury (1995) and Newmark
(1988));
4. Fernndez lists as a distinct fourth type so called Conciliatory approach
proposed by Snell-Hornby (1988), who claims that the range of renderings will
depend on the type of text and ad-hoc factors.

I reckon that for our purposes, this could be regarded as a variation of the third type
(depending on the strictness of definition of equivalence, which is, after all, not a
primary issue here).
12

As we can see, no universal definition of equivalence (and therefore no simple means of

measurement of it) has been provided so far (cf. Lotfipour-Saedi 1990). Also, we are
always dependent on which approach we take, as each theory focusing on one issue is
condemned to be partial or inadequate (cf. Prandi 2010).
As for the question of translatability seen from the point of view of metaphor
types (see chapter 4.5), Newmark (1988: 48-49 in Fernndez 2003: 68) argues that
metaphors most translatable are the dead ones, whereas the translatability of stock
and original ones is proportional to the proximity of the two polysystems involved. Van
den Broeck (1981: 73 in ibid.) suggests that not all metaphors pose the same risks, and
their translatability thus depends on their communicative function and cultural bounds
the larger the quantity of information and the degree to which this information is
structured in the text, the lower the translatability.
For the purpose of this thesis, lets assume that approaches No. 3 and 4 (lets call
this position metaphors are carefully translatable with important reservations) are
valid and that both are a part of the empirically-constructed model which is going to be
applied here.

4.3 Classical versus conceptual perspective

General study of metaphors is drawing on two equally important sources, that of the
classical and the conceptual approach. Whereas the principles of the two approaches are
fundamentally different, various attempts have been done during quite a lively debate in

13

the recent decades to combine and mutually inspire these two traditions. What are
their main features?
First of all, metaphor can be defined in various ways, among the particularly
interesting being textual interpretation of a conflictual complex meaning, or putting
strange concepts into interaction etc. (Prandi 2010: 305). If we yield to a certain level
of simplification, one of perhaps the most general and often quoted definitions is
Aristotles definition of metaphor as a transfer of a word into a strange domain
(ibid.).
See the chart below featuring the same concept described by various terms and
points of view, none of them being truly universal (cf. Slingerland Blanchard BoydJudson 2007; Prandi 2010). Each of the four pairs comprises a term of its own:

1. Tenor
2. Subsidiary subject
3. Strange domain
4. Extension

1. Focus
2. Vehicle
3. Word
4. Meaning

Metaphor / Frame / Transfer / Interaction

Fig. 1: The principle of metaphor

14

In the classical view, metaphor has been primarily seen as a rhetorical figure or as a
device to add interest to the text. At the same time, metaphor has been treated as
something albeit interesting, yet rather peripheral and difficult to study, as an object in
realm of poetics rather than empirical analysis.
Nonetheless, the traditional understanding of metaphor as a figure of speech
(whose main function is the stylistic embellishment of a text) has been recently replaced
with a more complex conceptual, cognitive6 approach (Schffner 2004: 1254) which
tends to see this phenomenon in context of broader aspects of communication. Whereas
this shift is very interesting, it inevitably leads to further methodological confusion.
With publication of Lakoff and Johnsons Metaphors We Live By (1980), the
whole world of study of communication was once again significantly moved. In recent
years, the new conceptual paradigm has been, according to e.g. Schffner (2004: 12571258) taking root also in translation studies as such. In their remarkable work, Lakoff
and Johnson argue that metaphors are nothing less than demonstrations of the whole
system of experience and thought of human society in other words, that metaphors
permeate and pervade both language and thought (Fernndez 2003: 65).
From this point of view, each metaphor is an expression of conceptual mapping
(from the source vehicle to a target tenor conceptual domain). Whereas this
may terminologically resemble the classical view, the crucial importance is that
metaphorical mapping is not regarded as a finite object. It is only a surface
demonstration of a relation existing on a much deeper level, firmly set in the
experiential system of human beings who are capable to see or understand one
domain by means of another. This changes the whole perspective.
6

Schffner is among those scholars who use the term cognitive to describe the conceptual approach.

15

Moreover, the conceptual approach does not regard metaphors as optional

linguistic tools or language devices that may be easily replaced by other means (as had
been tended to in older, classical times) instead, they are ubiquitous signs of the
ways people think just demonstrated through linguistic means (cf. Slingerland
Blanchard Boyd-Judson 2007: 55-57; McElhanon 2006: 37; Chaban et al. 2007: 81),
they are absolutely central to ordinary language (Lakoff 1993: 203 in Candel 2005:
10).
Common utterances seen from this point of view become the expressions of
underlying conceptual models. From this perspective, even completely novel, original
metaphors have to be compatible with already established concepts in order to be
comprehensible for a receiver of information (Because, after all, each metaphor ever
used is only a surface demonstration of a more abstract concept which lies somewhere
much deeper; Slingerland Blanchard Boyd-Judson 2007: 57).

4.4 Translatability revisited

If true, this brings immense consequences for the problem of translatability of
metaphors. As Schffner (2004: 1258) argues, [t]ranslatability is no longer a question
of the individual metaphorical expression, as identified by the ST, but it becomes linked
to the level of conceptual systems in source and target culture.
As I see it, this revolutionary shift may imply that at least older (such as
stock or recent, see chapter 4.5) and a considerable part of original or novel
metaphors are translatable (conceptually transferable), not because of the relative
closeness of the SL and TL, but because basic human experiential concepts are
16

universal (as proclaimed by Lakoff and Johnson). The remaining ones might perhaps be
reproducible provided a certain level of compatibility between cultures can be
found (which is, after all, not incompatible with both Newmarks and van den Broecks
notions mentioned in chapter 4.3). In this context, different types of metaphors should
be identified with regard to the level of their universality / specificity (cf. Stienstra 1993
in Schffner 2004: 1264) for instance, one could expect the metaphors based on
human body to be universally understandable, whereas metaphors originated in local
traditions as specific.7
This actualised approach is rather optimistic with regard to the question of
possibility of intercultural communication. It can also serve as an intermediate position
between the extreme points of view on the problem of translatability of metaphors, as
represented by the debate every metaphor is translatable versus metaphor cannot be
translatable implicitly.
Prandi (2010: 305 ff.) nevertheless warns against simplified solutions. She notes
that no strategy to tackle the translation of metaphors can be universal. She rather
argues for a much more complex and differentiated approach where the final decision is
dependent on the kind of metaphor used (for instance, consistent versus conflictual,
openness to substitution, coincidence to lexical versus textual interpretation etc.). For
her, metaphors in general have the same origin conceptual interaction but many

McElhanon (2006: 45-47), inspired by Kvecses (2005 in ibid.), proposes using three elementary
models of translation of image-schemas and conceptual metaphors:
1. Universalism: Translate a metaphor that reflects a universal, human conceptual process so as to
preserve the underlying image-schema structure. (This principle reflects Lakoffs invariance hypothesis
i.e. image-schematic elements and structure of the metaphor should be preserved.)
2. Human physiology: Translate a metaphor that reflects common human physiological processes so as
to preserve the sense of a psychological basis.
3. Experiential cultural models: Translate a metaphor that has an underlying cultural model with a
similar model ensuring that the coherence and integrity of the underlying translation model is not
compromised.

17

possible outcomes. Also, a mere co-existence of different concepts (signalled by putting

a word into a strange domain) does not automatically mean that a true metaphor is
present unless a real conceptual interaction (with an identifiable conceptual balance of
the result) is proven.
For Prandi, there are 1. consistent metaphors that are integrated in our ways of
thinking and there are 2. conflictual, living metaphors containing an overt conceptual
conflict (Prandi 2010: 311). The difference might be summed up as follows: Whereas
consistent metaphors are used automatically and we are not aware of them unless we
focus on them, conflictual metaphors have a striking effect, they attract attention.
Prandis underlying argument is that each theory focusing only on chosen aspects is
therefore condemned to be partial and inadequate, and it would also be problematic to
come up with such definitions which would cover such different phenomena as these
two kinds of metaphor, whose cores actually directly oppose each other.8
This distinction between metaphors has also highly relevant consequences for
translation (Prandi 2010: 318 ff.): Whereas a conflicting expression may actually be
translated immediately and it is almost impossible to kill it,9 a metaphorical sense of a
(highly language-specific) polysemous word or an idiom is not it cannot be.
Therefore, as Prandi states, it is actually not a novel metaphor which is challenging for a
translator; it is the consistent and conventional one.

It should be noted that Prandis terms should not be mistaken with Newmarks. For Prandi, the
difference is given by the distance between particular concepts; for Newmark, the difference is based on
temporal dimension. Whereas Prandi sees some metaphors as inherently conflictual on, say,
psychological grounds, for Newmark, all metaphors could eventually become dead after some time the
question of their effect is dependent mainly on the time they have been used. Prandis approach to origins
of metaphor is listed here as complementary theory.
9
The only real risk being the usual engagement in over-interpretation and explicitation; cf. e.g. BlumKulka (1986) as cited by Prandi (2010: 321).

18

On a side note, as has been stated earlier, metaphors are truly ubiquitous. Modern
languages in their use are constructed by sediment, petrified, metaphors, including those
which are already dead (i.e. not perceived as metaphorical expressions at all). There are
scholars who take the discussion one step further and argue that there actually cannot be
such a thing as a proper distinction between literal and figurative language at all
everything we perceive as literal had in fact roots in metaphorical nature, and words
commonly used are in fact troped, i.e. lacking one exclusive meaning.10 If metaphors
are indeed everywhere, if they [] cannot generally be regarded as something
literary or creative and they [exist] rather in clines and also include expressions
whose metaphorical meaning can be found in a dictionary (Mller 2005: 55), the
resulting complexity of this perspective is truly overwhelming and one has to be
extremely careful when drawing general conclusions. The fact that there could be
interference between all concepts mentioned above and the way whole language
systems work is a real possibility.

4.5 Types of metaphors and strategies of translation

As for types of metaphors, the criterion of time, or in other words, novelty or originality
of expressions proposed by Newmark has been often applied. At one hand, there are
non-lexicalised (i.e. newer) metaphors which are absolutely or relatively novel and
creative, at the other hand, there is a whole world of lexicalised (i.e. older) metaphors

10

One of the first things that a student of etymology [] discovers for himself is that every modern
language [] is apparently nothing, from beginning to end, but an unconscionable tissue of dead, or
petrified metaphors. [] If we trace the meanings of a great many words [] about as far back as
etymology can take us, we are at once made to realize that an overwhelming proportion, if not all, of
them referred in earlier days to one of these two solid things a solid, sensible object, or some animal
(probably human) activity. (Barfield 1928: 63 as cited by Kntsson 2008)

19

whose metaphorical nature is still apparent but which are already established in the
language.11
The Newmarks (1981, 1988) typology of metaphors is as follows:

Newmarks typology of metaphors

(Newmark
1981)

Dead

(Newmark
1998)

Dead

Clich

Stock

Recent

Stock

Recent

Lexicalised metaphors

Original

Adapted

Original

Non-lexicalised
metaphors

Table No. 1

The meanings of the typology categories as described by Newmark (1988: 196 ff. as
cited by Dickins 2005: 16-18 including examples) are:

11

On a side note, Dagut (1976: 23 in Candel 2005: 10) strongly opposes this view and argues that all
metaphors are new and unique creations by definition. For him, solely Newmarks original metaphors
would qualify as proper metaphors at all. The discussion has evidently been complicated, not only across
different paradigms but also in the scope of particular approaches. All attempts to deal with the topic thus
have to be partial and limited, no universal tool to classify procedures is at hand.

20

Newmarks typology of metaphors explained

Type

Description

Examples

Dead

Metaphors where one is

hardly conscious of the
image; universal terms of
space and time etc.

space, field, top, bottom,

arm, fall, rise...

Clich

Metaphors that have

temporarily outlived their
usefulness; substitute to
clear thought

[schools] traditions will

help and it may well
become a jewel in the
crown in the countrys
education.

Stock

Established metaphors; in
informal context
referentially and
pragmatically efficient

oil the wheels

Recent

Metaphorical neologisms
which have spread rapidly
in language

groovy as good, skint as

without money

Adapted

Metaphors which involve

an adaptation of an existing
(stock) metaphor

the ball is a little in their

court (R. Reagan)

Original

Non-lexicalised and nonadapted metaphors

Table No. 2

A similar principle in a less rigorous way is noted by Mller (2005: 55), who argues: a
procedure of metaphor identification has to differentiate between rather conventional

21

metaphors and creative metaphors which occasionally exploit the principles of

conceptual mappings. However, as Mller points out, drawing real distinctions
between these types is not an easy task. This problem therefore calls for establishing a
set of criteria which could be used during the process of determination and
classification.
Along with Mller, I suppose that creative metaphors in political discourse are
those that [depend] on deviation from what might be expected in a given situation or
[challenge] discursive or linguistic norms (ibid., 56), with regard to appropriateness
and usefulness, and strategic value of the term used. This is relevant for the analysis
of discourse, where even an established, say, stock metaphor can have a shocking effect
if used creatively and/or with attention to the context.
The thesis shall make use of Newmarks typology (especially with regard to the
distinction between unlexicalised and lexicalised expressions) but will pay attention to
Mllers pragmatic criterion as well. Lexicalized and unlexicalized metaphors will be
analysed separately. I shall search for possibly all cases of non-lexicalised metaphors
and, at the same time, for those cases of lexicalised metaphors which can be
contextually (or pragmatically) relevant in political discourse. As a rule, dead metaphors
without any relevant function in the text will be omitted. It is, of course, expected, that
lexicalised metaphors in the corpus will be much more common than the other type.12

12

It remains an inconvenient truth that the distinction cannot be always clear-cut, which holds true for the
issue of typology as well as strategy. There is no easy way to solve this problem. In doubtful cases, notes
or short in dataset are provided in the dataset.

22

As for the question of technique, procedure, or strategy of translation applicable to

metaphors, relatively many strategy typologies based on ideal-typical models exist. 13
Perhaps the most frequently cited among the source oriented14 approaches are:
1. A descriptive approach elaborated by van den Broeck (1981: 77 in Schffner
2004: 1256 ff.) operating with three possible strategies:
a. Translation sensu stricto (both SL tenor and vehicle are transferred
into TL)
b. Substitution (replacement of SL vehicle by a different TL vehicle with
the same tenor)
c. Paraphrase (rendering a SL metaphor by a non-metaphorical expression
in the TL)
2. A prescriptive approach advocated by Newmark (1981: 87-91 in ibid.; 1985 in
McElhanon 2006: 35)15 (English-German and English-French examples taken
from Schffner 2004). Newmarks typology is one of the most comprehensive
ones and it was applied in this thesis.
a. Reproducing the same image in TL
golden hair // goldenes Haar
b. Replacing the SL image with a standard TL image (which is compatible
with TL culture)

13

It should be noted that whereas these typologies have been largely constructed as a part of prescriptivebased works, I mention them in order to use them just in an empirical, descriptive way I am not trying
to favour any of them.
14
As for target-oriented perspective, Toury (1995: 81 ff) adds two other scenarios, namely (1) Use of a
metaphor in a TT for a non-metaphorical expression in a ST, and (2) Addition of a metaphor in a TT
without any linguistic motivation in a ST. In this respect, Toury is clearly interested in viewing metaphor
not only as a translation problem, but also as a translation solution. As this thesis is inherently sourceoriented, thus focused on ways of translating already existing tropes, this additional set of strategies is
mentioned only for the purpose of context.
15
In Newmarks work, the term object corresponds to topic, image to vehicle, and sense to grounds.

23

other fish to fry // dautres chats fouetter

c. Translating metaphor by simile, retaining the image (Effect: metaphors
shock possibly modified)
Ces zones cryptuaire o s labore la beaut // The crypt-like
areas where beauty is manufactured
d. Translating metaphor (simile) by simile plus sense (simile plus sense
statement) (Effect: loss of shock, compromise solution)
tout un vocabulaire moliresque // a whole repertoire of medical
quackery such as Molire might have used
e. Converting metaphor into its sense (Effect: possible loss of emotive
aspects)
sein Brot verdienen // to earn ones living
f. Deletion (if metaphor is redundant)
g. Using the same metaphor combined with sense (Effect: enforcing the
image)

5. Metaphors in political discourse. Context and

challenges
To some extent, political discourse is driven by underlying conceptual metaphors. These
metaphors are, on the other hand, partially rooted in ideologies and cultural models.
Simple examples of such metaphors include the conceptual dualisms such as right and
24

left, progressive and conservative, and other everyday terms, such as green or political
spectrum. There is a myriad of various terms from the scope of war, sports etc. In fact,
each political commentary in the newspaper is a noteworthy aggregate of political
metaphors. Also, it is not uncommon that a simple metaphor becomes a meme, a
shorthand term for a complex social phenomenon. Such term can then become a
standard term of its own. When performing the analysis of the political discourse,
pragmatic aspects should be taken into consideration and the analysis has to be of
critical nature, exploring the intentions of a speaker and the strategies they use to win in
the never-ending negotiations.
In general, metaphors are absolutely central to our understanding of many
political concepts, which are usually too abstract, remote, and complex to grasp to an
average voter. The more distant the object, the more important vehicle of understanding
and comforting ones mind metaphor is. In my opinion, metaphor, regardless if novel or
established, then bears the function of prejudice, i.e. of the tool to deconstruct and
internalise reality.16
As we can see, the issue of expressions typical of political discourse is complex
and has been approached from various perspectives. Mtt (2007: 168), making use of
Foucaults (1969) insights, defines the goal of [political] discourse analysis as to
determine why a certain fragment of discourse (statement or nonc) and no other has
appeared in a given place in a given time. This Foucaltian and pragmatic perspective
makes the reader pay attention to the subtle yet omnipresent variables of contextual
meaning, ideology, relations of power and coercion, audience-specificity, and so forth.

16

On a side note, this is one of the reasons why deliberate, participatory democracy has empirical limits
and cannot be employed successfully in real conditions.

25

All utterances need to be looked at with regard to their role in vast networks of concept,
meanings, and desired aims.
Following Foulcaltian logics, we could define analyzing metaphors as a
particular method of discourse analysis, which in turn would be a method of analyzing
either likely intentions of the players in the political system (which is the case of this
text) or political ideology in general (which would require a much more sophisticated
analysis).
In the context of EU, this is particularly relevant with regard to the fact that the
Union is a relatively young17 and still evolving entity. It is a project still in the making.
There is an ongoing debate whether its future lies in converting the Union into a
somewhat integrated, centralised supranational project or rather going back to the
intergovernmental, loosely-federated approach. Recall past employing and successful
introducing (i.e. lexicalizing) of such metaphors as Common European house, Three
Pillars of the European Communities, two-speed Europe, democratic deficit and so
forth, which undoubtedly influenced the way EU has been portrayed in the media and
thought over by political actors as well as voters (cf. e.g. Chaban et al. 2007, Hlsse
2006).

5.1 Agenda setting and persuasion

In 1946, in his famous essay Politics and the English Language, George Orwell
noted: By using stale metaphors, similes, and idioms, you save much mental effort, at

17

Despite having roots as far as in the 1950s, EU in its current form and subjectivity has been in existence
only since 1993.

26

the cost of leaving your meaning vague, not only for your reader but for yourself.
(Orwell 1968: 134 as cited by Mller 2005: 54).
For Orwell, the term stale was primarily a question of style. He viewed using
vague language and clichs as a sign of decay of English rhetorics, not as rudimental
presence of the change of foundations of public politics which can be traced back to
these times. On the other hand, as Mller interestingly points out, Orwells definition go
against the traditional view of metaphors as a mere stylistic ornament, for his
conception is also connected to the condition of mental efforts and ethics of a
speaker. This might have been a nodal point in the evolution of understanding of
metaphor.
Since WWII, an increasing attention has been given to the problems of
persuasion, strategies, self-portraying, and targeted use of concepts in political
communication. Nowadays, hardly anyone questions the fact that political discourse is
characterized by its predominantly persuasive function and argumentative, often
market-oriented style. Under typical circumstances of a democratic political system,
language used within political discourse is a strategic tool directly employed in political
battle. This has never been so much true as now, in the gold age of political marketing.
All utterances should be regarded as possibly strategically chosen ways of setting and
promoting the agenda. Use of metaphor in political discourse is a fundamentally
persuasive discourse act (Charteris-Black 2004: 13 as cited in Candel 2005: 16).
In the agenda setting theory (see e.g. McCombs 2009), strategic framing 18
refers to intentional emphasizing of those elements of a problem which are considered

18

In this thesis, strategic use of framing is strictly called strategic framing. This is not always the case in
theoretical works. This choice is motivated by the effort for terminological charity (strategic framing is a

27

as important by an actor, or those definitions and views of the problem which are
strategically advantageous, particularly using media. The aim is making such solutions
or topics salient, i.e. widely discussed and perceived as important (e.g. McCombs 2009:
133). Using metaphors is one of the way of persuasion. By highlighting some aspects,
and ignoring others, conceptual metaphors located in media discourses are claimed to
form cognitive models which organize thought and action (Gozzi 1999: 10 as cited
by Chaban et al. 2007: 88).
Strategic framing usually works with direct, intentional linkage of source and
target concepts, thus creating a metaphor which can be used to make a particular sociopolitical issue salient or, alternatively, to portray the speaker as an agent capable of
resolving the problem perceived. Hypothetical examples include conceptual frames
such as TERRORISM

IS A DISEASE + CANDIDATE IS CURE; or

CRIMINAL + CANDIDATE IS A GUARDIAN

POLITICAL OPPONENT IS A

etc. Metaphor may play a key role in addressing

a voter because it can be used as a shortcut for delivering a message using a concept
familiar to the voter.19

5.2 Concepts and transitivity in politics

If the validity of the conceptual (cognitive) model is accepted, one could also argue that
important societal changes are accompanied by large shifts in conceptual sets (and vice
versa). In this respect, it might come in handy to recall George Orwells 1984 and all

pragmatic act, portraying with the help of concepts, whereas framing (without an attribute) is a general
or theoretical term referring to working with concepts.
19
On the other hand, the notion that metaphor is an undoubtedly effective tool of persuasion has not
remained uncontested and needs to be viewed as a qualified hypothesis rather than a fact. There were also
scholars who argued that metaphor-free speech was more persuasive than the other kind. Both parties had
empirical proofs of their position (cf. Mller 2005: 55).

28

sorts of wag-the-dog remarks. Societal discourse and power structure are clearly
interconnected systems. I am far from saying Change the meaning of words and
empires will fall, I just want to remind the reader of the ever-faster changes in public
discourse and the nature of the power relations which we have been seeing since the 2nd
half of the 20th century. As Lakoff (2004: xv in Helln Garca 2010: 59) indicates: In
politics our frames shape our social policies and the institutions we conform to carry
th[ese] policies. To change our frame is to change all of this. Reframing is social
change.
Metaphor plays a prominent role especially in the post-modern approach to
political and societal reality. As Hlsse (2006: 397) sums up, [m]etaphors are a means
of imagining and by the same token constructing social reality. This has to do with their
very logic of operation: they project the meanings of a familiar issue onto a less
familiar and abstract one, thus constituting the unknown in terms of the known.
Analyzing discourse of a particular political actor thus touches upon the belief and
conceptual constructions hidden in their expressions. By decoding and interpreting
metaphorical concept, we may arrive at finding out the speakers intentions.
Accepting Lakoff & Johnsons theory of conceptual systems in its entirety, we
can assume that metaphors, once said, work also subconsciously, thus making the
message accessible on multiple levels simultaneously. A clever use of metaphors may
thus enable an informed political actor to kill two or possibly more birds with one
stone.
Possible use of conceptual metaphors may also include working with transitive
relations as defined by Systemic Functional Grammar of English (Halliday 2004). The
distribution and mixture of different process types gives a particular flavour to a text
29

and contributes to determining the text type and the discourse genre to which it
pertains. In addition, the transitivity grammar construes a particular world view
specific to the text in question (Halliday 2004: 174, 283): it inscribes the text within a
particular discourse type by encoding ideologies in the textual grammar. (Mtt
2007: 169-170). A general idea of types of relations used in metaphors can help to
discover which values are presented in speeches and texts, and how the political issues
are constructed by various speakers.

5.3 Intercultural communication

Let us not forget the other side of the equation the acceptability and comprehensibility
of the message. Clearly, even most unusual metaphors must be compatible with the
established conceptual system if they are to be decoded by the receiver of the
communication.
Thats where the factor of shared culture, context, experience, and translation
across different cultures comes into consideration. All metaphors, whether novel or not,
must be used in accordance with the (long established) conceptual system in order to be
recognized and interpreted appropriately. One can assume that this does not pose a big
problem in case when the speaker and receiver live in the same cultural system.
However, what happens if the strategic, subtle, conceptually salient, and politically
important metaphor needs to be translated to someone coming from a completely
different background? A failure in transfer may have a number of dramatic
consequences, form unnatural feel to logical incomprehensibility to misinterpretation of
speakers intention.
30

The role of language and translation and interpreting in international politics is

therefore crucial and cannot be overestimated. Negotiations take place under
circumstances with a great scope for misunderstanding, and different conceptualisations
of the world are inevitable (Sharifian 2007: 413-414). That is why the role of translators
as mediators is so important in this field.
The relationship between translation studies and political discourse has not been
widely discussed yet. Most analyses have focused on textual or (critical) discourse
analysis. The role of a translator has been largely seen as mediatory in the process of
intercultural (contextual) communication (Lande 2010; Xiaoqian 2005: 85). There is a
shared belief among the scholars that broader societal and political framework in
which such discourse is embedded has to be taken into consideration (Schffner 1997:
119 as cited in Lande 2010.). In the recent years, there has also been a growing
appreciation of usefulness of the models of cognitive science for the fields such as
political science or international relations (Slingerland Blanchard Boyd-Judson
2007: 57).
In the last decades, such an approach to translation in the context of
interculturality has prevailed that translation is always connected to interpretation, or
that translation means cross-cultural understanding (Rubel Rosman 2004: 1 as
cited by Shore 2005). As Shore correctly points out, this shorthand definition is
somewhat idealised and does not touch upon serious problems of intercultural
interpretation. The main issue is the risk of misinterpretation and meaning lost in
translation due to the inevitable ambiguity of cross-cultural references and the lack of a
universally understood language system. The impacts are crucial because there are
examples when questions of war and peace depend on which language version one
31

reads. And, of course, in our increasingly globalised and multi-cultural world, the risks
are more and more common (ibid.: 13-14).

5.4 Specifics of the EU

The EU project accounts for an environment sui generis unparalleled anywhere in the
world, today or in history. On one hand, it is a conglomerate of many (often
fundamentally) different cultures and languages. One the other hand, a process of
creating shared political institutions and political lite has quite advanced in the last
decades and the todays Union may thus be considered to be an entity with many
features typical of a common western polity.
European Union is worth analysing for several important reasons: I believe that
EU is a good example of a novel socio-political structure where the processes of
intercultural communication play a key role. Moreover, the questions and rules
discussed are of political nature, thus inherently dealing with relations of power,
economics, international security, and so on. The importance of translations of such
discussions and documents cannot be questioned. Last but not least, the discourse
originating inside and among European institutions inevitably influences discourse in
other fields and in other levels.
The highly complex system of internal translation in EU itself, with 23 official
languages possessing (formally) the same status, is unique in the world and should be
thus studied from various scholarly perspectives. The costs of translation and the
logistic complexity of the system are extraordinary. The number of language
combinations and types of communication is so high and the incidence of high-risk
32

areas and sensitive topics so common that the system is prone to having issues of intercultural misinterpretation and ambiguity. This is the case not only from the theoretical
point of view the problems can be documented by a number of translation blunders
and misinterpretations: Hence, the metaphors of the Tower of Babel and a game of
Chinese whispers (Shore 2005: 17) are indeed pertinent.
From the intercultural point of view, there are three working languages (English,
French, and German), which are used primarily within the European institutions such as
in the Commission, and enjoy a special status. As the website of the Department
(Directorate-General) for Translation states,
[...] the only documents produced in all 23 official languages are pieces of
legislation and policy documents of major public importance accounting for
about a third of our work. [...] Internal documents are all written in (and
sometimes translated into) English, French and German. Similarly, incoming
documents which may be drafted in any language are translated into one
of these three languages so they can be generally understood within the
Commission. (DG Translation 2011).
This (technically certainly understandable) custom creates a possible imbalance within
EU and may contribute to the predominance of the cultural perspective of chosen big
European countries, which may shape the discourse and lead to the additional cultural
gaps between the big players and those countries with non-dominant languages.

33

6. The Corpus
One of the most difficult tasks when dealing with given research questions is securing
available material, i.e. finding suitable (i.e. political, non-legal) texts from a rather
narrowly specified area which would be available in both English and Czech. I tried to
create such a corpus which would possibly contain at least traces of creative
communication, persuasion, and other features typical of political discourse. Out of
question thus were purely or predominantly technical and procedural materials (laws,
notes, memos); priority was given to such texts where higher occurrence of tropes was
assumed.
As a rule, not all potentially interesting material could have been used due to a
simple fact that the amount of material translated into Czech is substantially limited. A
surprisingly acute problem was that the suitable textual materials produced in EU are
really scarce. For instance, a significant part of documents is being produced only in
widespread working languages, i.e. French, English, and German. On a similar note,
absolutely out of the question did prove to be political manifestos and platforms of the
party fractions existing in EP the primary political materials where most metaphors
can be expected the reason being simply non-existence of their translations to minor
languages such as Czech.20
The final, compromise version of the corpus contains two sets of texts:

20

With no doubt, declarations and electoral manifestos of political fractions would fulfil the criteria of
political discourse like no other comparable material, but these were unfortunately not available in Czech
at all. Also, it has been tried to add other, not purely translated texts (Schffner (2004): In order to find
out more about universal, culture-overlapping, and culture-specific metaphors, the analysis of
translations can also be of use. A potentially good source for empirical analyses are multilingual
documents that have come into being in a text production process, involving a combination of
multilingual negotiations. However, these are extremely difficult to obtain as well.

34

1. Official press-releases from top European institutions,21 as available from the

official internet portal of the EU [http://europa.eu/rapid/searchAction.do].
Unlike legislation, press-releases are expected to contain at least traces of
figurative language and creatively used metaphors. When building up the text
bank of press releases, two criteria were applied:
An institution must offer a significant part of its press releases in Czech,
Priority must be given to (quasi)political institutions (such as the
Commission) over those of purely technical nature (such as European
Personnel Selection Office).
With regard to the nature of the material published from particular institutions
and availability of its translations, two types of texts were taken into account,22
namely (in the EU jargon):
a. Presidency of the Council of the European Union (DOC) 11 pairs
(i.e. all available texts from the term which fulfilled the criteria). Texts
from this domain have been published by the Commission and usually
resume the outputs of what the particular session of the Commission:
what was debated and what conclusions and recommendations were
achieved. In each DOC text, an introductory (preamble) chapter plus one
randomly selected chapter from the paper itself was analysed. As the
initial pre-research revealed certain stylistic uniformity of these texts and
21

In case of official press releases, the original source language of the documents cannot be determined.
Although the English source texts are presumably prevalent (as traceable from the variety of texts not
translated), another possibility cannot be ruled out that certain texts were originally formulated in in other
language (usually French). This is implied by the nature of practice of the European institutions.
22
The selection of the EU institutions is rather narrow because typical press releases of most offices are
in fact based in journalistic discourse rather than political (which is no surprise after all), PESC press
releases are rather public memos and statements on various happenings in the world at large, and CJE
texts are full of uninteresting legal jargon.

35

a relatively lower incidence of tropes, it has been decided that the

analysis of the texts in their entirety was not necessary.
b. Council of the European union (PRES) [sic] 8 pairs. These texts
contain the speeches, conference opening remarks, published opinion
and so forth by the highest EU representatives. In other words, this part
of the text bank contains the press releases of the European Council
including the occasional semi-political declarations of the highest
representatives of the Union, the President of the EC Mr van Rompuy
(up to 7 pairs) and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign
Affairs and Security Policy, baroness Ashton (1 pair).

2. Selected plenary speeches from the floor of the European parliament.

Exclusively British and Czech representatives were selected. As a rule, these
speeches tend to be semi-prepared; traces of expressive language and a certain
level of lively discussion, thus a larger role of figurative tropes are to be
expected. The speeches are available on the EP website
[http://www.europarl.europa.eu/members/expert/groupAndCountry.do?language
=EN]. There are seven British and four Czech fractions in the current term. The
speeches from the whole period were selected, with regard to length and the type
of speech. If possible, speeches marked as Explanations of vote were not
preferred (a decision based on their shorter form and technical nature), but had
to be taken into account in cases of less active MEPs in whose profiles no proper
speeches were at hand. In case the randomly selected text was not long enough,
the next suitable one on the list was chosen.
36

1. As for the British MEPs, speeches of members from five fractions (S&D,
ALDE, G-EFA, ECR, EFD) plus one solitary member from the
remaining fraction (GUE-NGL) were taken into consideration.
Unattached members (NI) were ignored. That makes a total of 11 people.
2. As for Czech MEPs, an analogous procedure was carried out. In this
case, the speeches of nine members from three fractions (S&D, ECR,
GUE-NGL) plus two members of one remaining fraction (EPP) were
analysed, which makes us arrive at the same result, 11 people.
As a presupposed rule, Czech representatives tended to formulate their speeches
and written answers in Czech. This part of the corpus can thus be practically
considered as a bilingual corpus of a mixed nature23 where L1 is Czech and L2
English. The same (vice versa, needless to say) holds true for the British
members.24

6.1 Selection procedure

The selection of the official press releases was as follows:
1. Select the press releases available from chosen institutions in both languages.
2. Apply random sample selection (only applicable for PRES; in case of DOC, all
11 text pairs were taken).

23

Most texts are transcribed speeches, however, some texts are provided in writing and the ratio of both
types varies from person to person.
24
It should be noted that the number of MEPs analysed is too small to allow full statistical analysis the
aim of the selection procedure is to have a balanced corpus rather than trying to reach statistically
significant results for all groups. Moreover, the distribution of members across groups in both parties is
by definition irregular.

37

The selection of the parliament speeches was as follows:

1. Select the UK and CZ MEP group in the chosen term (7th EP)
2. Select all fractions except from Non-attained representatives (NI).
3. Select two (UK) or three (CZ) most active representatives of each fraction. If
there are not so many representatives in a particular fraction, take all and skip.
(For obvious reasons, disregard those MEPs whose contributions are largely
technical, typically the chairmen of EP committees.)
4. Apply random sample selection of those texts which have been translated to L2.
(In order to sort out too short and technical questions: If the text is not at least
two paragraphs long, skip it and select another article in the queue.)

6.2 Time range

After consideration, I decided to analyse solely the material from the current EP term,
which effectively started on 14 July 2009 and has been continuing till today. The final
time range covers the period between July 2009 and September 2011, i.e. about 2 years.
Whereas it would be most interesting to extend the time range to more terms, the
differences in composition of the EP would make the complexity of the corpus too high
and, consequently, the analysis rather unfeasible.

38

7. Qualitative analysis of metaphors

First of all, the results and other information on the research stated in following
subchapters deserve several notes: As outlined in the text above, it was not the aim of
the analysis to capture all metaphors in the corpus (this effort would be, after all, futile
due to the pervasiveness of metaphors in language) but to arbitrarily pick up those
which bear the semantic or pragmatic tension with regard to the functions of political
discourse. The same set of criteria has been applied to all three subcorpora, so the
difference between the numbers of metaphors in all three sets really should correspond
to the differences in nature and discourse.
The dataset contained living (i.e. not dead) metaphors whose tension was
implicit along with usually less interesting, dead metaphors recorded solely due to their
potentially important conceptual frame or contextual relevance. If a metaphor was not
likely to bear either of these two kinds of tension, it was usually not recorded. This was
the case particularly for the sedimented expressions which currently are either dead or
established as technical terms (provided they did not bear any contextual significance)
at any case, not perceived as figurative very much. Examples of real cases of tropes
(metaphors, metonymy, synecdoche) found in the corpus and usually deliberately
omitted from the analysis include:
In English: We have important work ahead; We focused our debate; Tailored to
one's own needs; The way forvard; Third-country nationals; Frozen conflict;
Collapse of the banking system / Soviet Union etc.; Sister parties; In the light of
progress made; Play a key role; Arab world; Schengen

39

In Czech: as uke / dozrl; Krok k vt ochran spotebitel; Vyslat signl

spolenosti; Boj proti nsil na ench; Transparence financovn; Rozpotov
krty; Legislativn rmec; Sttn pokladna; Pd berlnsk zdi; Sametov
revoluce

The metaphors have been recorded using the ST perspective. Whereas the source texts
were scanned through in their entirety, target texts were read only selectively. That
means that solely those metaphors found in the source text have been compared to their
translated counterparts in the L2 version. Even when an inverse case of translation was
found (lexical language translated as figurative, for example have double standards //
mit dvojm metrem), these cases were omitted.
Perhaps needless to say, the terms metaphor, metaphorical expression etc. in
all following subchapters refer solely to those terms which have been found interesting
enough and subsequently recorded to the dataset and analysed, even if, for the sake of
simplicity, the text refers to features of texts and EU practices in general. In other
words, the data and conclusions presented are related to metaphors bearing pragmatic or
conceptual significance, not all metaphors in the corpus.

7.1 General information on metaphors

The analysis of the corpus showed that metaphors really are widely used in various
types of political texts within EU. That means that figurative tropes and expressions
presenting conceptual relations indeed are a real issue of communication, which means
that translators have to deal with them on a daily basis.
40

As has been already mentioned, the corpus comprised three parts or subcorpora
of texts: PRES, the texts presented by Mr van Rompuy and Baroness Ashton on
various occasions; DOC, the press releases of the Council of EU; and EP, the texts
and speeches from the floor of the European Parliament. In a simplified way, PRES and
DOC are texts published by the executive, supposedly neutral EU bodies, and EP texts
come from the only (quasi-)legislative body EU has. Whereas PRES and DOC
subcorpora were unidirectional (EN-CS), the EP part contained the same number of
Czech-to-English and English-to-Czech translations. The length, number of texts, and
general number of expressions recorded are summarised in the table (all figures are
related to the L1 version of the subcorpora):

Information on corpus
Subcorpus

Number of
texts

Total length

Average length
of a text

Number of
expressions

PRES (Van
Rompuy,
Ashton)

35,371
characters
(19.7 pages)

4,421
characters (2.5
pages)

46

DOC (Council
of EU)

11

58,320
characters
(32.4 pages)

5,301
characters (2.9
pages)

69

EP (European
Parliament)

215

243,147
characters (135
pages)

1,130
characters
(0.63 page)

181

Total

234

336,838
characters (187
pages)

Table No. 3
41

302

As already partially apparent from the table, the presence of metaphors was uneven and
not uniform. In the texts published by the executive bodies, about 2.2 metaphorical
expressions per page were found (2.33 and 2.1 respectively); in the EP part, it was only
1.34 metaphors per page. The last figure is slightly misleading because it ignores the
considerably higher heterogeneity of EP texts (with regard to length, purpose, and
individual style): the differences in general use of language among individual
representatives were fundamental (and naturally so). 110 out of 215 texts analyzed did
contain no metaphor at all. If we take them away and focus only on those texts
containing at least one metaphorical expression, the incidence increases to 2.6
metaphors per page. In other words, those texts which did not lack figurative language
altogether were considerably richer in metaphors than those produced by the
(stylistically rather uniform) executive bodies. As for possible differences between the
CS-EN and EN-CS texts in the EP subcorpus, both parts proved to be exceptionally
similar, with 93 expressions distributed across 108 texts and 88 expressions across 107
texts respectively.
Overall, only a part of the texts included in the corpus could have been marked
as typical, recognizable political discourse which was to be expected in these settings.
There were considerable differences in the styles of usage of metaphors among different
representatives, which follows from different personal styles of expression, and
seemingly from the differences between spoken and written communication in EP. It
probably goes without surprise that several representatives even did not use political
discourse proper and confined themselves to general or technical discourse featuring
technical terms and jargonese, yet no creative and figurative lexical units. This was the
case primarily among those MEPs with higher percentage of answers provided in
42

writing, i.e. so called explanations of vote,25 and particularly relevant in case of those
MEPs not very much active on the floor at all. Consider the following example taken
from one of the explanations of vote and note the distinctive technical style, overly
complicated structure and the obscurity of the actual message:
Nemn dleit je vzva Komisi ke zven potencilu strukturlnch fond
zjednoduenm a zlepenm postup a prunosti s drazem na dimenzi sociln
integrace s clem pomoci lenskm sttm optimalizovat vsledky sociln
politiky a politiky zamstnanosti a dosaen udritelnho rstu. // No less
important is the Commissions call to boost the potential of structural funds by
simplifying and improving approaches and flexibility, with an emphasis on the
dimension of social integration, in order to help Member States optimise the
results of social policy and employment policy and achieve sustainable growth.

Speeches on the EP floor were relatively less technical and also richer in metaphors
than answers provided in writing which lacked tropes or pragmatic markers. The nature
of discourse in both types of communication is different. Another thing to mention is
the natural difference among individual styles. Even in cases where all texts were likely
delivered on the floor, there were MEPs whose using metaphorical expression was
rather an exception in the stream of factual or technical speech. On the other hand, for
some of the MEPs, using tropes was a frequent strategy or a common way of
expression.

25

The types of texts were not known and thus not recorded for the purposes of statistical enquiry but were
quite noticeable nonetheless, because explanations of vote differed considerably from speeches in terms
of style as well as in structure and different choice of expressions (I decided to vote for this bill
because).

43

7.2 Nature and type of metaphors

As outlined in the methodological chapter (4.5), Newmarks typology was used to
examine the kinds of metaphors in the texts. The most important distinction was drawn
between older, lexicalised (LEX) expressions and newer, unlexicalised ones (UNL).26
When in doubt whether a metaphor was lexicalised or not, British National Corpus27
was consulted.
Whereas the borderline between lexicalised and unlexicalised is comparatively
easy to draw, assignment to specific subcategories is more problematic and involves a
certain degree of risk. Several cases were possible to assign to more subcategories than
one, contextual meaning had to be taken into consideration and in some cases, and the
rules had to be specified in an arbitrary way. For example, when discussing economy,
the term The way to recovery is a relatively established and common, thus classified
as stock metaphor, whereas the economy infected by the crisis is a metaphor
reintroduced not so long ago and shaping current discourse relatively strongly, hence
classified as recent. When in doubt which particular category to assign, a borderline
category X/Y was planned. This is no surprise due to the impressionistic nature of
Newmarks categories and the dynamics in the metaphors evolution. (On the other
hand, just one transitional category type, namely STOCK / RECENT, had to be
established in the end.)

Summary of metaphor types found in the corpus:

26
27

In the dataset, this variable is referred to as Nature.

BNC Interface: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk

44

Metaphor types in the corpus

Unlexicalised

Lexicalised

Adapted

Original

Dead

Clich

Clich / Stock
Stock

Recent

PRES (Van 4
Rompuy,
Ashton)

17

12

46

DOC
(European
Council)

12

31

13

69

EP
12
(European
Parliament)

19

19

10

12

74

28

181

Total

19

32

13

23

122

18

53

Subcorpus

16

Synecdoche, Total
metonymy

Table No. 4

7.2.1 Unlexicalised metaphors proper

It probably could have been expected that unlexicalised, or recent and original,
metaphors were represented to a considerably lesser extent than lexicalised ones: Only
35, or 12%, of all metaphorical expressions were categorised as unlexicalised.
Moreover, a strong difference was found between the two executive subcorpora on one
hand and the EP subcorpus on the other hand.

45

In PRES subcorpus, only four unlexicalised metaphors were found, one of them used
twice in almost the same exact form. All of them fall under Adapted subcategory. (In
the DOC subcorpus, no unlexicalised metaphor was found whatsoever.) The
expressions are:
Without Europe, there would have been an Arab Spring, but without us there
will be no Arab summer! // Arabsk jaro by nastalo i bez Evropy, bez n vak
nepijde arabsk lto!
Without Europe, there would still have been an Arab Spring, but without us
there will be no Arab summer! // Arabsk jaro by vypuklo i bez Evropy, avak
arabsk lto bez ns nepijde!
[in a speech about tackling the economic crisis:] we created a solid fire-wall
and better fire-brigade equipment // vytvoili jsme solidn protiporn hrz a
lep hasic prostedky
[Used in a title:] A SUMMER OF DISCONTENT? // BOULIV LTO?

In the EP subcorpus, 31 expressions were found, 19 original and 12 adapted.

Examples (ORIGINAL):
Obas mm v tto ctihodn instituci pocit, e prav hemisfra vid obsah
better regulation diametrln odlin od hemisfry lev // I sometimes have
the feeling in this venerable institution that the right hemisphere sees the content
of better regulation diametrically differently from the left hemisphere
uzaven pevnost Evropa neprospje nikomu // a closed fortress Europe would
benefit no one

46

Indini kmene Dakot maj pslov: Sed-li na mrtvm koni, sesedni. A

takovm mrtvm konm je vmi doporuovan politika 20-20-20 // The Dakota
Indian tribe have a saying: If you are sitting on a dead horse, dismount. Your
recommended 20-20-20 policy is just such a dead horse
Belarus is the missing piece of Europes democratic jigsaw puzzle // Blorusko
je chybjc kus demokratick skldaky Evropy
[] Baroness Ashton, the Sarah Palin of the ex-student Left [] // []
baronky Ashtonov, jaksi Sarah Palinov exstudentsk levice []

Examples (ADAPTED):
udren nskoku ped inovanmi tygry, jako jsou na i Brazlie //
maintaining a lead against innovation tigers such as China and Brazil
Antidumping je dobr sluha, ale zl pn // Anti-dumping is a good servant but
a bad master
Their European dream, to quote the Commissioner, is that they will receive
subsidies // Jejich evropsk sen, abych citoval komisae, spov v tom, aby
dostvaly dotace
[Marine Stewardship Council] is setting a gold standard. // Tato organizace
stanovuje zlat standard.

The peculiarity of unlexicalised (i. e. original and adapted) metaphors (not only) in
political discourse lies in the almost certain intent of the speaker. One can hardly
assume that someone spends their intellectual resources creating original or creatively
adapted metaphor without the intention to point out specifically the meaning of the
47

message, or to exploit the conceptual tension involved. (On the other hand, older or
lexicalised metaphors can be used both automatically and intentionally, and there is no
easy way to prove the true intention of the speaker.)
This also means that using an unlexicalised metaphor is a straightforward
strategy: The intention is to highlight a point, not to cover the concept in any kind of
wrapping. The examples are profound: Comparing policy to a dead horse is a very
strong way to say by means of an original metaphor that such a policy is defunct and
not worth defending. Similar effects are seen in cases of adapted metaphors, for
example European dream as an adaptation of American dream (meaning the very
best one can achieve, the underlying idea of a society) contrasting with the low-level
aim; and innovation tigers as an adaptation of tiger economy to emphasize the point
that innovation is the single most important thing in economy today and that innovators
are the winners of future.

7.2.2 Lexicalised metaphors proper

As for the lexicalised category, these expressions accounted for the vast majority of the
dataset (298 expressions, i.e. 70%). Most of them fell under stock category but
occasional examples of recent, clich, and dead metaphors were present as well.

Examples
we decided to refine and strengthen our tool box. // rozhodli [jsme se] zpesnit
a poslit nstroje, kter mme k dispozici. (PRES, STOCK)

48

The Arab spring is also an invitation to redouble our efforts // Arabsk jaro je
pro ns tak vzvou ke znsoben sil (PRES, RECENT)
This [the options to tackle the problems of economy] is a strong package. // Jde
tedy o drazn balek opaten. (PRES, CLICH / STOCK)
We will build on individual assessments of partners' performance and needs
[] // Stavt budeme na samostatnm posuzovn vsledk a poteb partner
[] (PRES, DEAD)
framework for closer policy coordination on financial stability, in line with the
roadmap agreed by the Council // komplexnho rmce pro celou EU v zjmu u
koordinace politik v oblasti finann stability, v souladu s cestovn mapou,
kterou Rada schvlila (DOC, STOCK)
It concluded the first European semester // Uzavela prvn evropsk semestr
(DOC, RECENT)
Progress and democracy go hand in hand // Pokrok a demokracie jsou
nerozlun spjaty (DOC, CLICH / STOCK)
Basel agreement, which is an important step in strengthening global financial
stability // Basilejsk dohody, je pedstavuje vznamn krok k poslen globln
finann stability (DOC, DEAD)
m je nyn na stran Evropsk komise // the ball is now in the hands of the
Commission (EP, STOCK)
the years the UK Labour Government acted as a Bush poodle // v letech, kdy se
labouristick vlda Spojenho krlovstv chovala jako Bushv pudlk (EP,
RECENT)

49

Dame Sarah and the Lib Dems can cry crocodile tears now over cases like Mr
Symeou // Pan Sarah Ludfordov a liberln demokrat nyn mohou ronit slzy
nad ppady, jako je kauza pan Symeoua (EP, CLICH)
the Lisbon Treaty is, in our view, still a step in the wrong direction. //
Lisabonsk smlouva je podle naeho nzoru stle krokem patnm smrem.
(EP, DEAD)

The results show that lexicalised metaphors, and especially stock ones, are by all means
the most typical tropes in the texts analyzed.28 I would not argue for the thesis that this
is the commonality between the political discourse and general discourse. Instead, I
would like to raise the question of multidimensionality and interdiscursivity. It seems
that with regard to the presence of metaphors in language whereas the PRES and
DOC subcorpora feature something as common, typical style (characterized by
relatively high occurrence of stock metaphors and synecdoche / metonymy on one hand
and the general lack of unlexicalised metaphors on the other hand), a similar conclusion
cannot be drawn in case of EP texts. EP texts are heterogeneous in terms of occurrence
of metaphors, and stock metaphors, albeit most common, are not as dominant as in the
case of executive subcorpora. Also, original and adapted metaphors are more common
here.
Moreover, consider the differences in style which can be found among the EP
texts. These are striking especially when the passages in the dataset are compared to
those texts which were omitted. It is naturally quite common for one particular
representative to use different styles and discourse strategies according to the nature of
28

For the data on strategies of translation, please see chapter 7.3.

50

the debate, topic discussed, context etc. The EP texts also featured many cases of
legalese, technical style etc. The point is that there indeed are differences in using
metaphors between executive EU bodies and members of the European Parliament. The
style used by the European Council is just one way which can be employed on the floor
of the Parliament, and there is no such thing as a universal European jargon.

7.2.3 Metonymy and synecdoche

In all three subcorpora, there was quite a high presence of expressions which fall under
the category of synecdoche and metonymy (53 cases or 18%). These tropes are based on
proximity or interchangeability of concepts; they are more explicit than metaphor
proper. Metonymy is often considered as being of less interest because of less
originality: its very essence is predictability (the association must be obvious), whereas
metaphor is traditionally praised for its originality, its heuristic effect of showing
hitherto unnoticed connections. (Stlhammar 2006: 101).
Although the analysis of synecdoche and metonymy was not a primary goal of
this work, this kind of trope was identified as one of the most typical communicational
tool in the corpus. Those cases of synecdoche / metonymy where the objects were
livened by the speaker, i.e. added metaphorical sense, have been recorded and added
to the dataset, for their use can be located on the borderline of the research questions of
the thesis. Synecdoche / metonymy, if used creatively, may become a linguistic
demonstration of the conceptual metaphor, the most typical strategy in these settings
being personification (i.e. STATE or COLLECTIVE ACTOR IS (i.e. has attributes of) A
PERSON).

51

In the dataset, this kind of expressions comprised 12 cases (26%) in the PRES
subcorpus, 13 cases (17%) in the DOC subcorpus, and 28 (15%) in the EP subcorpus.
With regard to the fact that other cases of synecdoche / metonymy were not recorded
because they did not bear significant conceptual tension, this kind of figurative tropes
can be considered to be the typical feature of the political discourse texts within EU.
Moreover, two different patterns of this metonymy could be identified in the
corpus:
1. Animate synecdoche / metonymy these do not make any sense without the
metaphorical dimension (For example: The Commission is looking forward)
2. Inanimate synecdoche / metonymy these can be regarded as shorthand,
they make sense even with no metaphorical interpretation involved (For
example: The Commission accepted a proposal)

The difference between both categories can be identified by logical reflection. Whereas
the meaning of some verbs, say, accept, can refer to technical procedure and can be
traced back (i.e. absolute majority of members accepted the proposal, maybe there was
an unanimous vote among the members of the Commission, etc.), verbs such as look
forward or welcome cannot be deconstructed in a pure technical way (did each and
every member of the Commission really like the motion? Is there a way to prove that
objectively?) Here, the body is clearly becoming more than a sum of its parts, the
holistic metaphorical dimension is activated and the figure is therefore used as a
conceptual metaphor.
The field of synecdoche and metonymy is quite vast and it is difficult to link
these expressions to concepts and strategies. For example: The metonymy
52

bude to evropsk ednk, a nikoli americk ednk, [...] kdo ve Sttech bude
rozhodovat // it will now be a European official, and not an American official
[...] who will decide in the Member States
could be ignored on basis of the linguistic criteria (no figurative element used) but can
be taken into account because it bears an emotive tension, a strategic portrayal of
political issue (The concept, say, OURS VERSUS FOREIGN). Clearly, this statement is
more powerful than a hypothetical The competence to decide on this issue is in
European, not American authority.
Also, we could say that various stages of sedimentation can be identified here,
similarly as in the case of metaphors proper. Only briefly, expressions such as
[Institution] is invited; [Institution] plays a role; [Institution] faces [a
pressure]; Head of state; Kanada zavedla vza; pan komisaka se postavila za
Rumuny a Bulhary; Dt Washingtonu jasn najevo
... bear less tension and were often not included in the dataset. The opposite can be said
of expressions such as
[Institution] reaffirm one's determination; "A Europe that protects"; the
European Council remains firmly committed to the process; the Union can
better engage with its strategic partners; [Institution] express[es its]
satisfaction; EU selhv a netla na Kanadu.
Nevertheless, these categories are constructed in a rather impressionistic way. The area
of dubious cases is vast. The actual relevance of the verbs such as recall, urge,
recognize, or exchange views is highly context-dependent and cannot be determined
universally and objectively.

53

7.3 Translation strategies

The problem of translation strategy is one of the most interesting ones from the point of
translation studies, because it shows how the expressions are changed in the process of
translation and how much different their SL and TL leverage is. Newmarks typology
was applied in this part of the analysis. The frequency of all strategies used is summed
up in the table:

Translation strategies
Strategy
Subcorpus

Reproducing Standard
image

Simile

Simile plus Sense

sense

Deletion

Metaphor
plus sense

PRES (Van 36
Rompuy,
Ashton)

DOC
(European
Council)

15

EP
115
(European
Parliament)

25

32

Total

31

53

51

202

Table No. 5

The strategy of reproducing the metaphorical image in target language (No. 1) is by far
the most common one, followed by the strategy of converting metaphor into sense (No.
54

5). Replacing the image with a different image (common in TL, No. 2) has been also
used, particularly in EP, yet not so widely. With only one exception, solely these three
strategies are occurring in PRES and DOC subcorpora. In EP subcorpus, three other
ways of translation are found, however this cannot be regarded as an important
difference due to the significantly larger size of this part. Also, almost surprisingly,
there is almost no tendency whatsoever to delete metaphorical expressions. Let us see
some examples:

Typical strategies
Reproducing image in the TL (No. 1):
we covered all the sides and angles of the debt crisis // bylo na dluhovou krizi v
eurozn nahleno ze vech stran a hl (PRES)
[a referendum is] a significant step towards a more open and democratic
political system // jde o vznamn krok vped na cest k otevenjmu a
demokratitjmu politickmu systmu (DOC)
Europes expertise and resources must be mobilized in a coherent manner //
Je nezbytn soudrnm zpsobem mobilizovat odborn znalosti a zdroje, kter
m Evropa k dispozici (DOC)
cestu, kterou Rusko postupn kr od totality pes autoritativn systm smrem
k demokracii // the path Russia is gradually treading from totalitarianism via an
authoritarian system to democracy (EP)
persecution and harassment against those who dare challenge [Lukashenko's]
iron-fisted rule // svou kampa za pronsledovn tch, kte si dovol vyzvat
jeho vldu elezn psti (EP)
55

Converting image into sense (No. 5):

Your country has turned the fundamentals of the State inside out // Vae zem
dokzala zsadn zmnit zklady sttu (PRES)
A win-win situation // Takov situace bude vhodn pro vechny (PRES)
of the comprehensive package of measures // komplexnho souboru opaten
(DOC)
It is time to get off the reactive and chaotic back foot and onto the proactive,
well-managed front foot // Nastal as skoncovat s reakc a chaosem a piklonit
se k aktivnjmu a dobe zenmu ponn (EP)
It is American pork-barrel politics special pleading for sectoral interests
brought into the European Parliament // Americk styl politiky vyuvajc
veejn prostedky k prosazovn zjm jednotlivch odvtv je penesen do
Evropskho parlamentu (EP)
alespo si tady neleme do kapsy // but let us at least not lie to ourselves (EP)

Replacing SL image with TL image (No. 2):

the European Council paved the way for Croatia's accession to the EU // [Ve
vztahu k Chorvatsku] dnes Evropsk rada pipravila pdu pro to, aby
pistoupilo k EU (PRES)
[the European Council] mapped out the next steps // [Evropsk rada] nastnila
v tto otzce dal postup (DOC)
pelapovn na mst mus skonit // we must stop dragging our feet (EP)

56

nen mon donekonena tahat Turecko za nos // it is not possible to pull the
wool over Turkeys eyes (EP)
we should be bending over backwards to respect that principle // mli
[bychom] dt zpteku a tuto zsadu respektovat (EP)

Infrequent strategies and noteworthy cases

Translating metaphor (simile) by simile plus sense (No. 4)
several countries have gone far beyond their traditional positions and red lines
// Nkolik zem se pi pijmn tchto smlch rozhodnut znan odchlilo od
svch obvyklch postoj a pekroilo hranice [z dvodu...] (PRES)
[prezident Obama] Inovace tehdy nazval Sputnikem na generace // He
referred to innovation as our generations Sputnik moment (EP)
Nenechme si prosm ulett Sputnik na generace // We must not allow our
generations Sputnik moment to slip away (EP)

Translating metaphor by simile, retaining the image (No. 3)

Solidarity and responsibility has to be a two-way street. // Solidarita a
odpovdnost mus bt obousmrn. (EP)
We are also fooling ourselves if we think that what is on the table here is
actually going to meet the needs of each and every migrant worker

//

Klameme sami sebe, pokud se domnvme, e to, co zde ped nmi le, skuten
uspokoj poteby kadho jednotlivho migrujcho pracovnka (EP)
the Western Balkans, a region where EU membership prospects are the glue
that binds these fractious countries together // [] zpadnm Balkn,
57

v regionu, kde vyhldka na lenstv v EU je onm tmelem, kter vechny tyto

rozttn zem spojuje. (EP)

It is perhaps natural that the strategies No. 1, 2, and 5 are used predominantly. A
hypothesis can be formulated that the strategies No. 1 and 5, reproducing image and
converting it into its sense, may be the most implicit and least risky ones. Previous
research has also shown the tendency to emulate the form of expression found in
SL.29 Choosing these strategies might even be connected to the tendency of being
influenced by the ST structures during translation process. Moreover, judging from
Newmarks notes on particular ways of translation, strategies No. 1, 2, and 5 may be
most suitable for translating non-literary, factual texts: Since other strategies are
believed to have some influence on the value of the resulting expression (No. 3:
modification of the metaphorical shock; No. 4: loss of tension, No. 7: enforcing the
metaphorical image), the translators might avoid them (automatically or on official
recommendation) in order to lessen the risk of misinterpretation.

7.4 Concepts and intercultural communication

One of the most common conceptual metaphors found in the corpora (featured by
several dozens of expressions) was the metaphor EU / STATE / INSTITUTION IS A PERSON
which was often (but not always) conveyed by synecdoche / metonymy (See chapter
7.2.3):

29

When analyzing the translations of journal articles from English to Spanish, Fernndez et al. (2003: 77)
even found that there was a tendency to isomorphism, i.e. translation tended to copy the original.

58

The European Union remains deeply concerned [about the detention] //

Evropsk unie je i nadle hluboce znepokojena [skutenost, e]

Other concepts typical of PRES and DOC subcorpora

GOVERNANCE / LIFE IS CONSTRUCTION
[help young people] to build a future in their own country // [pomoci mladm
lidem] s budovnm jejich budoucnosti ve vlastn zemi
GOVERNANCE / LIFE / NEGOTIATION IS A GAME / WAR
we will not waver in the defence of our monetary union and our common
currency // v obran na mnov unie a na spolen mny nepolevme
GOVERNANCE / LIFE IS A PATH
[Its implementation will] constitute a major step forward // [Jej proveden
bude] vznamnm krokem vped
CRISIS IS A DISEASE / FIRE
To prevent healthy euro area economies from being cut off from funding //
Abychom pedeli situaci, kdy by byl v dsledku rozmar trh zdravm
ekonomikm eurozny znemonn pstup k financovn
ADMISSION IS A PATH, MEMBERSHIP IS A DESTINATION
probh proces demokratizace v Turecku a piblen se EU // democratisation
process in Turkey and the process of drawing closer to the EU
EU IS A FAMILY
[congratulate on this achievement,] allowing Croatia to fully join the
European family// [blahopl k tomuto spchu;] Chorvatsko se stv
plnohodnotnm lenem evropsk rodiny
59

In EP, in addition to the concepts above, several other, less frequent cases appeared,
including:
MONEY / PEOPLE ARE LIQUID
transparentnost finannch tok, kter proud do politickch hnut //
transparency in relation to the financial sums flowing into political movements
Metaphor of CONTAINER
uzaven pevnost Evropa neprospje nikomu // a closed fortress Europe would
benefit no one
CITIZENS ARE BELOW, INSTITUTIONS ARE ABOVE
[rozhodnut se mi jev jako] uml krok, kter nevychz zdola // [the decision
looks like] a measure artificially imposed not from below
EU IS A TERRITORY BROKEN APART
The San Andreas Fault for the European Union is between the seven Member
States who are large net contributors, and the rest. // Zlom San Andreas pro
Evropskou unii probh mezi sedmi lenskmi stty, kter jsou velkmi istmi
pltci, a tmi ostatnmi

Differences in concepts across subcorpora do exist because there was a wider range of
concepts found in EP texts. Then again, the difference was not fundamental and can be
most probably again accounted for the multidimensionality of EP discourse.
No particular structures of transitivity were discovered apart from several cases
dealing with the phenomenon of spatial reasoning (what is coming from citizens comes
from below; nations who are not members of EU are outside; there is a physical
60

distance between rich countries and beneficiaries of the financial support, between
citizens and Europe etc.)
Overall, EP metaphors serve as better examples of intertextuality which is again
given by the differences in purpose and style. Consider for example the following
statement which appeared in the speech about crisis in Iceland and which refers to the
phenomenon of Nordic sagas:
The referendum at the end of this week will hopefully bring an end to the saga
[regarding Iceland] // Referendum, kter probhne koncem tohoto tdne, tuto
sgu doufejme ukon
Utterances of this kind are naturally likely to appear in public, lively, and to some
extent topical discussion such as during the debate in the Parliament.

7.4.1 Concepts changed by translation

As visible in the previous subchapters, one could say that the typical metaphor used
within European political institutions is a lexicalised, stock metaphor translated by close
reproduction of the image in the target language without the change in concept. Most
metaphors are indeed so. On top of that, most metaphors analyzed were found to be
culturally universal, working with concepts directly transferable between the two
cultures involved (as demonstrated e. g. by the predominance of the strategy of
reproducing the image). On the other hand, there was a very small amount of cases
which deserve more attention.
Comparing conceptual frames may tell us about the difference of metaphorical
expression for the source and target culture, ergo about tackling cultural differences. Let
61

us see at the cases where the conceptual metaphor has been changed during translation
(i.e. obviously in those cases where the strategy was different from simple reproducing):

Cases where the conceptual metaphor was loosened:

[To obtain for Parliament an equal role to Council in] determining the
scoreboard for detecting possible macroeconomic imbalances. // [zajistit
Parlamentu] pi vypracovvn pehledu za elem odhalen monch
makroekonomickch nerovnovh [stejnou lohu, jakou m v tto souvislosti
Rada] (EN: GOVERNANCE IS A GAME CS: none)
The European Council welcomed progress made in Ireland in the
implementation of its reform programme, which is well on track // Evropsk
rada uvtala pokrok Irska pi provdn reformnho programu, kter probh
uspokojivm tempem. (EN: GOVERNANCE IS A PATH CS: none)

Cases where the conceptual frame has been directly changed into a different one,
either slightly:
suma [] zmiz v propadliti korupce // [aid] disappears into the jaws of
corruption (CS: CORRUPTION IS DOWN, CORRUPTION IS A TRAP EN:
CORRUPTION IS A MONSTER)
or profoundly (the only case of this very kind was found):
the European Council paved the way for Croatia's accession to the EU // [Ve
vztahu k Chorvatsku] dnes Evropsk rada pipravila pdu pro to, aby
pistoupilo k EU (EN: ADMISSION IS A PATH CS: ADMISSION IS PLANTING)

62

Nonetheless, it is necessary to point out that those cases were truly sporadic; one cannot
possibly speak about fundamental shifts in conceptual metaphors or even distortion of
meaning with regard to intercultural communication. The most typical cases of shift of
meaning were not those which would involve the change in conceptual frames; it was
rather a question of style, emphasis, and emotional temperature, as in following
examples. In these cases, we can see a distinctive loss of not only the metaphor tension
but also a certain shift in the semantic meaning of the phrases. That is because the SL
metaphors are truly language- and culture specific, and their transfer to another
language is very difficult:

Je to pt minut po dvanct // It is high time to act

otzka na Komisi [] je, jak se k, mimo msu // question to the Commission
[] is, so to speak, off message
nmitky jsou lich // the objections are unfolded30
knee jerk reactions from this Parliament are unlikely to solve any problems //
Spontnn reakce Parlamentu jen st vye jakkoli problem

Let us take a look at the first two examples for instance. The first translation shows a
shift in meaning: The proper literal sense of the phrase would perhaps be It is almost
too late to act. The second translation is very similar as the previous one. The term off
message refers to messages which are unofficial, spoken not on behalf of the
institution. The proper sense could be this is not the right actor to ask such a message.

30

On a side note: Mistranslated.

63

Nonetheless, such examples of mistranslation were too truly exceptional and one
could argue that the shifts in meaning are, due to the context, not strong enough to
preclude proper understanding.
Perhaps one of the most interesting translation problems encountered in the
course of the analysis was the case of double meaning needed to deal with in the
following statement. It was also probably the only metaphor found which was
impossible to be transferred without the (at least partial) loss of its SL tension and
creatively crafted point:
The French now want to join the Italians and say arrivederci Roma //
Francouzi se chtj pipojit k Italm a zvolat sbohem, Romov
The expression plays with two meanings of the word Roma that of the name of the
ethnic group and that of the name for the capital city of Italy. Owing to the inescapable
fact that there are two distinctive names for the two objects in Czech, Romov and
m, there was no easy way to convey the point. On the other way, no factual mistake
has been made, the only loss made was of metaphorical punning, not metaphor as such.

8. Discussion. Avenues for future research

The translation-studies-driven and discourse-analysis-driven research of political texts
and speeches is the kind of research which deserves more attention than it currently has.
The crucial importance of clarity of communication in politics for the lives of nations

64

and the far-reaching consequences of translating international key documents in

increasingly globalised and interconnected world are indisputable.
This thesis used more-or-less established methodological tools (the Newmarks
typologies) along with relatively novel approaches (e. g. Schffners taking conceptual
analysis into consideration) to analyse current European communication. Its aim was to
find out how tropes are translated within one particular institution. It has thus only
slightly touched upon the question of metaphors used in political discourse because its
framework was imperatively limited.
In future research, it would certainly be interesting to explore more layers of the
phenomenon either with regard to the vast topic of metaphorical concepts in general
or with regard to practical issues involved in translating. As for the first case, possibly
fruitful research topics of the future include tracing the sources of deeper conceptual
metaphors used in politics, their replication on various levels, treating European
neologisms and newly introduced technical terms, and comparing different institutional
settings where metaphors are used. The tools of semantics, pragmatics, and critical
discourse analysis might come in handy in this respect, and so might a diachronic
analysis of documents from long periods of time with regard to comparison of treatment
of metaphors. As for practical issues, potentially interesting could be a comparison of
working routines and inner procedures (in EU and elsewhere) and their impact on the
product, and ever-more important analysis on the impact of translation memories and
term banks on transferring meaning of creative communication. As the thesis pointed
out, a research on which strategies are preferred in EU with respect to risk involved and
whether there are any official directives regarding this issue may be very interesting.

65

Open possibilities remain in the domain of the micro-level analysis as well.

Here, applying target-text perspective, cognitive perspective, and any kind of rigorous
analysis of grammatical structures and lexical components of metaphorical expressions
(cf. the Componential analysis; Al-Zoubi 2009) may be of use.

9. Conclusion
The thesis analysed a way of treatment of metaphors within top political institutions of
the European Union. Its general aim was to shed light on the way of translating
speeches and documents in EU with regard to the possible distortion of meaning and
cultural messages in everyday communication.
In general, the analysis has shown that translating tropes in EU might be
described as largely functional, austere (uncomplicated, unsophisticated), and troublefree. Although several cases of shift of meaning did occur, it can be safely concluded
that in view of the number of expressions occurring these were really sporadic. In
almost all cases, the meaning was conveyed realistically and the cultural shift was not
fundamental, i.e. it did not induce incomprehensibility of the message. Of course, this
might have been so because most metaphors were not challenging in terms of
transferring culturally-specific messages. The results might be different if the analysis
focused on these metaphors and picked them up specifically from the texts.
As for the features of metaphors used within EU, these indeed constitute a
noticeable part of texts produced by the executive bodies as well as (some) Members of

66

the European Parliament. Most metaphors found fell under categories of lexicalised (i.e.
older), metaphors. That means that most tropes used in EU are not specific but rather
borrowed from general language. The most common subcategory was stock (i.e.
commonly used) metaphors. Unlexicalised, i.e. original and adapted, metaphors do
occur but more-or-less only in EP and to considerably lesser degree than lexicalised
ones.
As for translation strategies, most metaphors were transferred using the
technique of reproduction the same image in the target language. Other commonly used
strategies are that of converting metaphors into their sense and that of replacing
metaphor with an image which is standard in the target language. Other strategies (as a
rule, involving use of similes and their combination with the sense of metaphor) are
used much less. A hypothesis can be formulated that those strategies which are more
implicit and less risky are preferred. As a rule, deleting metaphors was not pursued.
As for the issue of conceptual metaphors, several typical concepts occurred
repeatedly and can be described as typical for example EUROPE IS A PERSON of CRISIS
IS A DISEASE.

The differences in subcorpora in terms of concepts used could be

attributed to the differences in the extent and nature of the material analyzed; no
difference was fundamental. Contrary to the expectations about the European political
environment and intercultural factors involved, the changes in concepts during
translation were almost non-existent.
The types of text analysed did prove to be quite different. On the one hand, there
are texts published by the executive institutions which use predominantly lexicalised
metaphors and are rather uniform in style. On the other hand, there were the texts from
the European Parliament where much wider variety of metaphor types was found, more
67

unlexicalised metaphors have been employed and more conceptual metaphors have
been used. Special features in EP subcorpus are likely to result directly from the
collective nature of the institution and the incomparably higher number of situations and
strategies which can be pursued here. Whereas the Council of the European Union
produces just one kind of press releases along with occasional publication of an
important speech, the situation in the Parliament is interdiscursive a matrix of
different text and discourse types can be found here. Some of the texts from the
Parliament not only contained no metaphors whatsoever but also could not be
categorised as political discourse at all.
Each language is a living, multidimensional space featuring inconceivably many
conceptual relations with various levels of abstraction. A significant part of each
language consists of metaphors in different degrees of sedimentation. Other
metaphors can bear metaphorical tension or shock which can be used creatively.
Political discourse is known for being able to use such features of metaphors, either
directly or indirectly, both subconsciously and in a straightforward way. This thesis
tried to find out more about these processes as made in the unique settings of the
European Union, the largest political conglomerate ever made.

68

10. Sources and works cited

Al-Zoubi, M. (2009): The validity of componential analysis in translating metaphors,
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 151-160. Available online
from InformaWorld [www.informaworld.com], accessed on 1 June 2011
Barfield, O. (1928): Poetic Diction: A Study in Meaning, London: Faber and Gwyer
Blum-Kulka, S. (1986): Shifts in Cohesion and Coherence in Translation, in: House, J.
et al. (Eds.): Interlingual and Intercultural Communication: Discourse and
Cognition in Translation and Second Language Acquisition Studies, Tbingen, pp.
17-35
Candel, B. (2005): Political Islam and Translation: Metaphors and Frames in Media
Reporting and Islamist Rhetoric, Diploma thesis, University of Surrey
Chaban, N. et al. (2007): Under Construction: Images of the Enlarging EU in the
Australasian News Media, Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across
Disciplines Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 79-95
Charteris-Black, J. (2004): Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis, New
York: Palgrave MacMillan
Dagut, M. (1976): Can metaphor be translated? Babel Vol. 22, pp. 21-33
DG Translation (2011): Translation and the European Union, official website,
[http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/translating/index_en.htm], accessed on 3
November 2011
Dickins, J. (2005): Two Models for Metaphor Translation, available online
[http://usir.salford.ac.uk/1343/1/niTrOfMetArtTARGETtextFINAL.pdf], accessed
on 1 June 2011
69

Fernndez, E. S. et al. (2003): Translations we live by: the impact of metaphor

translation on target systems, 8th International Cognitive Linguistics Conference
Foucalt, M. (1969): LArchologie du Savoir, Paris: Gallimard
Gozzi, R. (1999): The Power of Metaphor in the Age of Electronic Media, Cresskill:
Hampton Press
Helln Garca, M. J. (2010): Diagnosing Terrorism in Spain: Medical Metaphors in
Presidential Discourse, Southwest Journal of Linguistics Vol. 29, No. 1
Hlsse, R. (2006): Imagine the EU: the metaphorical construction of a supranationalist identity, Journal of International Relations and Development Vol. 2006,
No. 9, pp. 396-421
Kloepfer, R. (1981): Intra- and Intercultural Translation, Poetics Today Vol. 2, No. 4,
pp.29-37
Lande, I. (2010): The Role of Critical Discourse Analysis in the Translation of Political
Texts, Masters thesis, rhus University
Lakoff, G. (1993): Contemporary Theory of Metaphor, in: Ortony, A. (Ed.): Metaphor
and Thought (2nd edition), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Lakoff, G. (2004): Dont Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the
Debate, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing
Lakoff, G. Johnson, M. (2002): Metafory, ktermi ijeme, Praha: Host
Newmark, P. (1981): Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press
Nida, E. (1964): Towards a Science of Translating, Boston: Brill
Fuertes-Olivera, P. A. et al. (1998): Metaphor and Translation: a case study in the field
of economics, pp. 79-95, in: Fernndez Nistal, P. Bravo Gozalo, J. M. (Eds.): La

70

Traduccin: orientaciones lingsticas y culturales, Valladolid: Universidad de

Valladoolid
Kntsson, P. (2008): Metaphor, lecture material, University of Iceland, available online
[http://notendur.hi.is/peturk/KENNSLA/METAPHOR%20TOLLI/metaphor.ppt],
accessed on 5 November 2011
Kvecses, Z. (2005): Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Lotfipour-Saedi, K. (1990): Discourse Analysis and the Problem of Translation
Equivalence, Meta: journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators Journal Vol. 35, No.
2, pp. 389-397. Available online from rudit [www.erudit.org], accessed on 25 May
2011
Mason, K. (1982): Metaphor and Translation, Babel Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 140-149
Mtt, S. K. (2007): The Foundations of Europe: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the
EU Constitution, Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines Vol.
1, No. 1, pp. 166-178
McCombs, M. (2009): Agenda Setting. Nastolovn agendy: Masov mdia a veejn
mylen, Praha: Portl
McElhanon, K. A. (2006): From Simple Metaphors to Conceptual Blending: The
Mapping of Analogical Concepts and the Praxis of Translation, Journal of
Translation Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 31-81
Mller, R. (2005): Creative Metaphors in Political Discourse. Theoretical
considerations on the basis of Swiss Speeches, Metaphorik.de Vol. 2005, No. 9
Newmark, P. (1981; 1988): Approaches to Translation, London: Prentice Hall
International
71

Orwell, G. (1968): Politics and the English Language, in: Orwell, S. Angus, I. (Eds.):
George Orwell: The Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell. In
Front of Your Nose: 1945-1950, Vol. 4, London, pp. 127-140
Prandi, M. (2010): Typology of Metaphors: Implications for Translation, Mutatis
Mutandis Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 304-322
Rabadn, R. lvarez, R. (1991): Equivalencia y traduccin. Problemtica de la
equivalencia translmica ingls-espaol, Len: Universidad de Len
Rubel, P. Rosman, A. (2004): Introduction: Translation and Anthropology, in: Rubel,
P. - Rosman, A. (Eds.): Translating Cultures: Perspectives on Translation and
Anthropology, Oxford: Berg.
Sharifian, F. (2007): Politics and/of Translation: Case Studies between Persian and
English, Journal of Intercultural Studies Vol. 28, No. 4, pp. 413-424. Available
online from InformaWorld [www.informaworld.com]
Shore, C. (2005): All in the Translation: Interpreting EU Constitution, SITES: New
Series Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 10-32
Schffner, Ch. (1997): Strategies of translating political texts, in: Anna (Ed.): Text
Typology and Translation, Trosborg
Schffner, Ch. (2004): Metaphor and translation: some implications of a cognitive
approach, Journal of Pragmatics Vol. 36 (2004), pp. 1253-1269. Available online
from Elsevier [http://www.elsevier.com/locate/pragma]
Slingerland, E. Blanchard, E. M. Boyd-Judson, L. (2007): Collision with China:
Conceptual Metaphor Analysis, Somatic Marking, and the EP-3 Incident,
International Studies Quarterly, No. 51, pp. 53-77

72

Snell-Hornby, M. (1988): Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach, Amsterdam:

John Benjamins Publishing Company
Spinolo, N. Garwood, Ch. J. (2010): To kill or not to kill: Metaphors in simultaneous
interpreting, FORUM, International journal of interpretation and translation Vol.
VIII, No. 1, pp. 181-211
Stlhammar (2006): Grammatical Metaphor/Metonymy in the Treaty Establishing A
Constitution for Europe: A Comparison between the English and Swedish Versions,
Nordic Journal of English Studies; Vol 5, No 1, pp. 99-117
Steen, G. J. et al. (2010): Metaphor in usage, Cognitive Linguistics Vol. 21, No. 4, pp.
765-796
Stienstra, N. (1993): YHWH is the Husband of His People. Analysis of a Biblical
Metaphor with Special Reference to Translation, Kampen: Kok Pharos
Toury, G. (1995): Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond, Amsterdam: John
Benjamins
van den Broeck, R. (1981): The limits of translatability exemplified by metaphor
translation. Poetics Today Vol. 2, pp. 73-87
Xiaoqian, D. (2005): Intercultural Factors Influencing the Process of Translation, k@ta
Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 85-93

If not stated otherwise, the electronic sources were checked on 25 May 2011.

73

List of schemata and tables

Figure No. 1: The principle of metaphor (p. 14)
Table No. 1: Newmarks typology of metaphors (p. 20)
Table No. 2: Newmarks typology of metaphors explained (p. 21)
Table No. 3: Information on corpus (p. 41)
Table No. 4: Metaphor types in the corpus (p. 45)
Table No. 5: Translation strategies (p. 54)

74

Abstract
The thesis deals with the topic of translation of metaphors within political discourse.
Most important aspects and problems of metaphor translation as presented by the
discipline of translation studies are listed, namely, the problem of translatability, the
difference of classical and conceptual approach to metaphor, and the typologies of
metaphor types and metaphor translation strategies as compiled by Newmark.
Subsequently, metaphor is presented as a relevant tool to use within strategies typical of
political discourse: The thesis argues that metaphor can be used as a tool of persuasion
or as a shorthand term for complicated concepts. In the practical part of the thesis, a
parallel corpus is analysed consisting of English and Czech texts coming from EU
(namely press releases from the Council, speeches of its highest representatives, and
speeches from the floor of the European Parliament). Those metaphors which bear
conceptual or contextual tension are recorded and their types and strategies of
translation are examined. The results of the analysis are that metaphors are indeed
common in the texts analysed. Political actors in EU use predominantly older, nonoriginal metaphors, although novel metaphors are not uncommon in the parliamentary
speeches. Moreover, translation of tropes in EU is largely functional, trouble-free, and
also non-problematic in terms of intercultural communication, as shifts in meaning or
concepts used are truly sporadic.

Keywords: Translation, Metaphor, Political discourse, EU, English, Czech

75

Resum
Diplomov prce se zabv tmatem pekladu metafor v rmci politickho diskursu.
Zmiuje nejdleitj vdecky diskutovan aspekty pekladu metafor, a sice otzku
jejich peloitelnosti, rozdl klasickho a konceptulnho pstupu k metaform a
typologie druh metafor a strategi jejich pekladu P. Newmarka. Metafora je nsledn
pedstavena coby dleit nstroj pouiteln v rmci strategi typickch pro politick
diskurs. Prce obhajuje tezi, e metafora me bt uplatnna jako pesvdovac nstroj
i jako zstupn termn pro sloit koncepty. V praktick sti prce je analyzovn
paraleln korpus, kter sestv z anglickch a eskch text pochzejcch z EU,
konkrtn z tiskovch zprv Evropsk rady, projev jejch nejvych pedstavitel a
projev z Evropskho parlamentu. Metafory, kter obsahuj konceptuln nebo
kontextuln napt, jsou zaznamenny a nsledn jsou zkoumny jejich typy a strategie
pouit pi jejich pekladu. Vsledkem analzy je, e metafory se skuten
v analyzovanch textech bn nachz. Dle, e politit akti v EU pouvaj
pedevm star, neoriginln metafory, akoli nov metafory jsou bn v textech
pochzejcch z EP. Dle meme ci, e peklad trop v EU je z velk sti praktick,
bezproblmov, a rovn nepedstavuje problm z hlediska mezikulturn komunikace,
nebo pekroucen vznamu nebo zmny pouitch koncept jsou pouze ojedinl.

Klov slova: Peklad, Metafora, Politick diskurs, EU, Anglitina, etina

76