Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Translating Metaphors Within Political Discourse-The Case of EU
Translating Metaphors Within Political Discourse-The Case of EU
Faculty of Arts
Department of English and American Studies
English-language Translation
Petr Dvořák
Translating Metaphors
within Political Discourse:
The Case of EU
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
Kamenická, 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
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1
3. Method ........................................................................................................... 7
9. Conclusion ................................................................................................... 66
Abstract ............................................................................................................ 75
ST Source text
TT Target text
EN English
CS Czech
UK United Kingdom
CZ Czech Republic
EU European Union
EP European Parliament
TS Translation studies
Subcorpora:
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
dissimilar, then Metaphor, the most acute and farfetched among Tropes, is the only one
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.”
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
given for one thing by the increasing importance of non-literary texts and the
metaphor as such and particularly its practical use is a topic located on the borderline of
However, this master’s thesis does not aspire to cover the topic in its entirety and
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
detection what the obvious priorities are) could tell us something about typical features
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
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
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”
2
II. Theoretical part (covering relevant concepts and specifics of the material analysed):
chapters 4 – 5
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 narrowly-
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.
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
Thirdly, the thesis also explores themes located on the borderline of approaches,
some of them having direct links to political reality, particular world views, social-
scientific 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
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
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
theoretical linguistics than for translation scholars. Analysing the basis of the
phenomenon would require immensely intricate research, well beyond the framework of
this study.
4
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)
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
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
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
metaphor is a good way to look at this problem, since some metaphors can be easily
view, for example that of traditional linguistics (“Is the metaphor equivalent as closely
1
See the terminology explanation and typology outlines in chapters 5 and 7.
5
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
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
• Is there any profound difference in applying metaphors and their strategic use
(see chapter 5) between the official (supposedly neutral) EU bodies and the
• Which conceptual patterns are most common? Can any particular transitive
identified?
uniform?
2
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
6
• 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
3. Method
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
Schäffner (2004), who argues in favour of applying cognitive approach (drawing from
Lakoff and Johnson’s theory) to the field of descriptive translation studies. In her
analysis of the treatment of metaphors (Schäffner 2004: 1258 ff.), she used authentic ST
unfamiliarity of the concept to a foreign reader etc. (Schäffner 2004: 1264). A plethora of other variables
has been mentioned as well (Fernández 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 translator’s competence).
7
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
Likewise, this thesis shall make use of the orientation of the research which she
texts, “with the explanation being linked to text, discourse, and culture” (ibid.).4
Moreover, the thesis shall make use of Lakoff and Johnson’s 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
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.),
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
4
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
8
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
4. Deciding about the existence of contextual contrast (such contrast can be used
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,
possible metaphors would be defined even before reading the text). See Steen et al. 2010: 768 for more
details.
9
4. Metaphor as an issue in translation studies
advocated by e.g. Nida, van den Broeck, Newmark) and descriptive (Toury, Snell-
Hornby, and Baker) approaches (Fernández et al. 2003: 61). Those approaches seeking
which had an impact on the concept of equivalence. Translemic equivalence thus does
not pursue ‘perfect’ but rather ‘acceptable’ renderings (Rabadán – Álvarez 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.
So far, with regard to the phenomenon of metaphors, translation studies has been
concerned with two main questions (cf. Schäffner 2004: 1256), namely
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
10
2. The problem of procedure, strategy of translation. Once we admit that there
metaphors, based on their nature, type, or function in the text, or is this an ad-
Schäffner herself (2004: 1254) warns that arguments brought forward need to be seen
is. As for the first question, among possible sub-disciplines of translation studies
and form.
equivalence is reduced).
11
The whole sub-domain is further complicated by the fact that no universally accepted
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
1. Metaphors are untranslatable (as argued by Nida (1964) or Dagut (1967), i.e.
2. Metaphors are fully translatable (e.g. Kloepfer (1981) or Mason (1982)), i.e.
to metaphors;
inequivalence (e.g. van den Broeck (1981), Toury (1995) and Newmark
(1988));
proposed by Snell-Hornby (1988), who claims that the range of renderings will
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
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
As for the question of translatability seen from the point of view of metaphor
types (see chapter 4.5), Newmark (1988: 48-49 in Fernández 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
For the purpose of this thesis, let’s assume that approaches No. 3 and 4 (let’s 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.
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
First of all, metaphor can be defined in various ways, among the particularly
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
(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 – Boyd-
Judson 2007; Prandi 2010). Each of the four pairs comprises a term of its own:
1. Tenor 1. Focus
2. Subsidiary subject 2. Vehicle
3. Strange domain 3. Word
4. Extension 4. Meaning
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
(whose main function is the stylistic embellishment of a text) has been recently replaced
with a more complex conceptual, cognitive6 approach (Schäffner 2004: 1254) which
whole world of study of communication was once again significantly moved. In recent
years, the new conceptual paradigm has been, according to e.g. Schäffner (2004: 1257-
1258) 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” (Fernández 2003: 65).
(from the source – “vehicle” – to a target – “tenor” – conceptual domain). Whereas this
may terminologically resemble the classical view, the crucial importance is that
experiential system of human beings who are capable to “see” or understand one
6
Schäffner 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
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
of the individual metaphorical expression, as identified by the ST, but it becomes linked
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”
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
found (which is, after all, not incompatible with both Newmark’s and van den Broeck’s
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 Schäffner 2004: 1264) – for instance, one could expect the metaphors based on
traditions as specific.7
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”,
her, metaphors in general have the same origin – conceptual interaction – but many
7
McElhanon (2006: 45-47), inspired by Kövecses (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 Lakoff’s 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
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.
Prandi’s underlying argument is that each theory focusing only on chosen aspects is
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
Therefore, as Prandi states, it is actually not a novel metaphor which is challenging for a
8
It should be noted that Prandi’s terms should not be mistaken with Newmark’s. 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. Prandi’s 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. Blum-
Kulka (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
literary or creative” and they “[exist] rather in clines and also include expressions
whose metaphorical meaning can be found in a dictionary” (Müller 2005: 55), the
extremely careful when drawing general conclusions. The fact that there could be
interference between all concepts mentioned above and the way whole language
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 Knútsson 2008)
19
whose metaphorical nature is still apparent but which are already established in the
language.11
Table No. 1
The meanings of the typology categories as described by Newmark (1988: 196 ff. as
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 Newmark’s “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
Newmark’s typology of metaphors explained
Table No. 2
A similar principle in a less rigorous way is noted by Müller (2005: 55), who argues: “a
21
metaphors and ‘creative metaphors’ which occasionally exploit the principles of
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 Müller, I suppose that creative metaphors in political discourse are
those that “[depend] on deviation from what might be expected in a given situation” or
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
The thesis shall make use of Newmark’s typology (especially with regard to the
distinction between unlexicalised and lexicalised expressions) but will pay attention to
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
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
Perhaps the most frequently cited among the source oriented14 approaches are:
into TL)
in the TL)
with TL culture)
13
It should be noted that whereas these typologies have been largely constructed as a part of prescriptive-
based 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 source-
oriented, thus focused on ways of translating already existing tropes, this additional set of strategies is
mentioned only for the purpose of context.
15
In Newmark’s work, the term object corresponds to topic, image to vehicle, and sense to “grounds”.
23
• other fish to fry // d’autres chats á fouetter
aspects)
g. Using the same metaphor combined with sense (Effect: enforcing the
image)
challenges
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,
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
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 one’s 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
and has been approached from various perspectives. Määttä (2007: 168), making use of
Foucault’s (1969) insights, defines the goal of [political] discourse analysis as “to
determine why a certain fragment of discourse (statement or énoncé) 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
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,
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
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, Hülsse
2006).
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.”
For Orwell, the term “stale” was primarily a question of style. He viewed using
vague language and clichés 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 Müller interestingly points out, Orwell’s definition go
against the “traditional” view of metaphors as a mere stylistic ornament, for his
speaker. This might have been a nodal point in the evolution of understanding of
metaphor.
communication. Nowadays, hardly anyone questions the fact that political discourse is
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
In the agenda setting theory (see e.g. McCombs 2009), ‘strategic framing’ 18
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
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 socio-
political issue salient or, alternatively, to portray the speaker as an agent capable of
CRIMINAL + CANDIDATE IS A GUARDIAN 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
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 Orwell’s 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. Müller 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 Hellín García 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.”
political and societal reality. As Hülsse (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
can assume that metaphors, once said, work also subconsciously, thus making the
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
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
specific to the text in question (Halliday 2004: 174, 283): it inscribes the text within a
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
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
communication.
That’s 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
speaker’s intention.
30
The role of language and translation and interpreting in international politics is
of the world are inevitable (Sharifian 2007: 413-414). That is why the role of translators
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
shared belief among the scholars that “broader societal and political framework in
which such discourse is embedded has to be taken into consideration” (Schäffner 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
2007: 57).
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
The EU project accounts for an environment sui generis unparalleled anywhere in the
fundamentally) different cultures and languages. One the other hand, a process of
creating shared political institutions and political élite has quite advanced in the last
decades and the today’s Union may thus be considered to be an entity with many
European Union is worth analysing for several important reasons: I believe that
intercultural communication play a key role. Moreover, the questions and rules
discussed are of political nature, thus inherently dealing with relations of power,
discussions and documents cannot be questioned. Last but not least, the discourse
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
32
areas and sensitive topics so common that the system is prone to having issues of inter-
cultural misinterpretation and ambiguity. This is the case not only from the theoretical
and misinterpretations: Hence, the metaphors of “the Tower of Babel” and “a game of
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
“[...] the only documents produced in all 23 official languages are pieces of
about a third of our work. [...] Internal documents are all written in (and
documents — which may be drafted in any language — are translated into one
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
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
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 (Schäffner (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
figurative language and creatively used metaphors. When building up the text
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
(i.e. all available texts from the term which fulfilled the criteria). Texts
from this domain have been published by the Commission and usually
randomly selected chapter from the paper itself was analysed. As the
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
of the text bank contains the press releases of the European Council
(up to 7 pairs) and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign
[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
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,
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
case, the speeches of nine members from three fractions (S&D, ECR,
and written answers in Czech. This part of the corpus can thus be practically
English. The same (vice versa, needless to say) holds true for the British
members.24
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
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)
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
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.)
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
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
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
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
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
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
39
• In Czech: Čas ukáže / dozrál; Krok k větší ochraně spotřebitelů; Vyslat signál
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 //
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
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
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
general number of expressions recorded are summarised in the table (all figures are
Information on corpus
Table No. 3
41
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
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
metaphors per page. In other words, those texts which did not lack figurative language
(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
There were considerable differences in the styles of usage of metaphors among different
seemingly from the differences between spoken and written communication in EP. It
probably goes without surprise that several representatives even did not use political
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
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
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
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.
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
reintroduced not so long ago and shaping current discourse relatively strongly, hence
category X/Y was planned. This is no surprise due to the impressionistic nature of
Newmark’s categories and the dynamics in the metaphors’ evolution. (On the other
hand, just one transitional category type, namely STOCK / RECENT, had to be
26
In the dataset, this variable is referred to as „Nature“.
27
BNC Interface: http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk
44
Metaphor types in the corpus
PRES (Van 4 0 1 3 3 17 6 12 46
Rompuy,
Ashton)
DOC 0 0 12 0 8 31 5 13 69
(European
Council)
EP 12 19 19 10 12 74 7 28 181
(European
Parliament)
Total 16 19 32 13 23 122 18 53
Table No. 4
It probably could have been expected that unlexicalised, or recent and original,
metaphors were represented to a considerably lesser extent than lexicalised ones: Only
Moreover, a strong difference was found between the two executive subcorpora on one
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
expressions are:
• “Without Europe, there would have been an Arab Spring, but without us there
will be no Arab summer! // Arabské jaro by nastalo i bez Evropy, bez ní však
• “Without Europe, there would still have been an Arab Spring, but without us
there will be no Arab summer! // Arabské jaro by vypuklo i bez Evropy, avšak
• [in a speech about tackling the economic crisis:] “we created a solid fire-wall
Examples (ORIGINAL):
• “Občas mám v této ctihodné instituci pocit, že pravá hemisféra vidí obsah
the feeling in this venerable institution that the right hemisphere sees the content
benefit no one”
46
• “Indiáni kmene Dakotů mají přísloví: „Sedíš-li na mrtvém koni, sesedni.“ A
Indian tribe have a saying: ‘If you are sitting on a dead horse, dismount.’ Your
• “[…] Baroness Ashton, the Sarah Palin of the ex-student Left […] // […]
Examples (ADAPTED):
• “Antidumping je dobrý sluha, ale zlý pán // Anti-dumping is a good servant but
a bad master”
• “Their European dream, to quote the Commissioner, is that they will receive
subsidies // Jejich evropský sen, abych citoval komisaře, spočívá v tom, aby
dostávaly dotace”
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
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
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
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, cliché, and dead metaphors were present as well.
Examples
• “we decided to refine and strengthen our tool box. // rozhodli [jsme se] zpřesnit
48
• “The Arab spring is also an invitation to redouble our efforts // Arabské jaro je
• “This [the options to tackle the problems of economy] is a strong package. // Jde
• “framework for closer policy coordination on financial stability, in line with the
roadmap agreed by the Council // komplexního rámce pro celou EU v zájmu užší
• “It concluded the first European semester // Uzavřela první evropský semestr”
(DOC, RECENT)
• “míč je nyní na straně Evropské komise // the ball is now in the hands of the
• “the years the UK Labour Government acted as a Bush poodle // v letech, kdy se
RECENT)
49
• “Dame Sarah and the Lib Dems can cry crocodile tears now over cases like Mr
Symeou // Paní Sarah Ludfordová a liberální demokraté nyní mohou ronit slzy
• “the Lisbon Treaty is, in our view, still a step in the wrong direction. //
(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
that – with regard to the presence of metaphors in language – whereas the PRES and
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
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
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
originality: its very essence is predictability (the association must be obvious), whereas
metaphor is traditionally praised for its originality, its heuristic effect of showing
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
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.
corpus:
1. “Animate” synecdoche / metonymy – these do not make any sense without the
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
conceptual metaphor.
The field of synecdoche and metonymy is quite vast and it is difficult to link
52
“bude to evropský úředník, a nikoli americký úředník, [...] kdo ve Státech bude
rozhodovat” // “it will now be a European official, and not an American official
could be ignored on basis of the linguistic criteria (no figurative element used) but can
political issue (The concept, say, OURS VERSUS FOREIGN). Clearly, this statement is
Also, we could say that various stages of “sedimentation” can be identified here,
... bear less tension and were often not included in the dataset. The opposite can be said
of expressions such as
European Council remains firmly committed to the process; the Union can
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,
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. Newmark’s 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 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Reproducing Standard Simile Simile plus Sense Deletion Metaphor
image sense plus sense
PRES (Van 36 3 0 1 6 0 0
Rompuy,
Ashton)
DOC 51 3 0 0 15 0 0
(European
Council)
EP 115 25 6 2 32 1 0
(European
Parliament)
Total 202 31 6 3 53 1 0
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
difference due to the significantly larger size of this part. Also, almost surprisingly,
some examples:
Typical strategies
• “we covered all the sides and angles of the debt crisis // bylo na dluhovou krizi v
• “[a referendum is] a significant step towards a more open and democratic
• “cestu, kterou Rusko postupně kráčí od totality přes autoritativní systém směrem
55
Converting image into sense (No. 5):
• “Your country has turned the fundamentals of the State inside out // Vaše země
(DOC)
• “It is time to get off the reactive and chaotic back foot and onto the proactive,
• “alespoň si tady nelžeme do kapsy // but let us at least not lie to ourselves” (EP)
• “the European Council paved the way for Croatia's accession to the EU // [Ve
vztahu k Chorvatsku] dnes Evropská rada připravila půdu pro to, aby
• “[the European Council] mapped out the next steps // [Evropská rada] nastínila
• “přešlapování na místě musí skončit // we must stop dragging our feet” (EP)
56
• “není možné donekonečna tahat Turecko za nos // it is not possible to pull the
• “several countries have gone far beyond their traditional positions and red lines
• “Nenechme si prosím uletět „Sputnik naší generace“ // We must not allow ‘our
• “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 domníváme, že to, co zde před námi leží, skutečně
• “the Western Balkans, a region where EU membership prospects are the glue
57
v regionu, kde vyhlídka na členství v EU je oním tmelem, který všechny tyto
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
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
One of the most common conceptual metaphors found in the corpora (featured by
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, Fernández 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] //
• “[help young people] to build a future in their own country // [pomoci mladým
• “we will not waver in the defence of our monetary union and our common
• “To prevent healthy euro area economies from being cut off from funding //
EU IS A FAMILY
59
In EP, in addition to the concepts above, several other, less frequent cases appeared,
including:
Metaphor of CONTAINER
benefit no one”
• “[rozhodnutí se mi jeví jako] umělý krok, který nevychází zdola // [the decision
• “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 probíhá mezi sedmi členskými státy, které jsou velkými čistými
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
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
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
• “The referendum at the end of this week will hopefully bring an end to the saga
Utterances of this kind are naturally likely to appear in public, lively, and – to some
As visible in the previous subchapters, one could say that the typical metaphor used
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
reproducing the image). On the other hand, there was a very small amount of cases
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):
• “[To obtain for Parliament an equal role to Council in] determining the
rada uvítala pokrok Irska při provádění reformního programu, které probíhá
Cases where the conceptual frame has been directly changed into a different one,
either slightly:
• “suma […] zmizí v propadlišti korupce // [aid] disappears into the jaws of
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 Evropská rada připravila půdu pro to, aby
62
Nonetheless, it is necessary to point out that those cases were truly sporadic; one cannot
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
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
• “otázka na Komisi […] je, jak se říká, mimo mísu // question to the Commission
• “knee jerk reactions from this Parliament are unlikely to solve any problems //
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
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
• “The French now want to join the Italians and say ‘arrivederci Roma’ //
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, “Romové” and
“Řím”, 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.
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
typologies) along with relatively novel approaches (e. g. Schäffner’s 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
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
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
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
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
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
free. 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
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.
occur but more-or-less only in EP and to considerably lesser degree than lexicalised
ones.
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.
repeatedly and can be described as typical – for example EUROPE IS A PERSON of CRISIS
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
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
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
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
tried to find out more about these processes as made in the unique settings of the
68
10. Sources and works cited
Perspectives: Studies in Translatology Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 151-160. Available online
Barfield, O. (1928): Poetic Diction: A Study in Meaning, London: Faber and Gwyer
17-35
Candel, B. (2005): Political Islam and Translation: Metaphors and Frames in Media
Dagut, M. (1976): Can ‘metaphor’ be translated? Babel Vol. 22, pp. 21-33
[http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/translation/translating/index_en.htm], accessed on 3
November 2011
[http://usir.salford.ac.uk/1343/1/niTrOfMetArtTARGETtextFINAL.pdf], accessed
on 1 June 2011
69
Fernández, E. S. et al. (2003): Translations we live by: the impact of metaphor
Gozzi, R. (1999): The Power of Metaphor in the Age of Electronic Media, Cresskill:
Hampton Press
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
Lakoff, G. (2004): Don’t Think of an Elephant: Know Your Values and Frame the
Fuertes-Olivera, P. A. et al. (1998): Metaphor and Translation: a case study in the field
70
Traducción: orientaciones lingüísticas y culturales, Valladolid: Universidad de
Valladoolid
[http://notendur.hi.is/peturk/KENNSLA/METAPHOR%20TOLLI/metaphor.ppt],
Equivalence, Meta: journal des traducteurs / Meta: Translators’ Journal Vol. 35, No.
2011
Mason, K. (1982): Metaphor and Translation, Babel Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 140-149
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
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
Schäffner, Ch. (1997): Strategies of translating political texts, in: Anna (Ed.): Text
72
Snell-Hornby, M. (1988): Translation Studies: An Integrated Approach, Amsterdam:
Constitution for Europe: A Comparison between the English and Swedish Versions,
Steen, G. J. et al. (2010): Metaphor in usage, Cognitive Linguistics Vol. 21, No. 4, pp.
765-796
Benjamins
If not stated otherwise, the electronic sources were checked on 25 May 2011.
73
List of schemata and tables
74
Abstract
The thesis deals with the topic of translation of metaphors within political discourse.
discipline of translation studies are listed, namely, the problem of translatability, the
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, non-
original metaphors, although novel metaphors are not uncommon in the parliamentary
75
Resumé
představena coby důležitý nástroj použitelný v rámci strategií typických pro politický
diskurs. Práce obhajuje tezi, že metafora může být uplatněna jako přesvědčovací nástroj
či jako zástupný termín pro složité koncepty. V praktické části práce je analyzován
kontextuální napětí, jsou zaznamenány a následně jsou zkoumány jejich typy a strategie
především starší, neoriginální metafory, ačkoli nové metafory jsou běžné v textech
pocházejících z EP. Dále můžeme říci, že překlad tropů v EU je z velké části praktický,
neboť překroucení významu nebo změny použitých konceptů jsou pouze ojedinělé.
76