Scarica Rhetorical Devices: Metaphor, Hyperbole, and Modality e più Sintesi del corso in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
CHAPTER 7
RHETORIC AND METAPHOR
The metaphor does not reflect reality, but the human cognitive processes. The metaphor can influence the way we understand a thing or concept. It is useful to express human through; in this way, people make a social work. The metaphor can help us to understand a complex concept. Example: The heart is the mechanism that pumps oxygen around the body to feed the important organs of the body. (Body as mechanism) The metaphor of the heart as a mechanism is not real but it gives us the idea of its action of pumping (pompaggio) oxygen into the body. The metaphors are useful for pedagogy. In this case, the metaphor helps children understand how our body works. The metaphor is common in everyday language. It changes depending on culture. The metaphor influences the way people look at and understand the world. For this reason, the metaphor influences ideology. Important is the role of metaphor in visual communication. Ex: when we say that a person has his feet on the ground, we want to say is that a rational at the contrary of a person who has his head in the clouds. The metaphor is a way in which humans organize their experiences. This because when we use a metaphor we can highlight (evidenziare) one aspect of experience, while at the same time conceal another. Example: the metaphor catch our attention to the idea that the heart carries (svolge) a role like the part of a machine, but conceal the fact that body might be better thought of as a whole (potrebbe essere meglio pensato come un tutto). Metaphor can become dominant ways of thinking. The metaphor is the means by which we understand one concept in other terms. Metaphor can be deliberately persuasive and often conceal power relations.
METAPHOR DOMAINS
Metaphor denotes something that is carried somewhere else. Therefore, in communication, we transport processes of understanding from one conceptual domain (dominio concettuale) to another. Here we use the term "conceptual domain". For this reason, we sometimes understand the difference in terms of colliding objects (oggetti di collisione). This can be explain as follows:
- TARGET DOMAIN: the concept that we want to describe through the metaphor (e.g. love)
- SOURCE DOMAIN: the concept that we draw up (elaboriamo) in order to create the metaphor (E.g. journey) Some topics can be dominated by a particular domain.
Example : when we talk about relationships, this is often do in terms of travel. Four years later, he took another road We cannot turn back now We have gone off the track (siamo andati fuori pista) One-step at the time They are just at the start of their journey together Of course, the concept of relationship has no natural comparison to a journey, but this has become a useful way to talk about them.
Example: Society is an organism
Society is a market In the first sentence suggests that we have to work together to make sure all parts of it are healthy (sane). While in the second sentence, the society is designed as a place where everyone has own abilities. While the organism metaphor emphasises cooperation, the market metaphor emphasises completion.
RHETORICAL TROPES
The metaphor simplifies the concept, for this reason the metaphors is use to explain difficult concepts, because in this way people understand. It is more simply because obscures the complex concept. It used in persuasive way.
- Example : the situation in Afghanistan has overheated (si è surriscaldata). The sentence simplifies the concept because the agency is obscures.
- Example in the EMDA: “we will work with our partners in the region to achieve the region’s ambition to be a Top 20 Region by 2010 and a flourishing region by 2010”. This sentence uses a metaphor “flourishing’ to describe its aims, but what will be done is not said. Aims, problems and solutions in the text are conceal in rhetoric (nella retorica).
- Example : Another metaphor used in political discourse is that of "building the future". The author does not say what there is to do, but only that we must work together. The "building" metaphor give us a sense of progress and collaboration.
- Example : "The minister will have to prepare for the political fallout" In this case, the metaphor of the explosion makes (rende) the idea of the big problem, its impact and its consequences.
- Example : "this tidal (marea) of generosity will help them rebuild their homes" The metaphor "tidal" usually used by journalists with negative sense, but in this case it is used in a positive sense. However, the tidal flood metaphor is used in a negative sense when talk about immigrants. About immigration, the journalist use the metaphor of house: “the immigrants come to our house” House= SOURCE Country=TARGET
- Example : Media storm or storm of controversy The metaphor is a good method of persuasion used in political discourse. Metaphor uses images rather than concrete details. The phenomenon of immigration can be describe as a natural disaster by many media. For example, the flow (flusso) of migrants is a tidal wave. These metaphors remove any sense of compassion and hospitality.
HYPERBOLE: Exaggeration PERSONIFICATION: can be obscure agents METONYMY: can conceal the actual people SYNECDOCHE: to avoid being specific
HYPERBOLE
Hyperbole is a rhetorical figure where there is exaggeration for example: "You make me die of laughter" (MI Fai morire dalle risate) or "I've told you a million times", "I feel ten feet tall" (mi sono sentito alto 10 metri).
PERSONIFICATION/ OBJECTIFICATION
Personalization is the rhetorical figure by which we assign human qualities to inanimate things. Example: "Democracy will not stand by while this happens” (La democrazia non sta a guardare mentre questo accade). This process hides the real agents. Democracy is not an agent but a political model. We can also see this process of concealment (occultamento) in this example: “the credit crunch has made all of us rethink" (la crisi
Here the possibilities and hopes became entities that have lives, which can be end. Talk about the death of hope and an exaggeration.
Metaphor: "The terrorist act as a dark threat." The threat (minaccia) becomes more concrete. Metaphor of Journey: “The advance of human freedom” (IL progresso Della libertà umana) “After all that has just passed” (dopo tutto quello che ha passato) These is useful because create a sense of travelling together.
The agents are not specified. Example: "Some speak" -> who are some? "Depends on us" -> who is us? "We will not fail" -> who is we. Case study 2: David Cameron Speech. Here we look at an extract from a speech by David Cameron, the leader of the opposition. Here the metaphor is used a lot and Cameron abstracts events and processes.
THE PROBLEM In this text, the problem is represented of two metaphor.
- First, that “society is broken” and “work together to solve problem”. This are objectification where the society is represented as an object rather than as a concept or an idea. The metaphor represents a society as a broken thing that can be repaired. The solution is to repair the broken thing together.
- The second metaphor is to describe the problem as a stew (stufato) of violence, anti-social behaviour, debt, poverty etc. The level of abstraction is elevated. Poverty, violence, bad attitudes are not explained as individual problems to resolve with individual solutions, but as many ingredients of the same stew.
THOSE WHO ARE AFFECTED (colpiti) In this broken society, the victims are "those at the bottom" (quelli in basso). The term victim is usually associated with crime, where there is a guilty or a criminal. In addition, the society cannot have a top or bottom, but this metaphor is used to represent social order.
THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM The cause of the problem are: the political and economic causes are not clear but abstract. This is evident in the expressions: "They are the victims of state failure " or "government is a big part of problem". We have seen that the nature and cause of problem have been presented as abstractions.
THE SOLUTION Cameron said in his speech that: "Only one is the way out." This is a typical expression used in political speeches. Then he goes on to say: "the only solution is to work together to solve problems." No problem or solution is actually said.
Case study 3: Housing Crisis Report in Time Newspaper. The text of the British Time newspaper, talk about the economic decline in Detroit. Although this is a newspaper precise, the information is incomplete and abstract. Tony
Allen-Mills uses a lot of hyperbole, metaphors and personification to conceal causality and actual processes. In the first part, the journalist uses hyperboles as "nightmare decline", "spiralling (spirale) financial crisis", "galloping murder rate" (galoppante Tasso di omicidi), "a blitz of foreclosures" (pignoramenti). All these rhetorical figures give as a sense of speed: galloping, Blitz, spiralling. We find other metaphors of the same nature: "I know dizzying decline" (vertiginoso declino), "Detroit's urban implosion," "prices sank like stones" (i prezzi affondano come pietre). Dizzying suggests rapidity while implosion suggests an uncontrollable force. We also find a number of metaphors that remind fungal illnesses, "decaying property markets". (Mercato immobilariare in decomposizione).The problem of house prices and economic decline is represented in terms of fungal attack that creates decay. However, economic decline has concrete causes and agents. The journalist also uses many personifications : "urban despair that slowly takes grip." (La disperazione Urbana che prende lentamente la presa). The city is described as an agent that can take hold. The reporter described the city with human qualities. These personifications demonstrate that this problem interests the whole of the city, rather than a specific section of population with specific problems. These personifications demonstrate that causality can be concealed. This article seem to distract from the actual concrete situation.
CHAPTER 8
The language and images allow us to evaluate the interest to maintain a neutral or an active position respect to some themes. The modality can be correlated to a sense of power and authority. These can be used to describe precise information or contrary for obfuscate them. The modality includes any unit of language that expresses personal opinion of or commitment (impegno) to what they say, such as hedging (I believe, think and suppose), modal verbs, modal adjectives etc. There can be "high modality" and "low modality" that indicate our judgment of probabilities and obligations, signal factuality, certainty and doubt. In visual communication, we identify visual qualities, such as the level of articulation of the settings, degrees of lighting and colour, and the way that these create distance from real world. These visual modals can be used to conceal of truth and reality.
MODALITY IN LANGUAGE. Example : “I will have a beer tonight” or “I may have a beer tonight” in this case, in the first sentence the speaker indicates much more commitment than in the second sentence, because he uses the verb "will have" instead the verb "may have". Modality has been categorised in three ways:
- (^) Epistemic modality : this is to do with judgment of truth of any proposition.
- Deontic modality : this influences people and events. Deontic models give modality to compel (costringere) and instruct others.
- Dynamic modality : this is associated to possibility and ability. The modality can also be associated with hedging terms, such as "I think", "kind", "sort of", "seems", or "often". Example : - -“this is the correct procedure” this sentence is an example of epistemic modality , because it is clear the judgment of the speaker in level of truth of the preposition.
There is no reason to hedge (coprire) by "some people say". Who these people are and what relevance they have is not clear. But these structures allow the author to “dress up” the sentence: "I think multiculturalism is outmoded but it is nevertheless (pur sempre) still orthodox thinking".
Our language in this way softens (ammorbidisce) the impact of the bluntness (schiettezza) of a message. In the same article there is a hedging through "sometimes" quite often "and" little ". These adverbs of time help to dilute the force of what is being said. (di ciò che viene detto) Example : "These incomers sometimes expect everyone to speak to them in thei own language and they quite often make little attempt to integrate themselves into French society or culture" Also words like "some", "many" and "others" can be used to avoid of demonstrate lack of concrete evidence.
The HEDGING allows attenuate(attenuare) the impact of what is being said and also gives the impression of knowledge with technical language.
A STRATEGY, to hedge the ideology:
- Long sentences with subordinate.
- Modal verbs and adverbs such as "may", "perhaps", "seems to"
- Approximates as "some", "somewhat"
- No-factive verbs as “report”, “suggest”
- Comparative forms of adverbs such as "more" than "before".
- Specify the time, date etc. to give a sense of precision and continuity
- Reference to an official sources, names of newspapers, experts, and reports.
- Use technical language of science.
- Connectors such as “while”, “although”, “nonetheless” or moreover“
- Excessive defining of concept and terms.
CASE STUDY 1: BLOG COMMENT ON KHIFE CRIME.
This example comes from on a newspaper site: "The Daily Mail", where readers comment on the government's response to announced increases in knife crime. (accoltellamento)
"It is worrying (è preoccupante) that everyone have brain washed (lavaggio del cervello) over the issue of knives (coltelli). If you’re the kind of person that when is angry want to kill, the weapon (arma) used is irrelevant. You're a loose cannon (mina vagante) and potential murderer (assassino), nothing is going to change that. When these groups of youths killed someone then they could keep kicking (prendere a calci) the victim in the head. People thinks that we can just magically change people attitudes about violence."
This statement is characterized by high modality. There is a soft hedging in the first sentence with the approximate "so". But it could have simply written: "It Concerns me that everyone is brain washed over the issue of knives." Use "is" instead "on". The high modality is central in this sentence: "If you're the kind of person who gets angry enough to want to kill someone whit them then the weapon used is irrelevant"
In the next line we find modality more low. Here the dynamic modality "could", helps to maintain a more moderate and less arrogant tone. Of course the use of "could" still suggests high probability, but it is more moderate. It would have been different had we used: “will". (Sarebbe stato diverso se avessimo usato) Example: "When these groups of youths kill someone then they could just as easily just keep kicking the victim in the head". OR “When these groups of youths kill someone then they will just as easily just keep kicking the victim in the head". Finally, we find a epistemic modality : "People seem to think we can just magically change people's attitudes about violence". These people are not represented as "knowing” (sapienti), but think that attitudes can be changed, this implies (implica) that they are mistaken.
CASE STUDY 2: GLOSSING OVER THE IMPLICATION OF MILITARY FUNDING CUTBACKS.
This text examines the implications of defense cuts. (tagli alla difesa) What we can observe in this text is the predominance of low dynamic modality. Very little in the text is presented as certain. In fact it is presented as pure speculation (pura speculazione). The speaker use lower modalities (modalità inferiori) as a way of hedging and moderate the reality of the situation. For example : “With the unification of Germany, that seems likely there will not longer be a need for a full brigade in Berlin." "A token presence, perhaps a battalion, might remain .” (Con l'unificazione della Germania, che sembra probabile, non ci sarà più la necessità di una brigata completa a Berlino - Una presenza simbolica, forse un battaglione, potrebbe rimanere). The hedging is clear in the use of "It seems likely" and the expression "might remain". In the next line, we find that NATO “proposes” rather than “will carry out” (ealizzare) changes: “Nato planners propose to move over to a structure with multinational covering forces furthest east.” (Pianificatori della NATO propongono di passare sopra ad una struttura con le forze multinazionali di copertura più a est). “Propose” as opposed to “will make" softens (ammorbidisce) what is about to happen.
