The use of archimetaphor as an evaluative device of persuasion in the genre of journalistic commentary
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.1896Keywords:
archimetaphor, emotional argumentation, naturalisation of reality, axiological polarisation of reality, relation of identification, relation of differentiation, vital valuesAbstract
The present study explores the cognitive use of archimetaphor belonging to the evaluative devices of persuasion in emotional argumentation. The corpus consists of forty editorials taken from the Internet French newspapers and magazines. The subject matter of the gathered texts includes two thematic groups of reforms concerning the higher education system and the special retirement plan for public sector employees. Thanks to the archimetaphor the addresser may highlight or hide chosen aspects of the described problem in order to activate vital values concerning our life and existence. Therefore, the concept of “conflict” described in the analysed textes is conceptualised by means of four natural forces (elements) such as fire, air (wind), water and earth (soil) which leads both to the mechanism of naturalisation and axiological polarisation of the presented reality. The mechanism itself stems from two opposing relations: identification and differentiation, allowing the grouping of presented facts to the class of US (protagonists) and THEM (antagonists). In consequence, such axiological persuasion aims at influencing the addressees’ will and decisions and allows for nearly absolute acceptance of the opinions presented by the addresser.
References
Amossy, R. (2012). L’argumentation dans le discours: Nouvelle présentation (3rd ed.). Paris: Arman Colin.
Bartoszcze, R., & Pisarek, W. (2006). Słownik terminologii medialnej. Kraków: Universitas.
Breton, P. (2000). La parole manipulée. Paris: La Découverte Poche.
Breton, P. (2008). Convaincre sans manipuler: Apprendre à argumenter. Paris: La Découverte.
Brin, C., Charron, J., & Bonville, J. de. (2004). Nature et transformation du journalisme: Théorie et recherches empiriques. Québec: Presses Université Laval.
Charaudeau, P. (2005). Les médias et l’information: L’impossible transparence du discours. Bruxelles: De Boeck.
Charaudeau, P. (2006). Discours journalistique et positionnements énonciatifs: Frontières et dérives. Semen, 22, 29–43. Retrieved July 17, 2019, from https://journals.openedition.org/semen/2793 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/semen.2793
Creuser. (n.d.). In Dictionnaire de l’Académie Française. Retrieved July 17, 2019, from https://www.dictionnaire-academie.fr/article/A9C4938
Doury, M., & Plantin, C. (2015). Une approche langagière et interactionnelle de l’argumentation. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours, 15. https://doi.org/10.4000/aad.2006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/aad.2006
Dubied, A., & Lits, M. (1997). L’éditorial: Genre journalistique ou position discursive? Pratiques, 94, 49–61. https://doi.org/10.3406/prati.1997.1803 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3406/prati.1997.1803
Grzmil-Tylutki, H. (2000). Francuski i polski dyskurs ekologiczny w perspektywie aksjologii. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
Grzmil-Tylutki, H. (2007). Gatunek w świetle francuskiej teorii dyskursu. Kraków: Universitas.
Grzmil-Tylutki, H. (2010). Francuska lingwistyczna teoria dyskursu: Historia, tendencje, perspektywy. Kraków: Universitas.
Herman, T., & Jufer, N. (2001). L’éditorial «vitrine idéologique du journal»? Semen, 13, 135–162. Retrieved July 17, 2019, from https://journals.openedition.org/semen/2610 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/semen.2610
Hostyński, L. (2006). Wartości w świecie konsumpcji. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej.
Hunston, S., & Thompson, G. (2000). Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jacobs, S. (2015). Les principes pragmatiques de communication dans l’argumentation. Argumentation et Analyse du Discours, 15. https://doi.org/10.4000/aad.2078 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/aad.2078
Jäkel, O. (2003). Metafory w abstrakcyjnych domenach dyskursu: Kognitywno-lingwistyczna analiza metaforycznych modeli aktywności umysłowej, gospodarki i nauki (M. Banaś & B. Drąg, Trans.). Kraków: Universitas. (Original work published 1997).
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1980). L’énonciation: De la subjectivité dans le langage. Paris: Librairie Armand Colin.
Krzeszowski, T. (1990). The axiological aspect of idealized cognitive models. In J. Tomaszczyk & L. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (Eds.), Meaning and lexicography (pp. 135–165). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/llsee.28.16krz DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/llsee.28.16krz
Krzeszowski, T. (1994). Parametr aksjologiczny w przedpojęciowych schematach wyobrażeniowych. Etnolingwistyka. Problemy Języka i Kultury, 6, 29–51.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1985). Les métaphores dans la vie quotidienne (M. de Fornel & J.-J. Lecercle, Trans.). Paris: Les Editions de Minuit. (Original work published 1980).
Maingueneau, D. (2007). Genres de discours et modes de généricité. Le Français aujourd’hui, 4(27), 29–35. https://doi.org/10.3917/lfa.159.0029 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/lfa.159.0029
Mrozowski, M. (2001). Media masowe: Władza, rozrywka i biznes. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza ASPRA-JR.
Osborn, M. (1967). Archetypal metaphor in rhetoric: The light-dark family. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 53(2), 115–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335636709382823 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00335636709382823
Pachocińska, E. (2000). La réalisation de l’intention persuasive dans le discours polémique: Approche énonciative. Warszawa: Uniwersytet Warszawski.
Plantin, C. (2011). Les bonnes raisons des émotions: Principes et méthode pour l’étude du discours émotionné. Berne: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0352-0070-6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0352-0070-6
Puzynina, J. (1992). Język wartości. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Puzynina, J. (2004). Problemy wartościowania w języku i tekście. Etnolingwistyka. Problemy Języka i Kultury, 16, 179–189.
Rabatel, A. (2011). Des conflits de valeurs et de points de vue en discours. Semen, 32. Retrieved July 17, 2019, from https://journals.openedition.org/semen/9354 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/semen.9354
Topa-Bryniarska, D. (2014). L’univers discursif dans l’éditorial: L’étude des structures ontologiques et axiologiques. Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Dominika Topa-Bryniarska
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
