Metaphor clustering in american presidential inaugurals - from George H.W. Bush to Donald Trump

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

METAPHOR CLUSTERING IN AMERICAN PRESIDENTIAL INAUGURALS - FROM GEORGE H.W. BUSH TO DONALD TRUMP

Denis S. Mukhortov, Ji Xiaoxiao

This paper explores the phenomenon of metaphor clustering in American presidential inaugurals. The analysis shows that metaphor clustering plays a vital role in these inaugurals. Metaphor clusters may contribute to the cognitive and structural coherence of a discourse, the elaboration of important topics within a discourse, and also the fulfillment of a discourse's central purpose. Comparing the use of metaphor clusters in eight inaugurals reveals some similarities and some differences. The central topics of fundamental American values and country development appear in metaphor clusters in each of the seven inaugurals (except Trump's inaugural). Regarding differences, it is evident that each president uses his own individual metaphor types, including a certain favored metaphor which appears more frequently than the rest. This preferred metaphor often repeats itself throughout a discourse and is also used to link together several metaphors in a metaphor cluster. For example, the breeze metaphor is used as a binder to link several metaphors in Bush Senior's inaugural (1989). Trump's inaugural is different from the other four presidents' in terms of the use of metaphor clusters. The instance of metaphor clustering dominated by the carnage metaphor presents a scary image, which brings him some harsh criticism.

Key words: conceptual metaphor; presidential inaugurals; metaphor clusters; metaphor relations; discourse coherence; functions of metaphor.

metaphor american presidential inaugurals

Д.С. Мухортов, Цзи Сяосяо

В данной статье анализируется прагматическое значение метафорических кластеров в инаугурационных выступлениях американских президентов c 1988 по 2018 г. Утверждается, что с точки зрения текстообразования кластеры способствуют выстраиванию дискурса, структурированию его логики, достижению главных прагматических задач выступающего и акцентированию затрагиваемых им в речи проблем и вопросов. Проведенный анализ восьми инаугурационных выступлений выявляет ряд закономерностей и указывает на существующие идиолектные различия в плане использования метафор, которые -- по воле спичрайтера или не зависимо от нее -- создают кластеры и тем самым усиливают метафорический потенциал текста. Так, отмечается тот факт, что в семи речах, за исключением выступления Трампа, центральной темой, описываемой метафорами, являются фундаментальные американские ценности. Различия в использовании метафор носят субъективный характер. У каждого президента появляется свой -- или навязанный спичрайтером -- образ, который встречается чаще других. Он также становится одним из магистральных, и ему отводится роль кластерообразователя. Примером является метафора breeze в речи Дж. Буша-старшего. В статье утверждается, что смена тональности и образности в инаугурационных метафорических кластерах может подвергнуть политика острой критике со стороны истеблишмента или общества, что было продемонстрировано неортодоксальным поведением Дональда Трампа.

Ключевые слова: концептуальная метафора; инаугурационное выступление президента страны; метафорический кластер; метафорические отношения; связность дискурса; функции метафоры.

Introduction

Metaphors have been a keen intellectual interest ever since Aristotle's era. The very nature of describing and understanding one kind of thing through the terms of another poses quite a problem for scholars who are interested in truth, particularly philosophers. To name just one example here, Thomas Hobbes once regarded the use of metaphors as a kind ofabuse of speech [Leviathan, 1996: 21], though he himself used “Leviathan” metaphorically as the title of his book. It seems as though metaphors have already become ingrained into human thought. Any attempt of thinking without them seems impossible and unnecessary.

What is necessary, however, is to understand them as comprehensively as possible in order to avoid misusing them, whether it be intentionally or unintentionally, and to recognize any occurrences of misuse as efficiently as possible. The ability to recognize metaphor use is highly important because of the crucial roles it plays within a number of discourses, especially in political discourse. According to Kobozeva [2001], the functions of metaphor in the field of political discourse include: a heuristic function to assist the understanding of the ever-changing political reality and formulation of new political programs, an argumentative function to convince the audience of the correctness of certain political views, and a pragmatic interactive function to mitigate the most dangerous political statements that affect controversial political problems and minimize the responsibility of the speaker for the possible literal interpretation of his words by the addressees. Additionally, metaphorical language functions as a common platform which enables addressers to input non-conventional opinions into the consciousness of the addressees [Kobozeva, 2001]. Metaphors in political discourse have the potential to be one of the most effective ways of manipulating the human consciousness [Mukhortov, 2015a]. They may be used to describe and define any actual political situation, associating positive traits with the user and negative ones with his or her opponent [Ji Xiaoxiao, 2016b].

In modern times, the Conceptual Metaphor Theory proposed by Lakoff and Johnson [1980] has inspired various metaphor studies in many different research fields. Their idea of considering metaphors in terms of thought expands the overall understanding of metaphors. People not only express their ideas through metaphors, but also think metaphorically, know the world through metaphors, and even try to transform the linguistic picture ofthe addressee during the process of communication [Chudinov, 2013: 4]. In political discourse, observing the changes in prevailing metaphors across different epochs enables us to understand their different political realities and subsequently the changes in political situations, country, culture, lifestyle and ways ofthinking [Kondratjeva and Kovaleva, 2016]. For example: in the Soviet totalitarian era, the dominating metaphors are military ones; in the era of stagnation, metaphors of kinship are at the forefront; during perestroika, architectural metaphors are most prevalent; and at the end of last century, the theatrical, sexual and criminal metaphors are most common [Baranov, 1991; Budaev, 2011; Kaslova, 2003; Chudinov, 2001, cit. in Kondratjeva and Kovaleva, 2016].

Among many branches of metaphor studies, the topic of the relationship between metaphors drew a certain amount of attention from scholars. For example, Baranov [2014: 43] put forward the notion of “metaphor constellation” which refers to the totality of metaphoric models that are interrelated in terms of approximation in profiling certain properties of the source sphere and the target sphere. The focus of this notion is mainly on the relationship between metaphors which are similar to each other to some extent. Compared to the topic of the relationship between metaphors, the phenomenon of the distribution of metaphors in a discourse is given relatively less attention. However, its obvious existence in different discourse contexts means that it deserves much more attention and effort in exploring its nature and characteristics.

The concept of metaphor clustering in this paper concerns the distribution of metaphors in a discourse and the relationship between metaphors in a discourse, i.e. how these metaphors are distributed in a discourse and how they are related to each other. The crowding of several metaphors may form a relative complete cognitive scenario, in which either several images crowd together to form a coherent or incoherent picture, or one image repeats itself to reinforce its effect. These cognitive scenarios embody the speaker or writer's deliberate or subconscious focus in a discourse and are usually closely related to the important topics of the discourse.

One of the earliest studies written about the distribution of figurative language in a discourse comes from the field of psychotherapy. Pollio and Barlow [1975] discovered that figurative language bursts in certain periods throughout individual sessions, and the bursts of figurative language tend to demonstrate therapeutic insight. Pollio and Barlow claimed that these findings suggest that there is a correlation between changes in the rate of figurative language production and the nature and purpose ofthe discourse. Although there is no direct mention of the term “metaphor clustering” in the study, this research is an early glimpse at the phenomenon of the distribution of figurative language in certain discourse context and contributes to the development of the topic.

Jamieson [1980] was likely to be the first user of the term “metaphoric cluster”. He studied the phenomenon of metaphoric clusters in the rhetoric of Pope Paul VI and Edmund G. Brown Jr., a politician. He believed that it was not the recurrence of a single metaphor which made their rhetoric significant, but the appearance of clusters of related metaphors. Jamieson did not provide an exact definition for the term “metaphoric cluster”. However, his analysis reveals that he viewed metaphoric clusters not based on the distribution of metaphors in a discourse but based on the relationship between different metaphoric lexicons or between different metaphors. He also utilized terms equivalent to “metaphor cluster”, such as “the metaphoric networks” and “clusters of related metaphors” in the paper. Nevertheless, his work is inspiring for subsequent researchers. His claim that “recurrent patterns observable in the surface language reflect deeper rhetorical consistencies” [1980: 51] reveals the close relationship between the occurrence of a certain linguistic feature and its effect in rhetoric.

More recently, metaphor clustering has been studied in many other discourse contexts, such as college lectures, Baptist sermons, business media discourses, and conciliation conversations, which has revealed some insightful findings. Corts and Meyer [1999], in their study of three college lectures, find that figurative language and gestures frequently occur in bursts. These bursts tend to occur when teachers explain unknown and difficult topics to their students, or when different ways of understanding a known topic are presented to students. Besides this, the study finds that “metaphors and gestures both singly and in combination serve 2 functions: (a) to orient audience members to the structure and flow of the lecture and (b) to present and emphasize novel perspectives on significant lecture content” [Corts and Meyer, 1999: 81].

Aside from the college lectures, Corts and Meyer [2002] also study Baptist sermons, which inherently contain many occurrences of figurative language. They find that the clusters of figurative language in Baptist sermons contain a central root metaphor that represents the topic under consideration. The clustering of figurative language in Baptists sermons is usually rooted in a certain topic which is relatively important to the purpose of the speech. Koller [2003] researched metaphor use in business media texts on marketing and mergers and acquisitions, concluding that certain dominant metaphors are qualitatively supported by other metaphors in the metaphor clusters. Metaphor clusters fulfill certain important functions, such as relevance-production in discourse. Cameron and Stelma [2004] studied the conciliation conversations and found that metaphor clusters are “sites of intensive work relating to the central discourse purpose” [2004: 107]. Thus, it can be said that the phenomenon of clustering is closely related to the purpose of discourse itself.

Studies of metaphor clustering confirm that the phenomenon of metaphor clustering exists in many different discourses, and that it is highly important to both the structure and purpose of a discourse. However, there has not been a great deal of such research into political discourse specifically. This paper is a minor contribution to this field.

This paper will analyze metaphor clustering in presidential inaugurals, a specific type of presidential discourse. Presidential discourse, as a kind of political discourse of power, is a specific manifestation of the communication between those in power and the public, and even of the political transformation at a certain era [Gavrilova, 2004]. The study of linguistic characteristics of a president can reveal his speech patterns, his views, and his manner of political decision-making [Mukhortov, 2015b: 93]. Additionally, his discourse is also deeply influenced by the national culture and political culture. Thus, studying his language and style, such as in the course of the pre-election debate, may reveal a linguistic culture of the nation, its value orientation, and the availability of manipulative technologies for those in power to influence national consciousness [Mukhortov, 2016: 24]. Furthermore, the analysis of specific linguistic features, such as metaphor use in presidential discourse, may reveal the influence of some national and cultural background on presidents' linguistic characteristics and their personal rhetoric [Ji Xiaoxiao, 2016a: 242].

It is a well-known fact that presidential inaugurals are usually written with the help of professional speechwriters. The appearance of speechwrit- ers in the political sphere may partly relate to the complexity of politics and therefore the importance ofproper wording; any carelessness in presidential discourse may lead to troublesome or even disastrous results. Any illogical or improper wording may damage a president's image and reputation. As for the question of who the true author of these speeches is, one reasonable answer may be that it is the person who takes the responsibility for the speeches [Chudinov, 2012: 54]. After all, it is presidents who make the final decision on whether to accept the address, with or without any changes. And when they decide to accept it, they are fully responsible for every word that comes out of their mouths.

Even so, when studying the linguistic characteristics of presidential inaugurals, we have to keep in mind that underlying these linguistic characteristics are not only the thoughts of the presidents themselves, but most of all the “collective unconscious” [Jung, 1996] that belongs to a specific party, or a whole political cycle, or even the whole nation. Therefore, the metaphor use in presidential inaugurals can reflect both the president's own personal thoughts and, more importantly, they may reflect the thoughts and consciousness of his party or his country as a whole.

Corpus and method

Corpus

This paper examines the possible metaphor clustering in eight inaugurals of five American presidents, including George H. W. Bush (1989), Bill Clinton (1993 and 1997), George W. Bush (2001 and 2005), Barack Obama (2009 and 2013), and Donald Trump (2017). The overall data of the addresses contains about 15,660 words. The transcripts of these speeches come from the website “The American Presidency Project”: http://www. presidency.ucsb.edu/inaugurals.php

Method

The definition of metaphor clustering

In this paper, we locate metaphor clustering wherever groups of metaphorical sentences are found. The term metaphorical sentence refers to a sentence that contains one metaphor or more. That is to say, metaphorical sentences are used as the basic unit for studying metaphor clustering in a discourse. Metaphor clustering can be regarded as a textual, or discursive, phenomenon suggesting a combination of metaphors located in adjacent metaphorical sentences throughout a text.

There are two types of metaphor clustering: The first type refers to different kinds of metaphors occurring together in adjacent metaphorical sentences. It is assumed that the minimum number of metaphors making up a cluster is three. Within this cluster, three additional phenomena may occur -- when a target domain is metaphorically understood in terms of different source domains, when a source domain is used to understand different target domains, or the phenomenon that different source domains are used to understand different target domains. The second type refers to the phenomenon of an extended metaphor where one metaphor is repeated and developed through linked source domains and target domains in consecutive metaphorical sentences throughout a text or discourse.

The visual presentation-scatter diagram

The results of research are presented both with qualitative discussions and related diagrams. In this paper, scatter diagrams (created with Microsoft Excel) will be used to visually present the distribution of metaphors and metaphor clusters within a discourse. In the scatter diagrams the horizontal axis shows the length of a discourse, i.e. numbers of sentences from the beginning of the discourse. The vertical axis shows the number of metaphorical sentences corresponding to each sentence in a discourse. If a sentence is metaphorical, we will count 1, if not, we will leave it uncounted. This serves the purpose of making each metaphorical sentence a point of data, while non-metaphorical sentences are not counted as a data point. Therefore, these data points will form a horizontal, discontinuous trend. Each instance of metaphor clustering will be bracketed in the diagrams.

The shortcoming ofusing a scatter diagram here is that it only presents a rough representation ofthe distribution of metaphors in a discourse and the variation of the metaphor clusters. This will be further refined and elaborated upon by analyzing specific examples of the phenomenon. Another shortcoming is that more than one metaphor may exist in a metaphorical sentence. Since we only count this sentence as one metaphorical sentence, the diagram may overlook some instances of clustering. The reason why we count a metaphorical sentence that may contain more than one metaphor as one instead of two or three is that we intend to make a horizontal, straight line of metaphor distribution in a discourse instead of a curved line, since straight lines are more visually understandable. Therefore, this shortcoming will also be solved by the qualitative example analysis.

In the examples, all metaphorical words or phrases come in bold and italics and they are confirmed after checking their basic meaning and contextual meaning with the help of the Merriam-Webster online dictionary.

Qualitative analysis

In this section, we will firstly look at metaphor clusters in each inaugural and attempt to answer the following questions: What are their characteristics? How are they related to the address itself? How are the metaphors in a metaphor cluster related to each other? What are their functions in the address? Secondly, an attempt will be made to compare the use of metaphor clusters in all the eight inaugurals in order to find out possible similarities and differences among them.

Metaphor Clusters in Each Inaugural

George H.W. Bush (January 20, 1989)

(1) I come before you and assume the Presidency at a moment rich with promise. We live in a peaceful, prosperous time, but we can make it better. For a new breeze is blowing, and a world refreshed by freedom seems reborn. For in man's heart, if not in fact, the day of the dictator is over. The totalitarian era is passing, its old ideas blown away like leaves from an ancient, lifeless tree. A new breeze is blowing, and a nation refreshed by freedom stands ready to push on. There is new ground to be broken and new action to be taken. There are times when the future seems thick as a fog; you sit and wait, hoping the mists will lift and reveal the right path. But this is a time when the future seems a door you can walk right through into a room called tomorrow.

Great nations of the world are moving toward democracy through the door to freedom. Men and women of the world move toward free markets through the door to prosperity. The people of the world agitate for free expression and free thought through the door to the moral and intellectual satisfactions that only liberty allows. (January 20, 1989)

(2) Some see leadership as high drama and the sound of trumpets calling, and sometimes it is that. But I see history as a book with many pages, and each day we fill a page with acts of hopefulness and meaning. The new breeze blows, a page turns, the story unfolds. And so, today a chapter begins, a small and stately story of unity, diversity, and generosity -- shared, and written, together. (January 20, 1989)

Figure 1: Distribution diagram of metaphorical sentences in the presidential inaugural of George H.W. Bush in 1989.

There are two occurrences of metaphor clustering in Bush Senior's inaugural. In example (1), several metaphors are crowded together in the two adjacent paragraphs, creating a cognitive scenario that presents the audience with a picture of an unfavorable past and a present filled with the opportunity of progress and a bright future. Moreover, the related metaphorical linguistic expressions in the address suggest that what may make this bright future a reality is the change that will come about when the president is in office.

The first metaphor that deserves our attention is the breeze metaphor. It appears twice in example (1), and five times throughout the address overall. A breeze is a light, gentle wind, which usually causes people to feel a sense of comfort. It is a weather phenomenon common in spring which is synonymous with rebirth and renewal. Therefore, the breeze metaphor used here by George H.W. Bush indicates that on the one hand, there will be some new changes in society during his presidential term, while on the other hand, the change will be tender and minor, which is comfortable and easy to accept, especially due to his former role as vice president to Reagan before he was elected as president.

Because a new breeze is blowing, a world is “reborn”, “old ideas blown away like leaves from an ancient, lifeless tree”, a nation starts to “push on”, and “a new ground is to be broken”. It can be noted that the breeze metaphor is combined with the birth metaphor, journey metaphor, the leaves and tree simile, and the building metaphor. All these images contribute to one picture in which a new change is on the way and that this change will have a positive impact. There are causal links between the breeze metaphor and other metaphors here: The following fog simile, journey metaphor, door simile, and room metaphor are also connected, especially the journey metaphor and the door metaphor. George H.W. Bush uses these metaphors here to present us with two pictures to compare: One is the image of a place full of mist, in which everything is unclear and it is impossible to see an exit route, and the other is a picture of a door that waits for people to walk through it. The two pictures are all about the future. It is clear that the second picture is favorable for everyone; the future depicted in the second picture is the one everyone wants. The correlated images used by the president reinforce the fact that he is well qualified to be a president who would bring his people a brilliant future.

In example (2), Bush combines the breeze metaphor with the book metaphor and the story metaphor. History is seen as a storybook. Again, the new breeze means a new change, and the change turns a new page of the book of history and brings about new developments. It brings a bright future, unity, diversity, and generosity. Example (2) compares the image of high drama and the image of books. High drama is usually used in political discourse to signal something negative, as is the case in this instance. The second image of books is much more preferable.

All in all, we can see from the two examples that metaphors are linked to each other in each instance of metaphor clustering. They are topically related, describing one of the main topics of the address: change. Change is an eternal force in the world. It is a force unseen by humans, but the result it brings can be observed by humans. The formation and development of everything is closely related to the force of change. In presidential inaugurals, the topic of change is oft-mentioned. This instance of metaphor clustering shows the image of a negative past and a positive future. The good future will be guaranteed by the change brought about by the president.

In terms of discourse structure, example (1) appears towards the beginning of the inaugural, and example (2) at the end of the inaugural. In addition, metaphors in these two metaphor clusters are linked together by the breeze metaphor that functions as a cohesive tool. In fact, the repeated occurrence of the breeze image reveals its three main functions: First of all, it has a cohesive function in terms of the text itself. Like a thread, it runs through this inaugural address. In many cases, it is used with other images, such as leaves of an old tree, a beautiful kite and an unfolding book of history. Therefore, the breeze metaphor is combined with other images to make a coherent metaphor system in the discourse. Secondly, it has a reassuring function. The breeze is a natural phenomenon. It is a natural force that cannot be stopped or eliminated. Therefore, the change it brings will certainly occur. All the promises made by the presidents will certainly be realized because of the breeze. This metaphor reassures the audience and makes them believe that a new, positive change will soon occur. Thirdly, this metaphor has the function of justifying an argument or enhancing the justification of an argument. This also reinforces the qualifications of the speaker. The arguments based on the breeze metaphor are justified because they are logically valid. The breeze can blow away leaves from an old lifeless tree, so it is logically valid that old ideas of the totalitarian era will pass. The breeze can help a kite fly higher and higher, so it is logically valid that more people will be freed when freedom is understood in terms of a kite. The breeze can blow pages of a book, so it is logically valid that people will get to experience new developments for people because of the inevitable change that will take place in the future.

Bill Clinton (January 20, 1993)

(1) We know we have to face hard truths and take strong steps, but we have not done so; instead, we have drifted. And that drifting has eroded our resources, fractured our economy, and shaken our confidence. Though our challenges are fearsome, so are our strengths. Americans have ever been a restless, questing, hopeful people. And we must bring to our task today the vision and will of those who came before us. From our Revolution to the Civil War, to the Great Depression, to the civil rights movement, our people have always mustered the determination to construct from these crises the pillars of our history. Thomas Jefferson believed that to preserve the very foundations of our Nation, we would need dramatic change from time to time. Well, my fellow Americans, this is our time. Let us embrace it.

Our democracy must be not only the envy of the world but the engine of our own renewal. There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America. And so today we pledge an end to the era of deadlock and drift, and a new season of American renewal has begun.

(2) The brave Americans serving our Nation today in the Persian Gulf, in Somalia, and wherever else they stand are testament to our resolve. But our greatest strength is the power of our ideas, which are still new in many lands. Across the world we see them embraced, and we rejoice. Our hopes, our hearts, our hands are with those on every continent who are building democracy and freedom. The cause is America's cause. The American people have summoned the change we celebrate today. You have raised your voices in an unmistakable chorus. You have cast your votes in historic numbers. And you have changed the face of Congress, the Presidency, and the political process itself. Yes, you, my fellow Americans, have forced the spring. Now we must do the work the season demands. To that work I now turn with all the authority of my office. I ask the Congress to join with me. But no President, no Congress, no Government can undertake this mission alone.

In Bill Clinton's inaugural in 1993, there are two examples of metaphor clustering. In example (l), the metaphorical words and phrases in bold and italics seem to crowd into three groups. However, the last two groups are semantically much closer to each other, with one short sentence between them, so they can be identified as metaphor clustering. The metaphor cluster consists of the building metaphor, engine metaphor, illness-curing metaphor, movement metaphor, and the seasonal metaphor. These metaphors relate to the topic of change, and past and future.

Figure 2: Distribution diagram of metaphorical sentences in the presidential inaugural of Bill Clinton in 1993.

There are two building metaphors -- HISTORY IS A BUILDING and NATION IS A BUILDING. As an indispensable part of human life, buildings are everywhere: They may take the form of a house that provides shelter to people, a museum that provides knowledge to people, or a theater that provides entertainment to people. To understand an abstract concept in terms of construction may emphasize different aspects of this abstract concept with focus on different parts of construction. It may emphasize the difficulty of the building process, or it may emphasize the final product of the construction. It may even emphasize the materials used in the construction. All these possibilities depend on the user's conceptualization habits.

It is common to see a country as a construction; the development of a country requires a literal building process and a metaphorical building process. To see a country as a construction makes the abstract concept of a country seem more real and concrete. As a result, the metaphor presents the audience with an image of construction, making any contribution to the building ofAmerica visible. It is human nature to tend to believe what is visible. When something is visible it means that it is controllable. Humans are afraid of the unknown and losing control. Therefore, construction metaphors, to some extent, make abstract concepts seem less abstract and more familiar to us by concretizing the abstract concept and making it seem more real.

In the same way, seeing history as a construction process makes what seems distant and abstract seem nearer to us. Additionally, the construction metaphor makes us see what we have achieved, thus allowing us to feel a sense of accomplishment because we can vividly see the result. This sense of accomplishment makes us feel that there is some value in our contributions, and therefore what we have is valuable. This sense of self worth is important for everyone.

The two building metaphors have different focus points: The metaphor HISTORY IS A BUILDING highlights the determination of American people who can take advantage of crises and transform them into the pillars of the building of history. It reveals a positive attitude towards crises. We know that a crisis is a situation full of problems that must be solved quickly in order to avoid the worsening of the situation. To some, it may seem like a pit that is impossible to climb out of. To others, it may be a chance which can be made use of, depending on an attitude people have towards it. The second building metaphor NATION IS A BUILDING highlights the necessity of change in order to maintain and strengthen the foundation of the nation. Here, the speaker emphasizes the importance of change.

The engine metaphor reveals the importance and indispensability of democracy in the country's development. The word “engine” refers to a machine that converts any form of energy into a mechanical force and motion. It serves as an energy source. Without it, any type of machine cannot operate. The illness-curing metaphor suggests that America has a self-healing capacity. The next metaphor is the movement metaphor. Movement is another common phenomenon in our lives. From the metaphorical linguistic expression “the era of deadlock and drift”, it can be seen that the country's development is understood in terms of forward-bound movement. No development means no movement, and negative development means directionless movement. The last metaphor is the season metaphor. It refers to changes in social condition.

From the discussion above, we can see from the metaphor cluster that these metaphors are used to describe both the bad past and the promising future. The promising future is guaranteed by the change brought about by what is right with America and the traditional American ideals, such as democracy. Therefore, the metaphor clustering is topical in the inaugural because it helps to elaborate on one of the main topics of the inaugural, i.e. change.

In example (2), the metaphor cluster includes the building metaphor, chorus metaphor, personification, spring metaphor. The first metaphor we will talk about is the spring metaphor. Spring is a natural phenomenon, which relates to the abstract idea of rebirth. Spring is one of the phases in the succession of the four seasons. The succession of the four seasons in itself suggests a sense of determination and assurance, since it is certain that spring must come after winter. Therefore, the spring metaphor has a reassuring function here, making the audience feel certain that new change will come and everything will be better in spring. The spring metaphor appears in four places throughout the address. It has a cohesive function in terms of text production, it is like a thread running through the inaugural address. It sticks to the theme of the inaugural address, i.e. the renewal of America. Therefore, by using the spring metaphor, Bill Clinton suggests that his presidential term will bring a new and preferable change. Besides this, this spring/season metaphor has the function ofjustifying an argument or enhancing the justification of an argument. The arguments based on the metaphor are justified because they are logically valid.

The related linguistic expressions ofthe spring metaphor are also worth discussing. The linguistic expressions like “Yes, you, my fellow Americans, have forced the spring” reveals the speaker's intention of strengthening the audience's sense of participation in the political process. The second- person pronoun “you” unifies the audience, making each person feel that they are involved in the process which is so important and so grand. The expression “you forced the spring” is rhetorically powerful, but realistically impossible. How could humans “force” the spring? It is an impossibility. Thus, the impossibility makes the activity itself seem so exciting and grand, making the doers feel highly powerful and confident. Therefore, although this expression is realistically impossible, it is rhetorically persuasive. It makes humans feel that they are powerful. This feeling is what matters for humans. Facing nature, humans are small and sometimes powerless, and this frightens them. So, humans seek every means to be powerful and to control everything they possibly can. We can see why such an expression is a powerful and persuasive strategy: It not only satisfies and reassures the audience emotionally, but also makes them feel confident about choosing the president who speaks these words.

In this inaugural, there is a similar expression: “we force the spring”. It is functionally similar to what we have discussed, and only differs in the use of pronouns. The first-person plural pronoun “we” includes both the president himself and the whole audience. The use of this pronoun unifies the audience and himself, and the use of the second-person plural pronoun “you” refers to all Americans. When the second-person plural is used, Americans get all the credit for “forcing the spring”. Thus, the feeling of power strengthens. The spring metaphor is used to describe the actions that should be taken in this season. Therefore, in the expression “we must do the work the season demands” the season refers to the spring. And in spring, we have to work hard in order to harvest in fall. Spring is the season of beginnings. This sense may be closely related to the tradition of farming. In this season, farmers begin to cultivate their land and harvest all the products of autumn. Therefore, spring is related to the beginning of doing something productive. To relate the concept of spring with work and service is therefore highly convincing to the audience.

Bill Clinton (January 20, 1997)

(1) At the dawn of the 21 century, a free people must now choose to shape the forces of the information age and the global society, to unleash the limitless potential of all our people, and yes, to form a more perfect Union.

When last we gathered, our march to this new future seemed less certain than it does today. We vowed then to set a clear course to renew our Nation. In these 4 years, we have been touched by tragedy, exhilarated by chal- lege, strengthened by achievement. America stands alone as the world's indispensable nation. Once again, our economy is the strongest on Earth. Once again, we are building stronger families, thriving communities, better educational opportunities, a cleaner enviroment..

(2) The divide of race has been America's constant curse. And each new wave of immigrants gives new targets to old prejudices. Prejudice and contempt cloaked in the pretense of religious or political conviction are no different. These forces have nearly destroyed our Nation in the past. They plague us still. They fuel the fanaticism of terror. And they torment the lives of millions in fractured nations all around the world.

These obsessions cripple both those who hate and of course those who are hated, robbing both of what they might become. We cannot, we will not, succumb to the dark impulses that lurk in the far regions of the soul everywhere. We shall overcome them. And we shall replace them with the generous spirit of a people who feel at home with one another. Our rich texture of racial, religious, and political diversity will be a godsend in the 21st century. Great rewards will come to those who can live together, learn together, work together, forge new ties that bind together.

(3) Fellow Americans, we must not waste the precious gift of this time. For all of us are on that same journy of our lives, and our journy, too, will come to an end. But the journey of our America must go on.

From the height of this place and the summit of this century, let us go forth.

Figure 3: Distribution diagram of metaphorical sentences in the presidential inaugural of Bill Clinton in 1997.

In the second presidential inaugural of Bill Clinton, there are three occurrences of metaphor clustering. In example (1), the metaphor cluster includes the dawn metaphor, journey metaphor, personification NATION IS A PERSON, and the building metaphor. The dawn metaphor is a conventional metaphor, as the phrase “at the dawn of “ is equal to “at the beginning of”. The journey metaphor is used to recall the change in confidence between the past and present. From the sentences “when last we gathered, our march to this new future seemed less certain than it does today. We vowed then to set a clear course to renew our Nation”, we can see that the president implicitly acclaims himself since he describes the “less certain” journey in the past as becoming clearer after his first term and implies that America became the world's most indispensable nation due to his governance. To personify America as a person standing alone is to highlights the image of a hero who is highly important. It is a political strategy to aggrandize America's status in the world. The building metaphor is used to concretize abstract concepts, therefore making the process of change visible and vivid to the audience.

In example (2), the metaphor cluster is based on one target domain with different source domains. The target domain is two kinds of negative attitudes: prejudice and contempt. These forces are metaphorical plagues, fuel, evil powers, robbers, and dark impulses. It is evident that the metaphors in this metaphor cluster are combined and accumulated to strenghthen their power to describe the negative nature of prejudice and contempt. On the contrary, the texture metaphor and tie metaphor presents a positive picture of unity and harmony.

In example (3), the gift metaphor journey metaphor, bridge metaphor, and fire metaphor are connected to each other to present a picture of a traveller on a journey. The target domains in this metaphor cluster are time, human life, the development of a country, history, and freedom. In this example, the sentences “For all of us are on that same journey of our lives, and our journey, too, will come to an end. But the journey of our America must go on” show the speaker's distinction between a human's life and the development of the country, that is, one is a forward-oriented journey which will come to an end one day, while the other is an endless forward journey.

The journey metaphor, as a spatial movement metaphor, is drawn from the fundamental human experience. Spatial movement is an action performed by humans and other creatures in nature; it is one of the most basic states of life. In political discourse, spatial movement is mostly used to understand the abstract concepts of “growth” or “development”. In this inaugural, it can be seen that, among other metaphors, the journey metaphor is relatively frequently used. The repeated use of the journey metaphors creates a coherent cognitive scenario in the address, i.e. everyone is on the same journey to an unknown, but possibly happy, destination. When politicians use journey metaphors, it is often to highlight the action of “going” and possible bright and positive destinations, thus giving their discourse a reassuring function.

Special attention should be paid to Clinton's combining of the journey metaphor with the bridge metaphor. Bill Clinton uses this metapor frequently in his acceptance address in 1996. He uses the bridge metaphor in almost twenty paragraphs in the address, relating his bridge metaphor to a variety of topics. Most of his bridge metaphors are used to acclaim his past accomplishements and future plans. The interdiscursive use of the bridge metaphor not only connects Clinton's different discourses, but also maintains the continuity of metaphor use throughout them.

The fire metaphor is used to understand freedom, depicting an image of fire with flames spreading throughout the entire world. In this example, the understanding of freedom in terms of fire highlights the “brightness” and “rapid dissemination” of fire, among other features. America's freedom is seen as a fire that can rapidly be proliferated and beneficial to other countries.

Fire has rich metaphoric associations. According to Osborn [1967], it is, primarily, a basic condition for human development, providing warmth and cooked food, thus guaranteeing their health and bodily comfort. Secondly, fire relates inseparably to light. In ancient times fire and light went together, both providing the condition for sight. Light can also represent intellectual knowledge, and so can fire. Thirdly, fire can be rapidly reproduced and spread from one place to another, so it can represent the rapid proliferation of something, such as an idea. Fourthly, fire burns and breaks down substances, therefore, it has functions of both purifying and destroying. In this case, fire sometimes relates to the religious notion of purgatory. A good example of the purifying function of fire could be found in the Early Modern period from 15th to 18th ofwitch-hunts in Early Modern

Europe and Colonial North America, when a lot of so-called “witches” were burned alive.

George W. Bush (January 20, 2001)

(1) I am honored and humbled to stand here where so many ofAmerica's leaders have come before me, and so many will follow. We have a place, all of us, in a long story, a story we continue but whose end we will not see. It is a story of a new world that became a friend and liberator of the old, the story of a slaveholding society that became a servant offreedom, the story of a power that went into the world to protect but not possess, to defend but not to conquer.