In our previous post, we discussed two popular and related approaches to metaphor analysis: 1) MIP (Metaphor Identification Procedure; Pragglejaz Group, 2007) and 2) MIPVU (Metaphor Identification Procedure VU University Amsterdam, Steen et al., 2019). In this post, we move on to another popular metaphor analysis method called Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA; Charteris-Black, 2004). Below, we provide a concise summary of the method. For a better understanding, we highly suggest to consult the sources listed at the end of this article.
Overview
CMA, developed by Jonathan Charteris-Black, integrates corpus linguistics with cognitive linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). This approach recognizes that metaphors function as powerful rhetorical tools that often convey emotional slants or moral evaluations of the subjects they describe. CMA is particularly effective for examining how those in positions of authority—politicians, news media, religious institutions—use metaphors to shape thinking. Therefore, this approach inherently more critical in the analysis process.
The Procedure
Charteris-Black’s method follows a four-step approach:
- Contextual Analysis: The first step is defining the research scope. It begins with formulating research questions that explore the potential impact of metaphors on a particular issue or group. Based on these questions, researchers choose appropriate data sources (like news articles, social media posts, or political speeches) and a specific timeframe. This creates a “corpus,” or a collection of texts, to be analyzed. For example, a researcher interested in how refugees are portrayed in the media might collect newspaper articles from a specific period (Benczes & Ságvári, 2022; Bozdag, 2024).
- Metaphor Identification: Identify metaphors by looking for “incongruity or semantic tension” resulting from a shift in domain use.
- Initial Scan: Researchers carefully read the text, marking potential metaphors – words or phrases that seem to be used non-literally.
- Verification: Each potential metaphor is then checked against a reliable dictionary to confirm if a domain shift has occurred. If the word’s usual meaning doesn’t fit the context, and a different meaning is implied, it’s identified as a metaphorical expression.
- Metaphor Interpretation: This step is about interpreting the conceptual metaphors that underlie the linguistic expressions. In other words, once metaphors are identified, the next step is to categorize them. This involves figuring out the “source domain” (the literal meaning of the word or phrase) and the “target domain” (the concept being described metaphorically). Researchers then group metaphors based on shared source domains. A dictionary is crucial for determining the literal meaning. For instance, the phrase “refugee influx” might be categorized as a “natural disaster”. This is because “influx” literally describes a large, unstoppable flow (like a flood), implying that refugees are being conceptualized as an overwhelming, uncontrollable natural force.
- Metaphor Explanation: Connect metaphor use to broader social contexts and rhetorical purposes. The final stage jumps into the why behind the metaphors. It explores the function of the metaphors within the broader discourse, the social actors who are using them, and their potential ideological or persuasive goals. This is where the researcher connects the identified metaphors to wider social and political contexts. For example, a researcher might analyze how different news outlets use different metaphors to frame the issue of migration. This analysis might reveal biases or political agendas. The goal is to understand how these metaphors might shape public opinion and contribute to particular viewpoints.
Example
To illustrate how CMA can be applied in practice, let’s consider the case of political speeches during an election campaign. Suppose a researcher aims to investigate how national identity is constructed through metaphors in the speeches of political leaders.
- Contextual Analysis
The first step involves defining the research focus and collecting the relevant data. In this case, the researcher formulates the question: How do political leaders use metaphors to frame national identity during elections?
To answer this, the researcher compiles a corpus of speeches delivered by major party leaders in the month leading up to the election. The goal is to observe recurring metaphorical framings that might evoke unity, threat, or moral superiority. - Metaphor Identification
Next, the texts are carefully read to identify metaphorical expressions that show a shift in meaning. Words such as “fight,” “defend,” “enemy,” or “battle for the nation’s future” are flagged as potential metaphors.
Consulting a dictionary, the researcher confirms whether terms like “battle” and “enemy” are used metaphorically. If they no longer refer to literal warfare but to political competition, they are classified as metaphors. Thus, these expressions are marked as instances of the POLITICS IS WAR metaphor. - Metaphor Interpretation
Once the metaphors are identified, the researcher interprets the conceptual mappings behind them. For instance, the POLITICS IS WAR metaphor frames elections as a conflict between opposing forces, suggesting that winning requires strategy, sacrifice, and loyalty. - Metaphor Explanation
Finally, the researcher situates these findings within their broader social and ideological context. The frequent use of war metaphors, for example, might serve to mobilize supporters by appealing to emotions like fear, courage, and loyalty. It may also implicitly construct political opponents as threats to the nation’s well-being.
Through this interpretive stage, CMA exposes how metaphor choices might not be neutral but can function as persuasive strategies that reflect and reinforce power relations.
Sources
Benczes, R., & Ságvári, B. (2022). Migrants are not welcome: Metaphorical framing of fled people in Hungarian online media, 2015–2018. Journal of Language and Politics, 21(3), 413-434.
Bozdag, U. 2024. Framing displaced persons: An analysis of Turkish media’s use of migration metaphors on Twitter . Intersections. East European Journal of Society and Politics. 10, 1 (Aug. 2024). DOI:https://doi.org/10.17356/ieejsp.v10i1.1189.
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Critical metaphor analysis. In Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis (pp. 243–253). London: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Charteris-Black, J. (2018). Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Group, P. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and symbol, 22(1), 1–39.
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2019). MIPVU: A manual for identifying metaphor-related words. In Metaphor Identification in Multiple Languages (pp. 23–40). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Corvinus Metaphor Workshop 