engleski

Beyond simple coronavirus metaphors: Why is Biden the COVID of this election cycle and Trump the COVID of humanity?

Covid-19 has been conceptualized in figurative terms by means of both metonymy and metaphor, which are often massed and mixed, in a single modality (linguistic or visual) or across modalities, sometimes producing hyperbole, irony and even sarcasm. The most basic type of metonymy that is hardly noticed is present in its multiple form in the very title of this conference. Coronavirus is the label used to refer to a type of germ, but it is currently used to refer to a particular type, the “novel” coronavirus (GENERIC FOR SPECIFIC), and then the disease caused by it (officially called Covid-19) or even to the pandemic (CAUSE OF A HEALTH CONDITION FOR THE HEALTH CONDITION). We also note metonymic shortenings, as both virus and corona can be used to refer to the (novel) coronavirus, the disease, the pandemic etc. One of most dominant conceptual metaphors used to talk about the coronavirus across languages and cultures is the WAR metaphor, but many other metaphors have been attested, exploiting a wide range of source domains. It appears, however, that there is a sort of evolutionary movement concerning the frequency with which particular source domains are used, progressing first towards more aggressive, war-like concepts, then after a sort of culmination in the spring of 2020, towards other related concepts, as the epidemic turned into a pandemic and now into an endemic (though a strong one). We can now observe the beginnings of a new cycle, the domain that has so far been conceptualized metaphorically in terms of other source domains is now beginning to emancipate itself, becoming itself a source domain, as evidenced in the title of this presentation, i.e. the coronavirus is being used as a source domain in expressions like: (1) Mealybugs are the Coronavirus of my succulents. (2) #Cybercrime is the #Coronavirus of the #tech world The aim of this presentation is not only to document this incipient trend, but also to analyse the phenomenon in structural and pragmatic terms. Metaphorically speaking, we study not the career of a metaphor, but the career of a domain (which in our opinion is even more exciting than the former enterprise). Figurative expressions of the type X is the coronvirus/COVID(-19) of Z are apparently instances of the figurative XYZ construction, but we adduce evidence against analysing them as cases of conceptual integration (as suggested by Turner & Fauconnier 1999, Steen & Turner 2013, Veale 2014), or as nothing more than just being deliberate metaphors. We claim that this type of XYZ constructions must be viewed in a wider discoursal context, and that when viewed from this perspective it becomes clear that speakers engage in online construction of paragon models, with a double function of securing a sufficient level of intersubjectivity, while combining framing effects with a humorous background. References: Steen, F. ; Turner, M. 2013. Multimodal construction grammar. In: Borkent, M. ; Dancygier, B. ; Hinnell, J. (eds.), Language and the creative mind. Stanford: CSLI Publications, 255–274. Turner, M ; Fauconnier, G. 1999. A mechanism of creativity. Poetics Today, v. 20, n. 3, 397–418. Veale, T. 2014. The ABCs of XYZs: Creativity and conservativity in humorous epithets. In: Manjaly, J. ; Indurkhya, B. (eds.) Cognition, experience, and creativity. New Delhi: Orient Blackswan, 135–154.

metaphor ; metonymy ; XYZ construction ; conceptual integration ; paragon model ; intersubjectivity ; framing ; humour

nije evidentirano