Nuclear Iran: A Simple Metaphor Analysis of Biden’s Discourse (2021–2023)
https://doi.org/10.56989/benkj.v6i6.1964
Keywords:
Political Discourse , Metaphor Analysis , Securitization , Biden Speeches , Critical Discourse Analysis , Discourse AnalysisSustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
Abstract
PDA consider as an important way to form common thoughtful of universal conflicts. One of the most powerful linguistic elements applied by political leaders is metaphor. Metaphors helps speakers to show unlimited political issues in easier and sensitively significant techniques. This research presents the metaphors used by US president Joe Biden when he talks about Iran and its nuclear program among 2021 and 2023. Both theories are applied in this research conceptual metaphor theory and elements of CDA to show how language presents Iran as a devil. Facts were gathered from official White House transcripts and public provided by Joe Biden. The data analysis presents that Joe Biden’s conferences often use metaphors belong to guardianship, containment, conflict prevention, and defense. These utterances present Iran as a possible danger while at the same time showing US as a guardian of universal security. The results show that metaphor do an important role in communication and political strategic mood. The data donates to research on political linguistics by presenting how metaphor effects international political narratives.
References
• Balzacq, T. (2005). The three faces of securitization. European Journal of International Relations, 11(2), 171–201.
• Biden, J. (2021). Press conference remarks in Rome following the G20 summit. The White House.
• Biden, J. (2021, April 16). Remarks by President Biden in press conference. The White House.
• Biden, J. (2021, June 28). Remarks during meeting with President Reuven Rivlin of Israel. The White House.
• Biden, J. (2022). Campaign remarks in California. Reuters transcript archive.
• Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A new framework for analysis. Lynne Rienner.
• Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. Routledge.
• Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
• Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. Routledge.
• Forceville, C. (2009). Multimodal metaphor. De Gruyter.
• Goatly, A. (2007). Washing the brain: Metaphor and hidden ideology. John Benjamins.
• Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, grammar and ideology. Bloomsbury.
• Koller, V. (2004). Metaphor and gender in business media discourse. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Lakoff, G. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant! Chelsea Green.
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
• Magid, J. (2021, June 28). Biden tells Rivlin Iran will never get a nuclear weapon on his watch. The Times of Israel.
• Musolff, A. (2016). Political metaphor analysis. Bloomsbury.
• Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge University Press.
• Stritzel, H. (2007). Towards a theory of securitization. European Journal of International Relations, 13(3), 357–383.
• van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283.
• van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.
• van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 17(3), 359–383.
• Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse of politics in action. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2016). Methods of critical discourse studies. Sage.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ibn Khaldoun Journal for Studies and Researches
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
