A Comparative Study of Metaphor in British and United States of America (US) Political Discourse
Student’s Name
University Affiliation Comparative Study of Metaphor in British and United States of America (US) Political Discourse
Abstract
This study offers a research on the application of metaphor in the discourse of cultural and political aspects between these two countries; The United States of America and Great Britain. As a result, this is an analysis of the various factors related to the perspective in terms of the cultural and socio-political phenomenon, in which a lot of attention is placed on the elements ascertaining the pragmatic, variable, and cognitive details of the British and US's political discourses: The inaugural speeches of four US presidents and party political manifestos of two British political parties during the period between 1974 and 1997 are analysed. The main purpose of undertaking this kind of comparative study of the British and the American political discourses is quite evident, these discourses symbolize intriguing and complex methods of cultural values and political differences as depicted in the respective linguistic contexts. The key findings are that metaphors from the domains of conflict, journey and buildings are general across the divide. However, the British corpus contain metaphors that draw on the source domain of plants whereas the American corpus hugely draws on source domains like fire and light and the physical environments that are excluded in the context of the British corpus. Therefore, the variations offer quite a significant dissimilarity in the use of metaphors among the two set of political discourse and cultural differences.
Keywords: Metaphor, Corpus, discourse, manifesto, and politics.
Introduction
Political and socio-cultural dimensions have been applied extensively in all kinds of linguistic studies on the purpose of language as a communication tool. Most of these studies focus their attention on the cognitive and pragmatic functions that will enable this study have a broad outlook on the intertwined relationship together with the social meanings behind their usage. Spectrums of studies that are analytical and critical have indicated the dynamics of language application as used among the broader social and political space (Howarth, 2000). Hence, in applying these studies, the underlying fact portrayed is the relationship formed between the dialect and its subsequent usage in the socio-cultural and political practises also commonly referred to as discourse. In this backdrop, the study takes reference from Howarth (2000) definition of discourse as the combination of text and context, in which the text has some situational components. The combination of both context and text form the essential elements of the definition because there exist no discourse without their inclusion. Conventionally, a text is viewed in two different ways: communicatively and propositionally. The perspective on the first approach is formed on the basis that it contains two separate sentences joined using various devices. The second approach describes the text with the functional condition and makes enquiries as to whether the author releases specific communicative elements that can be defined by an authentic and communicative situation. Howarth (2000) observes that for the context to have some elements of meaning, text have to relate to specific situations that are authentic. In regards to the context, it is construed to have the participants together with their respective roles, knowledge, goals and the setting in which the context is placed.
Current studies concentrate on the text from a perspective of the processes of the actual participants more so on the decisions they make their choices, the difficulties that these participants undergo when employing the textual elements during their social interactions, and the shared effects of communication that the participants experience. The hypothesis presented in text pays much attention to the intricate methodology in which text is formed. A new text is produced through any kind of interpretation and as such, the design and approach can be applied to all domains of knowledge, and further, to social phenomenon apart from humanities and philosophy. The results of such an interpretive methodology can be felt if the outcomes relate to the development of any text in the concept of a metaphoric or real world, for instance we can consider buildings as a form of political metaphoric discourse. The recipient of the information central participation in the formation of the meaning gives a very strong inducement in the conviction that the progressive development of the general doctrines of the theories of text forwarded can be studied further in what has been extensively termed by scholars as cognitive linguistics. Text is observed as the multivariate relationship between cultures in the familiar context of intercultural dialogue which not only offers the choice of language as a bridge to forming vital text plays, but also providing the know-how of the operations of a language in its context in the social domain which also builds these cognitive skills.
Discourse mainly concerns itself with the mutual relationship between society and language and also between this language and the effects it leaves on the mind of its users. It forms a strong binding chain to psychology via the close relationship established between the mind and the language, in sociological elements through a vital function with which language affect our social lives, and to anthropology through the course of culture and language investigation. Extensive studies have highlighted out the understanding that it's not only the discourse or the social methodologies that are ideological, but that what is churned out of them are the ideologies found within them. Chartis – Black (2009) brings out the features of these discourses: they are formed in a cognitive foundation, they ingrained in text, and that their ideological elements are well manifest. These features are the core of any analysis that is employed to any form of discourse. Further studies by Chartis – Black (2009) indicate that some forms of these discourses are heavily cognitive, have strong ideological and cultural motivation, and are so pragmatic. Therefore, this study is going to focus mainly on political discourse. R. Johnson and D. Johnson (2000) define political discourse as the prescribed exchange of rational opinions concerning various optional or alternatives that should be acted upon to unravel the problems that affect society. Significant emphasis should be inferred from the fact that this discourse only occurs in an actual communication, in which the underlying factors influencing the discourse are observed under strict cooperation and is mutual to other factors like quantity, mannerism, quality and relevance.
However, the doctrines governing the political discourse are rather often trudged upon and violated consciously to form a stylistic, realistic, and cognitive approach to the discourse. The realism towards the political discourse is manifested by the role it plays, with visual, cognitive and the real information embedded in it successfully. This forms the reason why most strategies on the lexical, stylistic and grammatical devices like metaphor, repetitions, and literature that are widely applied to the political discourse to awaken a keen interest in the receivers through poetry, cognitive and literary approaches to execute various functions within the field of communication. Among these devices, metaphor forms the most important element as through it, the receiver of the information is encouraged to bring out a number of problems in them, adequately and cleverly call upon them to identify the values that are important and what is placed in high esteem, and finally assist in building their identity behind the political scenes. Metaphors often work on high levels that form a useful tool in which the leaders can use to share and bring out the voice within. It establishes a scene of reminisce in the character of the speaker and the policies which arouse the emotions within their recipients. In other words, through metaphors, a speaker can more or less play with feelings evoked within the receivers. Charteris – Black (2005.20) observes that the speaker might be able to get through the receiver's feelings without them being aware of it.
Metaphor and Political Discourses
In the process of studying discourse, a lot of focus is placed in the initial field of linguistic and communication models – which is the usage of words and the conveyor of the message. The conveyor of the message and the primary user of words as a means of communication more often think first about the recipients of the message being conveyed. In the case of this study, the sender or the conveyors of the message are the politicians, and as such, they will strive to express their political and cultural ideologies so as to receive favourable feedback as much as possible. The primary aim of political discourse in psychological perspective is to form an accord among national citizens on which course of action is suitable to act as a remedy to the ailing situations within the society. The conventional belief that has been held over time is that the political class identify their probable recipients and using this knowledge beforehand; they build their speech and employ appropriate rhetoric based on the experience. Today, the factors have rapidly shifted, and the citizenry no longer get deceived using the rhetoric used a decade or so years ago. The situation is a bit complicated in the American political discourse mainly in the US where the globalization trend is a matter of public concern. The US involvement in almost every aspect of global interests sparks off the audience and in turn informs the conveyors of the political texts on what type of metaphors to use when engaging them in the course of their political rhetoric. The British political discourse, on the other hand, is not construed on the same basis since culturally the recipients are more conservative and tend to be more concerned about the political background. In both instances, the conveyors of the political discourses employed the use of words, either in rhetoric or in written form to reach to their audience, persuade them and in other occasions to manipulate their thinking and behaviour. The listeners to this political rhetoric are often keen on the substance of the words delivered rather than of empty words and promises. These words when used in a figurative manner tend to be more persuasive, and these are the tricks that politicians have conventionally used since the Roman times to create numerous forms of metaphors.
Taking a cognitive approach to the meaning and definition of a metaphor, it can be explained or described as i). A process of forming an idea on one element or thing as if it was another thing or item, ii). An outcome of an element of vocabulary or a string of words that are used in an unusual way or new format. Another definition put forward by Deignan (2005) describes metaphor as the use of words or expressions that are used to describe an entity or quality apart from the usual description they are always known with, or the ordinary meaning of the terms. The description portrays a perceived connection with the underlying sense of the words formed, and in various instances, among various semantic fields (Deignan 2005). Therefore, metaphors can be employed to bring out the simple meaning of a complex definition and instead of using conceptual words and forms, the use of metaphors always bring out clear understanding and makes communication more lively and enjoyable between the conveyor and the receiver of the text or the words.
For a better understanding of the theory of metaphor, a study at the work of G. Lakoff brings focuses on the distinction between the metaphoric expressions and the conceptual metaphor (Lakoff 2006). Metaphoric Expressions are mere reflections of the verbal – linguistic images as portrayed by the texts while conceptual metaphors are the actual form of the related culture as represented in the texts or words. An attempt has been made more recently towards the improvement of the understanding of metaphor as characterized by Tendahl's theory – ‘the hybrid of Metaphor' that puts together the theory with Lakoff's cognitive approach (Tendahl 2009). Lakoff introduces some labels when analyzing the use of metaphor in what he terms as the ‘Target' concept and the ‘Source' target that offers the vital perspective on the use of metaphors in the political and cultural discourses. He offers two types of mappings based on the concepts that he brings out. The target as the source domain or the target forming the source domain kind of mapping which altogether strive to bring a clear clarity to the understanding of the target domains in the context of the domains of origin. The use of domains like a building or a person, for example, portrays the context in which these words are used. They are used either as full and complete metaphors or as in the framework of the target or source metaphors.
The US American corpus derives most of its metaphors from the context of the lexical fields as suggested Charteris-Black (2002), which are mostly centred on the themes of buildings, conflict and Journeys. The American corpus uses metaphors that are connected to light and fire and the physical elements of the surroundings which seemingly lacks on the British rhetoric context. The metaphors are employing the forms of light and fire for example when hope is taken to mean light, and they represent a close relationship to religion. Religion is a significant element that plays a crucial role in the political space within the US culture and its development as a nation which is no surprise that metaphors bordering on religious discourses are frequently used by politicians in the United States of America. Charteris-Black further argues that the American corpus extensively use metaphors that are related to the physical surroundings. An example of political rhetoric is by former US president, Bill Clinton (1993 – 2001) who spoke of "the sunshine of freedom".
Presentation and Analysis
This study aims main focus is to look at the similarities and the differences between the metaphors as used in the two contexts, the US American presidential speeches and the British political party's manifestos. In the process of finding the answers to these two metaphoric models, this study will look at the two corpora firstly by presenting the metaphorical results from each corpus, then summarising and offering a brief discussion. The results from the findings will then be categorized with the metaphor's source concept. The second approach that this study will employ is to compare the results from the two corpora and then make a thorough analysis then discusses then their similarities and differences. In view of the fact that the categorization and classification of may or may not actually be metaphorical is still a topic under discussion by various scholars, the criteria used may not be in line with some of the major studies taken by linguistic scholars elsewhere. Some of the selected metaphors in this study might be considered as distinctly metaphorical, and any of the phrases that were in doubt as to which category of classification they were to be placed were omitted from the analysis.
Person Metaphors
The metaphors bordering on the aspects of Person are use in the context where the country or nation, the political; parties or the citizenry of the two countries, that is US and Britain, are all placed as a single person. Results from this source domain indicate that the two corpora tended to apply the metaphor as a way of explaining theoretical concepts through words and text that attracted the attention of numerous people. Examples of person metaphors as used in the British corpus and the US corpus are;
Person – American Corpus
1. “weakening our economy” - Bill Clinton
2. “the hand remains extended; the sleeves are rolled up” - George H.W. Bush
3. “terms bigger than ourselves” - George H.W. Bush
4. “when America rose up” - George H.W. Bush
5. “America has its eyes on the future; the world has its eyes on America” - George H.W.
Bush
6. “secured the American dream” -Bill Clinton

Person - British Corpus
1. “a strong Britain, secure, firm” - Conservative
6. “a world with its finger on the fast forward button - Labour
Conflict Metaphor
The American Corpus places much of its metaphoric reference to the conflict in the political r by the rhetoric by politicians since it forms the most emotional connection to the citizenry. The table below offers a look at the analysis of Charteris-Black on various lexical connotations surrounding the metaphoric context of conflict, together with the token for each of the lexical references made by each of the presidents. Conflict Lexicon | Tokens | Examples | Battle | 3 | "We know the race is not to the swift nor the battle to the strong. Do you not think an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs the storm?" -George H. W. Bush | Trumpet | 3 | “We have heard the trumpets. We have changed the guard” - Bill Clinton | Fight | 3 | “We will be ever vigilant and never vulnerable, and we will fight our wars against poverty, ignorance and injustice” - Jimmy Carter | Struggle | 6 | "…as a call to battle, though embattled we are – but a call to bear the burden of a long twilight struggle, year in and year out, "rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation"" - Jimmy Carter | Victory | 6 | “Every victory for human freedom will be a victory for world peace” - Ronald Reagan | Destroy | 8 | “…wise and correct course to follow in taxation and all other economic legislation is not to destroy those who have already secured success but to create conditions….” - Calvin Coolidge | Enemies | 10 | "….we will fight our wars against poverty, ignorance and injustice – for those are the enemies against which our forces can be honorably marshaled," - Jimmy Carter |

Although the societal institutions or grouping form much of the context in the case of the British Corpus under the metaphorical theme of “Conflict”, the study evaluates them under the following positive attributes as found in the manifestos of both the Labour Party and Conservative party.
(1) “Labor formed the National Health Service and it is determined to defend it...” – Labor Party
(2) “We will continue to defend farmers and the consumers” – Conservative

In the context of “defence”, there is a significant similarity in the use of the metaphor while little similarity is found in the use of “attack metaphors” by the two corpora. The following examples mentioned below clearly show that the conservative party vehemently defend social virtues while a general range of social ills is attacked or fought against by the Labor party.
(3) “Economic success is not an end in itself. For the Labor party, prosperity and fairness march hand in hand on the road to a better Britain. During the next Parliament, we intend to continue our fight against all form of social injustice” - Labor
(4) "We will fight against crime and violence that affects all Western societies…At the same time; we shall attack the social deprivation that allows crime to flourish" - Labor
(5) “We have to compete to win. That means a constant fight to keep tight control over public spending and enable Britain to remain the lowest taxed major economy in Europe. It means a continuing fight to keep burdens off business” - Conservative
(6) “We will continue to fight for free and fair trade in international negotiations” – Conservative
The Conservative manifesto uses the term "fight" to mean its vigorous defence of its ideologies and policies against the numerous political attacks from the labor party. On the contrary, the Labor manifesto uses the term "fight" to signify the ideological connection with the British citizens to the dilemmas and challenges faced in their day to day lives. The two policies from the manifestos of these political parties are used to signify harsh criticism on the social ills perpetuated by the opposing party or external aggressor that have had a negative impact on the society. Usually, the causes of these social ills have not been identified. The most significant decisions to be made by the politicians are perhaps the ones regarding whether or not to engage in political conflict and this shows the extensive use of metaphors related to the conceptual metaphor ‘Politics Is Conflict' in both corpora. This also reflects in the case of the United States of America, where presidents have the exclusive right to decide over whether or not nuclear missiles should be launched in the event of an external threat. In terms of the presidential oath, the use of the term ‘defend' is reflected by it. Clearly both against the internal enemies; the native inhabitants later the civil war and external political enemies of France and Britain, the American Constitution emerged out of the conflict. One of the most interesting facts is that the term ‘terrorism' can be described either as an internal or as an external threat. Therefore, it is no surprise that in both British and American political discourse, conflict remains an extremely potent source domain, with the continuing significance of the role of Britain in legalizing the post-colonial dominance and the importance of American military involvement as a foundation for international power. To the military, the language mostly used and known is battle that signifies a conflict situation, thus when political rhetoric borders on the conflict metaphors, the context it is based on is referred to as "Political Conflict" (Lakoff 1991, Jansen and Sabo 1994).

Building Metaphors
Metaphors originating from the source domain of buildings are employed so that hope towards desired social goals like progress towards a better future, democracy and peace can be expressed. Moreover, a strong positive suggestion is carried by them, and they are quite evaluative. They emphasize control of one's environment, social purpose and social cohesion. The metaphor can be further categorized into two types. First, there are those that refer to different forms and types of buildings, like houses and bridges. Secondly, there are those that refer to various parts of building like doors, threshold, and foundations among others. Foundation is the most part of a building that is used metaphorically by the political class. An abstract phenomenon is evaluated positively within such metaphors through which a conceptual representation can be inferred from it, as depicted by Lakoff and Johnson (1999), "a worthwhile activity is a building." For a valuable and stable policy, one of the conventional metaphors presented by most of the political class in both corpora is ‘laying foundations', although in the actual fact it may not be considered through to its full completion. It is a known fact that foundations are the first and foremost important requirement for any building in order to be strong and durable. In the construction of these foundations, a longer period is consumed, however; it is also known that the building completion is not implied necessarily by the laying of foundations. The building will not be built, if the money to pay builders or buy materials runs out. Therefore, in reality, predicting the extent to which the successful completion of construction will be guaranteed by laying foundations is quite difficult.

Journey Metaphors
In cognitive linguistic research, a long history is maintained by journey metaphors used by both the British political fields and the US American contexts. Originally, it was proposed through the title "Love Is a Journey" and later on in "Purposes are Destinations" that was a more generic representation that was forwards by Lakoff and Johnson (1999). From the initial stages to a target or an end point, movement in physical space and time is captured in these representations and as a prototype, various purposeful activities through the journey are considered. A similar representation can be proposed as the goal-oriented social activity that is the primary concern among the politicians, i.e., "Purposeful Social Activity is travelling along a Path toward a Destination". Since, the ends are socially valued ones therefore policies are evaluated positively by journey metaphors. For the semantic coherence of an entire speech, a single conceptual metaphor can be considered and from an analysis of inaugural address of Lyndon Johnson that was held on 20th January 2965, it is evident. Change was the theme of this speech and from a total of 34 sentences the sentences is example four are chosen and in parentheses their positions have been reflected.
(7) "They came here – the exile and the stranger, brave but frightened – to find a place where a man could be his own man."
(8) "First, justice was the promise that all who made the journey would share in the fruits of the land."
(9) "Think of our world as it looks from the rocket that is towards Mars. It is like a child's globe, hanging in space, the continents stuck to its side like colored maps. We are all fellow passengers on a dot of earth."
(10) "For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest sleeping in the unploughed ground. Is our world gone? We say, "Farwell." Is a new world coming?."
(11)"To these trusted public servants and to many family and those close friends of mine who have followed me down a long, winding road."
The journey metaphors attempt to evoke the original historical experience of the Pilgrim Fathers; the opening up of the American West and the space program. These are integrated with the more general use of journey metaphors to describe human relationships as implied by Lakoff and Johnson's (1999) "Life is a Journey metaphor." From the distribution of these metaphors, it can be perceived that through the text inviting the listener to participate in a journey is formed by them. Since the destination is only known to the guide, therefore, the president is represented as a guide in metaphorical terms and a type of map towards it is provided by the speech. However, the rhetorical objective of persuading the people of America to accept social change and innovation is maintained by the choice of this conceptual basis; therefore, journeys may be unknown destinations.
However, there will be ‘burdens to bear’ and ‘barriers to overcome’, as due to impediments to movement the travel can be arduous and slow. Metaphoric use of words such as ‘burden’ is represented by Lakoff and Johnson (1999) in the title ‘burden’ to signify or denote something that is difficult and an impediment to movement. Since it takes effort and time to reach a destination, therefore, the need for patience is expressed by these metaphors in a political context. This is effective rhetorically as it is implied that instant results must not be expected from it but rather the achievement of goals may need to suffer and since these goals are worthwhile, therefore, it is necessary to tolerate hardships. The notion of a burden is shown in the below-mentioned extracts, and since the value is placed on the destination the weight must be ignored or endured altogether by this notion:
(12) “… indeed all free man, remember that in the final choice a soldier’s pack is not so heavy a burden as a prisoner’s chains.” - Dwight Eisenshower
(13) "Lets us accept that high responsibility, not as a burden, but gladly – gladly because the chance to build such a feeling of peace is the noblest" - Richard Nixon

Fire and Light Metaphors

These study results show that the use of fire and light are more applied to the US-American political discourse than it is employed in the British context. Light as a lexical source domain has been traditionally connected with the target domain of understanding, and other metaphorical phrases that depict on its use are all emanated from the metaphoric abstract – "Knowing is seeing" (Lakoff & Johnson 1999). Light always create a positive atmosphere, because it is the complete opposite of darkness. George Washington first coined the metaphor in the use of light as a lexical field and a source domain in his inaugural speech and ever since the metaphorical connection between fire and freedom (or liberty) has formed the basis of reference in the making of America presidential speeches. The following examples depict the use of metaphorical light,

(14) “Since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the republican model of government” – George Washington

(15) "The preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the Republican model of government are just" – Roosevelt

(16) “He would extinguish the fire of liberty, which warms and lights the heart of millions” – James Polk Fire is denoted as a symbol of liberty, the guarantor of freedom that may be as a result of the assumption that a form of destruction or burning is necessary for one to gain freedom. Under this context, the source metaphor of conflict might be construed to mean peace.

Metaphor Borrowing: Religious Metaphors
In the Britain's corpus, two-percent was comprised of resonance by the lexical field of religion, whereas, in the United States of America's corpus, seven-percent comprised borrowed lexical connotations related to religious texts and words. In the findings, most sections of the two corpora, some degree of borrowing was found to have been used. From some earlier corpus of Britain's political speeches, comparison to the religious metaphors sufficed, although locating one on this occasion was not possible. In the US political speeches, borrowings from the religious metaphors are extensively common as they were commonly used during the evolution of the United States. A conceptual use of the metaphor "Politics is Religion" is further suggested by the evidence deduced from the study. The example contains extracts from the first inaugural speech of Bill Clinton.
“A spring reborn in the world’s oldest democracy that brings forth the vision and courage to reinvent America ...”

“Though we march to the music of our time, our mission is timeless.”

“We must bring to our task today the vision and will of those who came before us.”

“Our democracy must be not only the envy of the world by the engine of our own renewal.”
"The brave Americans serving our nation today in the Persian Gulf, in Somalia, and where else they stand are the testament to our resolve."

“An idea ennobled by the faith that our nation can summon from its myriad diversity of the deepest measure of unity.”

“And so, my fellow Americans, at the edge of the 21st century, let us begin with energy and hope, faith and discipline, and let us work until our work is done. The scripture says, "And let us not be weary in well-doing, for in due season, we shall reap, if we faint not."

“From this joyful mountaintop of celebration, we hear a call to service in the valley. We have heard the trumpets. We have changed the guard. And now, each in our way, and with God’s help, we must answer the call.”
Thank you and God bless you all. (End)

Apparently, the way to the strongly religious theme of this coda is prepared by the references to ‘mission', ‘faith', and ‘vision' among many others from a cohesive chain. To create coherence in a political context, this is a further example of how to use a metaphor systematically. It has been proposed by this paper that to introduce the lexical field of religion into political metaphors of British, from the United of America's political discourse the New Labour Party in Britain has been borrowed. There is no secret that a similar political allegiance was shared to social democracy by Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, and a close social relationship was formed between both of them. In the 1997 New Labour manifesto's, some typical uses of vision metaphors are shown in the example.

"But a Government can only ask these efforts from the men and women of this country if they confidently see a vision of a fair and just society," - New Labour

"The vision is one of national renewal, a country with the drive, purpose and energy. A Britain equipped - New Labour

“Our vision for Britain is founded on these values. Guided by them, we will make our country more - New Labour
“An independent and creative voluntary sector, committed to voluntary activity as an expression of citizenship, is central to our vision of a stakeholder society” - New Labour

Conclusion
The primary aim of this study was to explain the similarities and the differences as found between the British and American corpora as to the use of metaphors in the two respective political discourses. From the analysis of the two corpuses, it is seen that the successful use of a metaphor borders on the flourishing operation of its social and cultural frames or format of references, both by the receivers and the conveyors of the message. A successful metaphor can be used as a tool that gives the receiver the ability to understand deeply which types of references are applied to the successful use of metaphors. The initial un-tempered form of the metaphor can resurrect to life and later on undergo reconstruction. However, the new and rigid text forming the various discourse dissolve the well familiar image and instead creates a new, non-verbal picture.
Conclusions that can be taken from the analysis of this study is that the American and the British political discourses both have slight differences and similarities and the main cause of these small differences are the traditional and cultural elements rather than just being a little coincidental. Person and Journey metaphors form the most common types of metaphors used by both corpora simply because they have the ability to cover the needs of most receivers or listeners of the political rhetoric using efficient methods even to describe abstract concepts. It has also been suggested that the potential for passive acceptance of actual military conflict is created by the use of such metaphors; therefore, objectives that are evaluated as being socially beneficial are associated subliminally with it. Throughout the paper, it has also been identified that in one of the varieties, i.e., the physical environment, light and fire in the United States of America's corpus and the plants in the Britain's corpus, some lexical fields do occur. Some historically and culturally related explanations have also been suggested by the paper, like, for independence leading to a positive evaluation of fire metaphors the struggle of the United States of America experiences and for gardening leading to the positive associations of words like ‘nurture and ‘growth.' Moreover, it has also been suggested that from the United States of America's political discourse, the recent introduction of metaphors from the lexical field of religion into Britain's political discourse by New Labour is borrowed.
However, to establish a wider range of text types taken from conflicts or confirms of political discourse with these findings, further research is necessary. To determine whether between varieties of general English the differences in the use of metaphor occur whether to particular domains of language use, like politics they are restricted. Within the domain of politics, studying the diachronic shifts in the use of metaphor would also be relevant. Finally, finding out whether the types of evaluation motivate the use of metaphor in political discourse would be interesting and by collecting empirical data on the response of receiver's to metaphor in political context this would be interesting.

References
Charteris-Black, J. (2002). Why "an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs the storm": corpus- based comparative study of metaphor in British and American political discourse. . Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Charteris-Black, J. (2014). Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Amsterdam u.a.: Benjamins.
Howarth, D. R. (2000). Discourse. Buckingham [England: Open University Press.
Jansen, S. C., & Sabo, D. F. (1994). Humanism in sociology: Its historical roots and contemporary problems. Washington, DC: University Press of America.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2000). Civil Political Discourse in a Democracy: The Contribution of Psychology. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology. doi:10.1207/S15327949PAC0604_01
Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor and war: The metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. Berkley, CA: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G. (2006). Conceptual metaphor: the contemporary theory of metaphor,Geeraerts Dirk (ed.). In Cognitive Linguistics : basic readings (pp. 185- 238). Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago; London: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Tendahl, M. (2009). A hybrid theory of metaphor: Relevance theory and cognitive linguistics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.