MULTIMODAL METAPHOR IN VIDEO BANK ADVERTISEMENTS

Transcription

1 LITHUANIAN UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES FACULTY OF PHILOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH PHILOLOGY JUSTINA DOLGOVIČIENĖ MULTIMODAL METAPHOR IN VIDEO BANK ADVERTISEMENTS Final Master Thesis Academic advisor: Assoc. Prof. Jurga Cibulskienė Vilnius, 2015

2 LITHUANIAN UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES FACULTY OF PHILOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH PHILOLOGY MULTIMODAL METAPHOR IN VIDEO BANK ADVERTISEMENTS This Master Final Thesis is submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of the MA in English Philology By Justina Dolgovičienė I declare that this study is my own and does not contain any unacknowledged work from any source. (Signature) (Date) Academic advisor: Assoc. Prof. Jurga Cibulskienė (Signature) (Date)

3 CONTENTS ABSTRACT... 4 INTRODUCTION CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR THEORY Metaphor within the framework of the CMT General principles of the CMT Features of the conceptual metaphor Multimodality Features of a multimodal metaphor Classification and interaction of modes in a CM Conceptual metaphor and the genre CM within the genre of advertising Types of the CM in commercial advertisements Role of the advertiser and the target audience CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR IN VIDEO BANK ADVERTISEMENTS Conceptual metaphor in video bank advertisements in Lithuania CM in commercials of Swedbank CM in commercials of SEB Conceptual metaphor in video bank advertisements in the UK CM in commercials of HSBC CM in commercials of Barclays Conceptual metaphor in video bank advertisements in the United States CM in commercials of Chase CM in commercials of the Bank of America Conceptual metaphor in video bank advertisements in Poland CM in commercials of PKO Bank Polski CM in commercials of Pekao Conceptual metaphor in video bank advertisements in Russia CM in commercials of Sberbank CM in commercials of VTB Bank CONCLUSIONS SUMMARY IN LITHUANIAN REFERENCES APPENDIX APPENDIX

4 ABSTRACT The present research focused on the communication of values by multimodal conceptual metaphors in series of video advertisements of two most influential banks in Lithuania, the UK, the USA, Poland and Russia. It claimed that the choice of CMs depends on the projected system of values of the target audience. As the basis for the argument served the fact that conceptual metaphors reflect our understanding and that persuasive communication, such as advertising, focuses on the projected values of the target audience. To prove the statement, multimodal cognitive discourse analysis of CMs and underlying values in the aforementioned advertisement series was carried out. The analysis demonstrated that CMs are closely related to the values they communicate, which suggests possible influence of the system of values in the choice of CMs. It also revealed that the projected values are communicated by creating certain relationships between the target and source domains of CMs. To achieve greater reliability in the present findings, further studies comparing the results with the response of the target audience must be conducted. Key words: multimodal metaphor, advertising, bank advertisements, values. 4

5 INTRODUCTION Until the 19 th century metaphor was considered as an exclusively figurative phenomenon which had little or no place in everyday language. Lakoff and Johnson with their revolutionary work (1980; Lakoff, 1992, 1989) questioned the very essence of metaphor creation, which gave rise to an entirely new approach called the Conceptual Metaphor Theory. Contrary to all the previous claims, it stated that our conceptual system is metaphorical in nature. Since then, metaphor has been central in analyzing different discourses. The most productive researches were conducted in the genre of advertising (Forceville, 2013, 2012, 2008, 2007; Bounegru and Forceville, 2011; Ifantidou and Tzanne, 2006; Lantoff and Bobrova, 2012; Philips and McQuarrie, 2004; Oyebode and Unuabonah, 2013; Tzanne, 2013; Yu, 2007) with some other researches on the conceptual metaphor in film (Coegnarts and Kravanja, 2012; Piazza, 2010), newspapers (Bateman, Delin and Henschel, 2007), cartoons (Dominguez, Pineda and Mateu, 2014; El Rafaie, 2003; ) and video games (Kromhout and Forceville, 2013). Kovesces (2008; 2005) also analysed metaphor variation across and within culture, and Forceville (2006), as one of the first, extended the research of the conceptual metaphor beyond one mode of communication. Despite the great number of works within the Conceptual Metaphor Theory, most of them focused only on one aspect of the metaphor: genre, mode or culture. The present paper analyses metaphor as a complex phenomenon and argues that the genre and mode interact guided by the cultural influence of the context. Therefore, it suggests that since the advertisement of a bank is a public recommendation to purchase financial services focusing on positive representation of the financial institution, advertisers employ conceptual metaphors that reflect the system of values of the target audience. The problem raises the following research question: How does the conceptual metaphor express projected values of the target audience in bank advertisements across different countries? With regard to the research questions, the aim of the research was to identify multimodal conceptual metaphors and relationship between their target and source domains created to express projected values of the target audience in video advertisements of the most influential banks in Lithuania, the USA, the UK, Russia, and Poland. To reach the aim, the following objectives were set: to analyze multimodal metaphors in video advertisements of the banks in the countries under investigation; to analyze values around which multimodal metaphors in specific advertisements are built; 5

6 to establish relationships between domains of multimodal metaphors employed to convey underlying values across advertisements of the banks in the countries. The corpus of the present research consisted of multimodal conceptual metaphors in one series of video commercials of two most popular banks in each country: Lithuania, the United Kingdom, the United States, Russia, and Poland. First of all, conceptual metaphor as a mirror of our thinking and financial matters as a necessary part of modern life are together a goldmine for the search of values of the target audience as projected by advertisers. Then, the genre of advertising was chosen due to its extensive use of metaphor, representation of the idea within short episodes of communication, and the specific aim of selling the advertised (Forceville, 2008). For the purpose of clarity and reliability, each series consisted of at least two video commercials created around the same conceptual metaphor. To continue, Lithuania was chosen as the native country and as a country which had never been previously subjected to such research, the United Kingdom and the United States were chosen as western countries which have had a great impact on the values of people in Lithuania, whereas Russia and Poland were added due to their shared history with Lithuania, expecting to see more visible differences between western and eastern cultures. The choice of two most influential banks in each of the countries was determined by the fact that a greater number of clients, i.e. a wider target audience, will add to the reliability. Finally, the research considered all modes of communication, as advertisers usually employ more than one mode and the audience takes into account all of them when inferring the overall meaning. The modes were subdivided into visual, verbal spoken, verbal written, sonic sound, and sonic music, as the general subdivision was enough to serve the aim of the research. Due to the nature of data and in-depth analysis of the selected corpus, qualitative approach to analysis was chosen. Within the approach, multimodal cognitive discourse analysis was conducted, which focuses on how meaning is created through the use of multiple modes of communication, as opposed to language only, and how language reflects human thinking processes. Since any genre, especially advertising, is realized through multiple modalities simultaneously and the conceptual metaphor is one of the main tools used to create and communicate the meaning, the present method is believed to suit the aim of the research best. From the linguistic point of view, the paper provides evidence that specific metaphors can be more frequent or even unique in certain cultures due to their different systems of values. Moreover, it supports the claim that metaphors are created in more than one modality and the analysis of specific instances reflects how this process occurs. Despite linguistics, the research is also significant to advertising and marketing in general, as it shows how specific 6

7 values of the target audience are connected to the advertised product being the starting point for the creation of the multimodal metaphor in the advertisement. Moreover, the research will add to the culture studies, as it discusses values of people in the five countries under investigation. Therefore, the findings can be applicable for the analysis of multimodal metaphor in everyday communication, for the advertisement creation process, and for cultural studies of the countries. The novelty of the research lies in the combination of the three aspects that influence the creation of the multimodal conceptual metaphor the most, namely the genre, mode, and the cultural context. This way it connects the theory on the conceptual metaphor with its practical application in advertising and realization in the analysed countries. Nevertheless, the research is limited to the countries and banks under research and involves a certain degree of subjectivity inevitable in the analysis of the kind. Thus, it does not aim to present the factual degree of differentiation of the use of the conceptual metaphor among countries nor the particular underlying values, but merely suggests that the values of the target audience influence which metaphors are chosen to promote financial services. For more specific results on the differences and values exploited, a more extensive study with a comparison of the results with responses of the factual target audience is required. The present paper is composed of four chapters the introduction, the conceptual metaphor theory, the conceptual metaphor in video bank advertisements, and the conclusions. The introductory chapter presents the subject, the aim and the justification for the research. The chapter on the Conceptual Metaphor Theory reviews literature and researches done in this field in general, and advertising in particular. It also discusses modes of communication through which the conceptual metaphor is realised and possible influence of the cultural context. Finally, the third chapter provides the results of the research conducted and the last chapter summarizes the results and draws the conclusions. 7

8 1. CONCEPTUAL METAPHOR THEORY Currently prevailing interpretation of the metaphor from the perspective of cognitive linguistics has been introduced only thirty five years ago, although the metaphor, as such, has been discussed since ancient times. Aristotle, as cited by the Stantford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, understood the metaphor as the application of an alien name by transference either from genus to species, or from species to genus, or from species to species, or by analogy, that is, proportion (Rapp, 2010). He explained that the metaphor is a hidden comparison between two objects or processes and proposed the first clear classification based on what is compared with what. Yet, into the notion of the metaphor he included also other stylistic devices, such as metonymy, synecdoche and simile, and treated metaphor not only as a matter of language, but as a matter of poetic, figurative language, which has no place in everyday speech (Rapp, 2010; Lakoff, 1992, 202). Since then, many theories were built on the Aristotelian metaphor. Although several argued that everyday language does make use of metaphors and the later enrich it, most of them remained close to the original in the sense that they all treated metaphor as a part of language. As Lakoff (1992, 202) stated, this theory of metaphor grew so deeply into the human mind that it became definitional. Therefore, it could not be changed, until the very essence of metaphorical nature was questioned (Lakoff, 1992, 202). Only after linguists started to look for generalizations that dictate the creation of poetic metaphors, they revealed that metaphors are not in language, but in thought and are entrenched there so deeply, that Our ordinary conceptual system, in terms of which we both think and act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature. (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980 a, 4). With the present statement, as Forceville (2006, 379) rightly suggests, Lakoff and Johnson marked a switch from research into metaphor as a primarily verbal to a predominantly conceptual phenomenon. This new approach into metaphor was called the conceptual metaphor theory (CMT). Although Lakoff and Johnson are commonly introduced as fathers of the CMT, Lakoff (1992, 203) stresses that the ideas can be traced back to the work of Michael Reddy called The Conduit Metaphor, where with the help of the analysis of a single example, he showed that metaphors come from thought, reflect how we understand the world around us, and manifest themselves in our everyday behavior. The example together with later researches on the conceptual metaphor revealed the main differences between the traditional and current cognitive metaphor theory which lie in the set of the following false assumptions (Lakoff, 1992, 204): All everyday conventional language is literal, and none is metaphorical. 8

9 All subject matter can be comprehended literally, without metaphor. Only literal language can be contingently true or false. All definitions given in the lexicon of a language are literal, not metaphorical. The concepts used in grammar of a language are all literal; none are metaphorical. The examples above illustrate that the main difference between the traditional view of the metaphor and the conceptual one is the former excluding metaphor from every level of communication and understanding except from the surface realization of language. As it will be explained in the following chapter, the CMT on the contrary goes to the very core of out conceptual system understanding. 1.1.Metaphor within the framework of the CMT To start with, the very term metaphor within the framework of the conceptual metaphor theory means understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980 a, 6). These so-called things are conceptual domains with a set of features that serve as the basis for the creation of the relationships. The process is carried out by partly consciously and partly subconsciously projecting particular features from one domain onto another. As the result, the domain with the mappable features is called the source domain and the domain onto which the features are mapped the target domain, and the general formula for the construction of the conceptual metaphor is TARGET DOMAIN IS SOURCE DOMAIN. The small capitals are used in the formula for the purpose of highlighting the fact that this wording does not come from the language, but is merely a translation of an understanding that happens at the conceptual level, i.e. at the level of thought, and is literally false (Forceville, 2013, 55; Facounnier, 2003; Lakoff, 1992). Language, nevertheless, helps to construe metaphors and correspondences between the domains by providing metaphorical expressions (Yu, 2007, 26). To illustrate, Lakoff (1992, ) explains the conceptual metaphor LOVE IS JOURNEY, which manifests itself in language through such metaphorical expressions, as we ve hit a dead end, their marriage is on the rocks, we can t turn back now, and similar. In the present metaphor, he identifies such mappings as lovers are travelers, their relationship is the vehicle, their difficulties are obstacles, etc. (Lakoff, 1992, 206). He calls the principle a scenario, and provides the following plot for the conceptual metaphor LOVE IS JOURNEY (Lakoff, 1992, 206): The lovers are travelers on a journey together with their common life goals seen as destinations to be reached. The relationship is their vehicle, and it allows them to pursue those common goals together. The relationship is seen as fulfilling its purpose as long as it allows them to make progress toward their common goals. The journey isn't easy. There are 9

10 impediments, and there are places (crossroads) where a decision has to be made about which direction to go in and whether to keep traveling together. From the present scenario we can extract entailments, i.e. logical conclusions based on the associations with the elements of the source domain that are transferred onto the target domain (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980 b, 457). For example, if lovers are travellers, to reach their destination they have to be equipped. Equipment in travelling may correspond to emotional experience. Hence, if lovers are not experienced, it means that they will most probably fail in their relationships. On the other hand, it may also mean that they do not possess the emotional baggage in the negative sense. This shows that entailing is a process of interpretation of the conceptual metaphor and strongly depends on the context. Not only entailments, but also mappings are context-dependent. For that purpose, it is important to note, that features may not necessarily be explicitly stated in the metaphorical expression, they may also be salient. Forceville (2013, 58) provides a good example from the film Shrek (2001): Ogres are like onions. From the present example we can construe the conceptual metaphor OGRES ARE ONIONS, but it does not suggest which features are to be mapped, so the Donkey maps them on the basis of his experience with onions, which, as it appears later in the conversation, does not agree with the intention of Shrek. Lakoff (1992, 210) states that each metaphor opens a pattern of correspondences that may or may not be applied, and the example shows that if the readers of the metaphor are not provided with mappable features, they will project them on the basis of their own experience General principles of the CMT This way, we use our knowledge of the source domain, in order to understand the target domain. As both examples illustrate, within the CMT the source domain is usually more concrete or familiar than the target domain, which is abstract and thus, difficult to explain. For other purposes than concretization this rule does not always work and different combinations are possible (Forceville, 2006). What makes the source domain concrete is the possibility to understand it through senses. We can see, hear, taste, feel and/or smell concrete phenomena, which is impossible for the abstract. The experience of phenomena physically goes beyond separate senses only and comprises anything related to bodily experience. For example, since movement is important and necessary feature of human life, many explanations of abstract ideas lay on the conceptual metaphor LIFE IS JOURNEY, or more generally - ACTIVITY IS PURPOSEFUL MOVEMENT (Kromhoud & Forceville, 2013, 106). This is the key principle of the CMT the principle of embodiment, according to which our metaphorical thinking is guided by the main metaphor MIND IS BODY (Foceville, 2013, 2006; Lakoff, 1992; Lakoff and Johnson, 1980 a). 10

11 A related principle of the CMT, as proposed by Lakoff, is the invariance principle. It states that metaphorical mappings preserve the cognitive typology (that is, the image-schema structure) of the source domain, in a way consistent with the inherent structure of the target domain (Lakoff, 1992, 215). It means that each domain has a certain structure in a form of a very general image-schema, and the image-schema of the target domain imposes certain limitations on the possible mappings (Lakoff, 1992, 215, 228). For example, behind the metaphorical expression Next month I will reach the age of 25 there is a conceptual metaphor LIFE IS JOURNEY. Very generally, the structure of the source domain JOURNEY consists of a starting point, destination, and certain points in the journey. The present parts in the structure of the source domain can be mapped only onto specific parts in the target domain that coincide schematically, i.e. in the specific example, the starting point of a journey can be mapped onto the birth of a person, but not onto the death, as LIFE schema has death as the ending point and not the beginning. The figure above illustrates the example: Figure 1. Schemas of Domains JOURNEY and LIFE. Finally, just like mappings have to preserve schemas of the domains, the metaphor has to preserve its target-source domain structure. According to this principle, the metaphor has a strict structure and its domains cannot be reversed, at least in the same context. Forceville (2013, 58) provides a classic example my butcher is a surgeon and my surgeon is a butcher, where the reversibility appears to be possible, but the metaphorical expressions clearly belong to different contexts and carry different meanings. The present principle is called the principle of irreversibility. (Forceville, 2013, 58; 2002, 7) To summarize, the conceptual metaphor theory considers metaphor as a more abstract target domain explained in terms of a more concrete source domain by mapping correspondences according to the invariance principle (not violating the schemas). The information about the source domain is usually obtained through bodily experience and correspondences may be both explicit and implicit, but the direction of their mapping cannot be reversed. Finally, the conceptual metaphor manifests itself in language by metaphorical expressions which form a scenario based on logical entailments. 11

12 Features of the conceptual metaphor Although the CMT shade light on common patterns in creation of each conceptual metaphor, it also revealed important differences. Since linguists and other scientist focus on specific features of the CM in dependence on their area of interest, this chapter will present the most commonly discussed features that are crucial to the analysis of conceptual metaphors in any genre and context, i.e. creativity, generality, activation, and quality. Another feature which will not be mentioned here is modality, as a whole separate chapter will be devoted to it. To begin with, among other established beliefs, the CMT destroyed the belief that artistic texts are full of creative, novel metaphors. Lakoff and Turner (1989, 26) proved it by analyzing examples of novel metaphorical expressions on abstract concepts of life and death. They said that although human imagination is strong, empowering us to make and understand even bizarre connections, there are relatively few basic metaphors for life and death that abide as part of our culture (Lakoff and Turner, 1989, 26). As Forceville (2006, 386) suggests, the interpretation of basic phenomena has to be agreed on within the community for the sake of avoiding misunderstanding. Similar interpretation means similar understanding and thus the same conceptual metaphor. Therefore, metaphors which cannot be identified on the basis of stereotypes and familiar categorizations are creative metaphors, also called one-shot metaphors, novel metaphors, new metaphors, or unconventional metaphors (Tzanne, 2013, 115). Nevertheless, it does not mean that all language is conventional. According to Lakoff (1992, 237) there are three following instances of possible novel metaphors: 1. Generic-level metaphors metaphors novel at the very generic level. They can be called true novel metaphors, and are very rare due to the fact that they rely on personal rather than shared experience and thus are difficult to interpret, e.g. DEPRESSION IS FOOD a metaphor employed by a depression patient (Kaviani and Hamedi, 2011, 10); 2. Extensions of conventional metaphors metaphors at a more specific level. At the very foundation of each such metaphor lies a more generic conventional metaphor, e.g. DARK WOOD IS NOT KNOWING as an extension of a more conventional metaphor LIFE IS JOURNEY (Lakoff, 1992, 237); 3. Image metaphors metaphors which are based on very specific images, e.g. WAIST IS HOURGLASS (Lakoff, 1992, 229). These are metaphors at the most specific level, but they rarely rely on generic conventional metaphors, since they are 12

13 used in concrete situations and cannot be further used to explain something else. They are often called one-shot metaphors. As can be seen from the classification above, metaphors also differ in their degree of generality, which means that they form a certain metaphorical hierarchy, where more specific metaphors are built on more general (Lakoff, 1992, 222). With the help of this hierarchy, people can create new conceptual metaphors on the bases of already known and be sure that they will be understood. For example, if one says time flied so quickly, it can be said that s/he relies on the CM TIME IS PLANE, which relies on a more general CM TIME IS VEHICLE, which again relies on a more general CM. Below is presented the whole possible hierarchy of CM beyond the metaphorical expression: Figure 2. Hierarchy of the CMs in the Metaphorical Expression Time Flies. Another feature of the CM which differentiates metaphors and decides the ease of understanding them is the degree of activation. Stibbe (2013, 124) points out that the activation of the CM metaphor is the degree to which a source domain maps with the target domain. It can depend on the number of modalities used, repetition, extension of metaphors, their novelty, and vividness. When discussing CMs in advertising, Forceville (2008, 297) also writes about activation, but looks at a more specific feature which decides on the activation and analyses the degree of salience of metaphors. If both domains are clearly shown, he calls the metaphor explicitly signaled. Other terms used are marked and unmarked metaphors, metaphor in praesentia and metaphor in absentia. Moreover, he states that the activation of the metaphor depends on the number and importance of mapped features - the more features are mapped and the more typical they are of the phenomenon, the more clearly signaled is the metaphor (Forceville, 2007, 29; 2008, 297). Finally, metaphors can differ in quality, which in the context of the CMT means the concreteness of the domains of the CM. As mentioned before, the source domain of the CM is 13

14 usually concrete and the target domain is usually abstract. However, most linguists agree that all CM should not be reduced to embodiment only, as certain phenomena can be more concrete to people because of their personal mental or emotional experience (Coegnarts and Kravanja, 2012, 100; Kovesces, 2005, 232). For example, in the CM DEPRESSION IS PHANTOM (Kaviani and Hamedi, 2011, 10) neither the source, nor the target domain is concrete, but due to the specific experience, one seems more tangible than the other to the creator. To conclude, each CM is unique, as it differs in creativity, generality, activation, and quality. It can be novel or conventional, specific or generic, explicit or implicit and composed of abstract or concrete domains. Nonetheless, extremes can rarely be found. For this reason, features of the CM have to be imagined on scales, where one metaphor can be, for example, more conventional or creative than the other. 1.2.Multimodality Due to the fact that before the CMT metaphor was seen as a matter of language and not thought, only verbal mode was interpreted and all the other modes were ignored as not relevant (Jacobs et al, 2013, 490). By proposing a new approach where metaphor was considered as independent from language, theorists of cognitive linguistics discovered a variety of modes in which a metaphor can be represented (El Rafaie, 2003, 76). Very generally, Jewitt (2009, 14) understands the multimodal approach to discourse as follows: Multimodality describes approaches that understand communication and representation to be more than about language, and which attend to the full range of communication forms people use image, gesture, gaze, posture, and so on and the relationships between them. From there on, most linguists started to argue that in analyzing any discourse or text variation, one mode of research is not enough to uncover all the peculiarities and the researcher must take into account all modes (Thomas, 2014, 165), and some even claim that monomodal texts do not even exists and each information is one or the other way conveyed via multimple modes (Bateman et al, 2007, 151). Nevertheless, in order to research a metaphor from the present perspective, the definition by Jewitt is not sufficient and one must clarify what a mode is. According to Forceville (2006, 382) a mode is a sign system interpretable because of a specific perception process, which means that modes are related to our senses and the information obtained with the help of the specific sense is information represented in a specific mode. Yet, classification of modes by senses does not always serve the purpose of discourse analysis, since, for example, the aural or sonic mode will include both spoken language and music which usually have different purposes in different discourses. Therefore, it should be agreed that although analysis of any discourse must not be 14

15 restricted to one modality, the classification of modes varies depending on the genre and purpose of analysis. Moreover, modes can also be interpreted from the perspective of the producer and the recipient, i.e. the producer forms a metaphor having in mind a hypothetical recipient and the possible interpretation which may not always coincide with the way the actual recipient understands the interplay of modes (Holsanova, 2012, 252). Thus, any researcher must also take into account the fact that any interpretation is subjective and may not coincide with the intended meaning of the producer. Consequently, the features, classification, and relationships between modes in a metaphor presented in the following subchapters are limited to the discourse typical of the genre of advertising and the perspective of the production Features of a multimodal metaphor To begin with, according to Forceville (2006, 384) multimodal metaphors are metaphors whose target and source are each represented exclusively or predominantly in different modes. Although the present description does state the main feature of a multimodal metaphor, it does not disclose all the peculiarities. In fact, it is not necessary to have only one mode for each, there can be more than one mode to represent each of the domains and some or even all may correspond. For example, the source and the target can be both represented visually and verbally, or the target may be represented in three modes, while the source in one only. Such metaphors will still be called multimodal. To illustrate, if there is a video with a child sleeping on a cloud instead of a pillow, a music associated with lullabies accompanies the visuals, and a caption sleeping on a cloud is written, then it can be said that the target domain the pillow is represented visually by the context, i.e. sleeping child, and sonically by lullaby music, and the source the cloud is represented visually by the depicting a cloud and verbally by the caption. Therefore, the main condition is to have more than one mode representing the metaphor independently of the distribution of modes among the source and the target. Moreover, modes are needed not only to identify the domains, but the corresponding features as well (2013, 41). To illustrate, in the metaphor described by Forceville (2007, 20) GAZELLE BIKE IS THOUROUGHBRED domains are cued in multiple modes, namely visual, sonic, and verbal, but so are the mappings. For example, physical beauty is cued visually and the feature of being classics is cued sonically by the horse-like sounds. To conclude with, if all modes can be excluded except for one and the metaphor could still be understood, it is not multimodal, but if more than one mode is necessary in order to grasp the metaphor, it can be called multimodal. 15

16 Another feature, that is described by Forceville (2013, 41) as necessary for the creation of a multimodal metaphor, is that two phenomena that are compared must belong to different categories. This is a feature that can also be applied to the conceptual metaphor in general, but has to be interpreted very carefully. Categories are not only vague, since not all members are equal in the sense of their representativeness, but can also be construed on many levels, from very general to very specific (Rosch 1978, 30). The principle is clear when a bicycle is compared to a horse, as there is no doubt that they belong to different categories. Yet, in advertising it is possible to compare, for example, a family car to a sports car. Nevertheless, we can still say that they belong to different categories of cars. Therefore, the second condition of a multimodal and conceptual metaphor in general is comparison of two things which in the present metaphor belong to different categories, but are not necessarily unrelated. There are two more mandatory features or conditions of a multimodal metaphor presented by Forceville (2013, 41) which can also be applied to the conceptual metaphor. The third is that the things compared must be distinguished as the source and the target and cannot be reversed in the present metaphor. It means that we have to clearly see that one of the phenomena is the source and not the target and the second is vice versa. Finally, the last condition is that there must be at least one feature of the source domain that in the present metaphor is associated with the target domain. Since employing multiple modalities allows for communication of a big amount of information in a relatively short time spam, multimodal metaphors usually have a number of features mapped. To conclude with, a metaphor can be called multimodal if: - Its domains are represented in more than one modality; - Phenomena compared in the present metaphor belong to different classes; - Phenomena are clearly understood as source and target domains and cannot be reversed in the present context; - There is at least one feature that is mapped from one to the other domain Classification and interaction of modes in a CM As has been mentioned before, classification of modes depends on the purpose and the material of the research. In the analyses of multimodal metaphors in advertising, there have been several classifications presented by researchers. Here, Forcevile s classification will be used as the basis and will be completed by a few modes distinguished in other studies. 16

17 Very generally, modalities can be divided into verbal, visual, and sonic, but as has been stated before, such division does not suffice. Forceville (2007, 20) points out that domains can be represented visually, sonically, musically, in spoken words, and in written words. Visual representation includes representation of the phenomenon fully, partially or representation of elements related to the phenomena. For example, for the depiction of a bicycle in the advertisement we can show a bicycle itself, a wheel as a part of it, or a person wearing bicycling clothes. Then, sonic representation means sounds that are neither music, nor speech. In case of the same advertisement, it can be a sound of wheels touching the asphalt coating or a sound of a bike bell. In contrary, musical representation refers to music only and no other sounds. Very generally, music can be a melody or a song. Finally, representation of domains in spoken or written words can also be full representation or representation by words related to the target or source metonymically or by other relationships, e.g. similarity, association, etc. The figure above illustrates the subdivision of present modes: Figure 3. Subdivision of Modes. The purpose of the present figure is to show how modes are interrelated, since sometimes it is even difficult to ascribe one or other representation to one mode only. To consider a song, for example, generally it belongs to sonic mode and to music. Yet, song in itself often involves spoken words which belong to verbal mode, and incorporates melody which often belongs to an entirely separate subdivision. Therefore, even if modes are divided, representation of a domain can happen in multiple modes at once. To quote Cornelissen et al (2008, 14), a metaphor is likely to be cued and represented in more than one mode simultaneously, as metaphoric gestures often coincide with linguistic metaphors, and as sculpted artifacts may extend linguistic metaphors. 17

18 Interaction of modes occurs not only at the most general level. In order to create a conceptual metaphor and communicate a complex message, many employ several modes at once. To illustrate it with examples, Yu (Yu, 2008, 87) analyzed educational Chinese advertisements and one of them was related to the concept of water. The multimodal metaphor he interpreted was VIRTUE IS WATER, and it was achieved through the interplay of all main modes - aural (sonic), visual, and verbal. Aural and visual modes were used to show how water drops become seas and oceans, and verbal mode directed the audience into the right interpretation. In his article, he provides the following figure to show the interactions of modes (Yu, 2008, 88): Figure 4. Interaction of Modes in the Commercial Analysed by Yu (2008, 88). The present figure shows how closely the modes are related. Aural and visual modes are presented simultaneously throughout the commercial, and verbal mode is added later to contribute to the effect created by the first two. Some linguists go even further and argue that sometimes one mode alone cannot transmit certain messages at all. Rachovides (2001) describes two completely different situations when the same sentence is uttered with differed gestures of the speaker which make the same sentence carry entirely different meanings: For example, the utterance we ll get this paper finished by this evening, when accompanied by the quickly raised eyebrows of the speaker, might mean something quite different when accompanied by the speaker s reassuring smile. To continue, Rafaie (2003, 86) proves how visual and verbal modes depend on each other when interpreting cartoons dealing with sensitive agenda. The linguist points out that cartoons often represent a point of view which is very controversial and would be rude or politicallyincorrect if told out loud or written. On the other hand, correct interpretation of such cartoons often depends on the caption. Bonegru and Forceville (2011, 211) believe that captions are more than just additional information. They support their statement with a quote of Saraceni, stating that cartoons are like single sentences: in order to understand them you need to have some extra-textual information. Very often, economic and political agenda is represented with a help of animals and animation heroes dressed up in suits and carrying cases, but in 18

19 order to link the irony created to the actual situation captions are necessary. For example, there is a situation in a country when a politician runs for the presidential chair and in the cartoon he is represented as a cat trying to catch a mouse from a famous animation film. Although certain specific features of appearance may signal which politician it is, caption may be needed to show the attitude of the cartoonist, i.e. whether he sees the situation as ironic because the place is difficult to win or because the candidate is not worth it and makes a fool of himself for even trying. All the examples listed above prove that the analysis of interaction of modes is necessary not only for the interpretation of a conceptual metaphor, but also for the correct interpretation that was originally meant by the creator of the metaphor. Along with the general division of modes presented in this subchapter, there are linguist who specify more modes and add such modalities as camera movement, camera angle, gestures, color, symbols, costumes etc. (Ifantidou & Tzanne, 2006, 192; Rachovides et al, 2001; Oyebode & Unuabonah, 2013, 813; Piazza, 2010, 175). Nevertheless, in most cases these can be considered to be means rather than modes, e.g. camera angle is used to depict something visually from the angle that suggests certain relationships with a domain. In other cases, like gestures, colors and symbols, they can be considered as further subdivision of the same mode of representation - visual. Therefore, there will be no further analysis of them, but the mention is important for a better understanding of the whole picture. 1.3.Conceptual metaphor and the genre In order to understand how the genre influences the creation and interpretation of conceptual metaphors, one should begin with exploring the Relevance Theory. According to one of the most famous claims of language philosopher Paul Grice an essential feature of most human communication is the expression and recognition of intentions (Horn & Ward, 2007, 607). That is, any communication of information is interpreted within the situation or context, i.e. in dependence to where, when, how, and to whom information is transmitted. One of the features that fall into the context of communication is the genre. Very generally, Swales (1990, 58) defines the genre as a communicative event with recognizable features and specific communicative goals, where goals of communication determine the features selected by the communicator that in turn form the genre. Therefore, the importance of the genre is recognized in production, since it requires at least familiarity with the type of the audience and socio-cultural context, and in interpretation, as recognizing a communicative event as belonging to a specific genre guides the possible understanding of the information presented there (Forceville, 2008, 276). 19

20 In the genre of advertising the main goal of communication is persuasion, and, more specifically, in the genre of commercial advertising - to sell the advertised, with the main message either buy our product/service or do not buy the product/service of our competitors, and both the creation and interpretation of the conceptual metaphor are built on these main aims (Forceville, 2008, 273; Philips & McQuarrie 2004, 113; Qiu 2013, 1584, 1588). The following subchapters analyze how the genre of commercial advertising with its main goal of selling products or services advertised and the participants of this type of communication, including the advertiser and the target audience, influence the creation and interpretation of the conceptual metaphor CM within the genre of advertising As has been mentioned before, the main aim of commercial advertising is persuasion, which usually means showing people why certain products or services are better than the other and trying to make people buy them. The success of such persuasion is related to the several factors: recognition of a brand, recognition of the source and the target, and relation of specific positive features of the source domain to the target domain (Forceville 2007, 20; 2008, 275). To begin with, probably the most important objective within the aim of the commercial that can be called selling the advertised is to remind the audience about the product or service in specific, as well as the brand in general. To maintain the interest of the target audience, the product advertised as well as the brand are most often withheld till the end of the commercial (Tzanne, 2013, 123). It is worth mentioning that for brand metaphorization, often the CM BRANDS ARE PEOPLE is used by presenting brand as an ideal person that anyone from the target audience would like to be (Koller, 2009, 45). Moreover, both tend to be represented visually in order to avoid any possibility of misunderstanding by depicting a unique design or logo of the product or service provider. However, brands can also be recognized by sound, music, or by verbal means, i.e. the name of the company or a specific product/service may be pronounced or written. Since during the commercials many people leave the TV, visuals are often accompanied with a voice-over telling the name of the brand or a product/service (Forceville, 2008, 277; 2006, 392; 2011, 8). To continue, in order to construe correct, i.e. intended relationships between the target and the source, the audience has to identify them. Due to the specific aim of the genre of advertising, the target in commercials is as a rule the product/service advertised. Moreover, commercials are about the specific product/service, thus it is the other phenomena that serves as the source domain and explains the positive features of the first (Forceville 2006, 392). It 20

21 makes a metaphor easier to interpret which is welcome in the genre of advertising. However, the target can also have antonymic relationships with the products advertised, e.g. when negative features of a product of competitors are highlighted, or, in case of services, can be unrelated to both the product and the competitors (Forceville, 2008, 297). Another feature that eases the interpretation is the fact that in advertising the source is usually of a higher value than the target, since it provides the positive features that are mapped from the source to the target (Tzanne, 2013, 115). It is important to mention that the juxtaposition of the source and the target domains created by the CM is hypothetical rather than real, which is especially prominent when analyzing metaphors where both domains are concrete, e.g. PILLOW IS CLOUD. Therefore, Tzanne (2013, 124) points out that CMs do not appear in verbal form and questions the correctness of the form TARGET DOMAIN IS SOURCE DOMAIN. Instead, the linguist offers a more democratic TARGET DOMAIN COULD BE SOURCE DOMAIN. Finally, the last of the main objectives is to make the target audience associate certain positive features of the source domain with the target domain (Forceville 2007, 20; Qui 2013, 1588). Although a commercial is very rich in modalities, there are two disadvantages of the genre that make it challenging: time on TV is very expensive and thus commercials are limited in time, and the attention to commercials is low if compared to films or TV programs. In order to make sure that the right features are mapped, advertisers select only one or several features that are mapped, make sure that the feature is strongly related to the product in shape, size or quality so that it can be easily associated, and introduce the feature(s) from the very begging of the commercial (Forceville 2013, 60; Forceville, Lecture 5; Forceville, Lecture 4; 2008, 292). To conclude, the features mentioned above, i.e. that the brand and the product advertised are usually presented visually, that the target is most often the product advertised, and the source is of a better quality are not rules but rather often cases, since another important feature of the advertising is creativity. Commercials that do not fit the usual pattern surprise the audience and this way attract its attention (Tzanne 2013, 116). Also, it is important whether the CM in a commercial is structuring or fleeting element, i.e. whether it is the focus of the commercial or simply adds to the overall effect. If it is not the central idea of the commercial, the advertisers tend not to pay much attention to it (Forceville 2008, 94) Types of the CM in commercial advertisements Although metaphor as recognized by the CMT is formed at the level of conception rather than communication and thus is difficult to define and even more challenging to label, 21

22 Forceville (2007, 17; 2008, 278; Forceville, Lecture 3; Mulken et al, 2010, 3419) distinguishes four main types of CM in visual advertisements. These include hybrid, contextual, pictorial, and integrated CMs. The first, hybrid metaphor, is a CM where the source and the target are connected to make one whole, the meaning of which includes the meaning of both the source and the target (Forceville, 2007, 17; 2008, 278; Forceville, Lecture 3; Mulken et al, 2010, 3419). For example, in an advertisement there is a human depicted, but instead of a head, s/he has a lightbulb. This common metaphor is a typical example of a hybrid metaphor, where the target is the human being that has an idea which is illustrated with the help of the lightbulb. Another similar example is provided by Velikova et al (2013, 2) when wine is described as a human being. It is depicted as having human parts legs, nose, etc. and they help to understand the relations. The following schema presents the nature of the hybrid metaphor: Figure 5. Schema of the Hybrid CM. The following type is the contextual metaphor. The name of the metaphor suggests the relationships between the domains the target domain is placed in the context that is typical of the source domain (Forceville, 2007, 17; 2008, 278; Foceville, Lecture 3; Mulken et al, 2010, 3419). A very common example is an animal presented as a human being, i.e. in human clothes, doing human work, etc. The present metaphor can have many applications and both the human and the animal can be source or target domains, but independently of that mostly the source serves as the context. To illustrate this type of CM, the following schema can be used: 22

23 Figure 6. Schema of the Contextual CM. The third is the pictorial metaphor or a pictorial simile. It is referred to as a pictorial simile since it relies on juxtaposition of the source and the target domains. Both are represented while comparing them and highlighting similarities or differences (Forcevile, 2007, 17; 2008, 278; Foceville, Lecture 3; Mulken et al, 2010, 3419). An example can be a sand clock and a woman with a thin waist presented in one picture. The schema of the present metaphor would look the following: Figure 7. Shema of the Pictorial CM. Finally, the last metaphor type suggested by Forceville (2007, 17; 2008, 278; Forceville, Lecture 3) is the integrated metaphor. Relationships between the domains in this metaphor remind the hybrid metaphor type, but are more complicated. In this metaphor one domain, as a rule the target, is presented as if it was the other domain, usually the source. For example, match boxes are presented as if they are skyscrapers. This relationships are difficult to show in a schema, but if compared to the first, where two domains are clearly identifiable and can be separated, it would look like a one unified object, where only one domain, usually the target, can be distinguished, while the other can be suggested not by the context, but by the features that are borne by the first: 23

24 Figure 8. Schema of the Integrated CM. To conclude, though Forceville (2007, 17; 2008, 278; Forceville, Lecture 3) derives these types of CM from visual static advertisements, they can be called universal and with slight modifications applied to CMs in any kind of advertisements. Moreover, there are rarely cases of clear prototypes and many metaphors are of a mixed type with one type characteristics more prominent than the other (Mulken et al, 2010, 3419). Due to the possibility of including much more visual information and also communicating information via other modalities, commercials have a higher possibility of having mixed type metaphors or metaphors of multiple types, i.e the same meaning presented with the help of metaphors of several types via several modalities or via the same modality at a different time Role of the advertiser and the target audience Any specific communication within the genre also requires effort to interpret. Although knowledge of the genre allows for certain suggestions, the genre itself comprises a variety of communication acts with separate specific messages. Phillips and McQuarrie (2004, 114) speak about templates. Templates can be understood as collections of features that co-occur in order to transmit a specific message or a message about a specific product, if analyzed within the genre of commercial advertising. They claim that if consumers are exposed to the same template, over time they learn to respond to it. If, for example, a bed in a commercial is represented as a cloud, people interpret it as soft and comfortable, and not as thin or made of gas, because they have knowledge about advertisements of bedroom furniture and sleeping accessories which often map these specific features. This example shows that in the creation of advertisements the knowledge of the target audience plays an important role and influences how CMs are build. To begin with, the importance of being well-aware of the target audience lies in three main phenomena resonance, explicitness, and generality of CMs. Resonance is an ability of a metaphor to allow for mappings between the source and the target domain. It means, that the more resonant a metaphor is, the more features can be mapped and the more freedom is left 24