인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
As for political rhetoric, most of the previous studies of presidential election TV debates have been focused on the type and number of words and sentences used by individual candidates, the impact of the debates on polls, the turn-takings, and the roles of gender, whereas little attention has been paid to the figurative languages used in political debates. For these reasons, the purpose of this study is to analyze the figurative expressions of the U.S. presidential election debates from 2000 to 2016 from the perspective of cognitive semantics and find out the figures of speech and the strategies of the candidates and their parties in terms of a long-term changes of political rhetoric. The figurative speeches used for the analysis in this study are conceptual metaphor, conceptual metonymy, and combinational metaphor. The findings in this paper are as follows. First, Democrats mostly used figurative language in terms of human and social issues and tax-reduction. Second, Republicans mostly used figurative language in terms of collaborators, allies, places and date of terror. In other words, with regard to the uses of figurative language the main concerns of each party were domestic policy for Democrats and foreign policy for Republicans, respectively. Finally, figurative languages employed by each political party were found to be much more inclined to use conceptual metaphor by Democrats and to use conceptual metonymy by Republicans, respectively.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2020-740-001281913
