skip to main content

Use of Conceptual Metaphors in Miguna Miguna’s Political Commentaries on Facebook in Kenya: A Conceptual Metaphor Perspective

1Department of Linguistics, Universitas Diponegoro, Kenya

2Dr. Nurhayati Nuhayati, Dean Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, Indonesia, Indonesia

Received: 9 Jan 2023; Published: 30 Apr 2023.
Open Access Copyright (c) 2023 PAROLE: Journal of Linguistics and Education under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract

This paper examines Miguna's political commentaries on Facebook, which have become a potent force in Kenya's socio-political discourse. Known for his incisive and metaphor-laden commentaries, Miguna, popularly called "Double M", has sparked a surge in online political discussions, evoking both admiration and ire from the public. However, his style has also raised concerns about slander and libel in pursuing justice, secularism, and democracy. The gap in this study lies in the limited understanding of how conceptual metaphors, as utilized in Miguna's political commentaries on Facebook in Kenya, impact power structures, government policies, and communication practices. The study uses the Conceptual Metaphor Theory (CMT) by (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980) and the Deconstruction Theory (Derrida, 1967) to analyze the data collected from Miguna's Facebook page using a web scrapping tool, Octoparse. The Metaphor Identification Procedure Vrije Universiteit (MIPVU) was utilized to identify the conceptual metaphors in Miguna's commentaries. The analysis revealed seven metaphorical conceptualizations of politicians: despots, conmen and cartels, orphans and cows, corruption monsters, socialite bimbos, and human rights violators, with politicians as the source domains and despots, conmen and cartels, orphans and cows, corruption monsters, socialite bimbos, and human rights violators as the target domains. This study shows how metaphors contribute to political commentary, their impact on power structures, and their relevance in the digital age, specifically in Kenya. The findings have broader implications for freedom of speech, defamation, and responsible communication, guiding policymakers, educators, and media practitioners.

Fulltext View|Download
Funding: Universitas Diponegoro/MetMu123456

Article Metrics:

  1. (i) Al Maqbali, I. S. H., Al Khufairi, F. M. A., Khan, M. S., Bhat, A. Z., & Ahmed, I. (2019). Web Scraping: Data Extraction from Websites. Journal of Student Research
  2. (ii) Charteris Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: the persuasive power of metaphor. New Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230501706
  3. (iii) Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.6
  4. (iv) EA Ofori, (2021). The Use of Metaphors and Similes in Political Discourse in Ghana. Google Scholar
  5. (v) Farley, Erin J. and Lisa Pierotte (2017). Web Scraping: An Emerging Data Collection. Method for Criminal Justice Researchers
  6. (vi) Jacques Derrida (1967). Of Grammatology, Voice and Phenomenon, and Writing and Difference
  7. (vii) Kendhak, Zhou, 2010. Networking, or What the Social Means in Social Media
  8. (viii) Kenya, L. O. (2013). The Constitution of Kenya: 2010. Chief Registrar of the Judiciary
  9. (ix) Kinder, D. R., & Sears, D. O. (1985). Public opinion and political action. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology (pp. 659-741). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley
  10. (x) Kovecses, Z. (2010). Metaphor: A practical introduction. Oxford University Press
  11. (xi) Kövecses, Z. (2017). Levels of metaphor. Cognitive linguistics, 28(2), 321-347
  12. (xii) Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press
  13. (xiii) Lori D. Bougher (2012). The Case for Metaphor in Political Reasoning and Cognitio
  14. (xiv) Maria, Lonela Neagu (2013). Decoding Political Discourse: Conceptual Metaphors and Argumentation. Google Scholar
  15. (xv) Mohammed M. (2018). Use of Conceptual, Linguistic, Religious and Social Metaphors in Political Discourse. Google Scholar
  16. (xvi) Nassaji, H. (2015). Qualitative and descriptive research: Data type versus data analysis. Language teaching research, 19(2), 129-132
  17. (xvii) Nikolina Borcic, Mirela Holy $ Ivona Culo (2018). An Analysis of the Use of Metaphors in Political Rhetorics in Local Elections. Google Scholar
  18. (xviii) Nirmala, D. (2011). METAPHORS: UNIVERSAL, SPECIFIC, AND PUBLIC. Bahasa danSeni: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Seni, danPengajarannya, 39(2)
  19. (xix) Otieno R. (2019). Metaphors in Political Discourse in Kenya: Unifying or Divisive? Google Scholar
  20. (xx) Oxford English Dictionary (1989). Oxford: Clarendon Press
  21. (xxi) Steen, G., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., & Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: from MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14
  22. (xxii) The Computer Misuse. Cybercrimes (Amendment) Act, 2021. Section 6 of No. 5 of 2018
  23. (xxiii) Vaara, E., Tienari, J., &Säntti, R. (2003). The international match: Metaphors as vehicles of social identity building in cross-border mergers. Human Relations, 56(4), 419-451
  24. (xxiv) Willems, W, Mano, W (eds) (2017) Everyday Media Culture in Africa. New York: Routledge
  25. (xxv) Willems, W. and Mano, W. (forthcoming 2016). Decolonizing and provincializing audience and internet studies: contextual approaches from African vantage points. In: W. Willems and W. Mano (eds.), Everyday media culture in Africa: audiences and users. London: Routledge, https://www.routledge.com/Everyday-Media-Culture-in-Africa-Audiences-andUsers/Willems-Mano/p/book/9781138202849

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2024-05-28 19:36:24

No citation recorded.