Metaphors We Drill By?

Table of Contents

1 Introduction

2 Literature Review

2.1 Metaphors

2.2 Metaphor Theories

2.2.1 Aristotle & Traditional Theories

2.2.2 Interaction View of Metaphor

2.2.3 Lakoff’s & Johnson’s Approach to Metaphor

3 Background

4 Methodology

4.1 Sample

4.2 Data Collection & Analysis

5 Results & Discussion

5.1 OIL SPILL AS ENEMY

5.2 REMOVING OIL IS WAR

5.3 OIL SPILL AS DISEASE

5.4 OIL SPILL AS MISTAKE

5.5 THE WHITE HOUSE AS ENFORCER/THE WHITE HOUSE AS HELPER

5.6 BP AS RESPONSIBLE HELPER

6 Interpretation

6.1 Limitations of Study

7 Summary

Objectives & Key Themes

The primary aim of this paper is to analyze speeches and public remarks regarding the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill to identify the specific metaphors used by BP and the White House. The study explores how these metaphorical linguistic expressions are employed to construct specific images of the crisis, thereby uncovering the underlying political and corporate agendas of the involved institutions.

• Conceptual metaphor theory as a framework for analysis.
• Comparison of metaphorical usage between BP and the Obama Administration.
• Examination of personification and war-related imagery in disaster discourse.
• Analysis of self-portrayal and the shifting of responsibility.
• The role of rhetoric in shaping public perception and institutional reputation.

Auszug aus dem Buch

Summary of Chapters

1 Introduction: This chapter introduces the context of the 2010 environmental catastrophe and establishes the research goal of analyzing metaphors used by BP and the White House.

2 Literature Review: This section presents foundational theories on metaphors, ranging from Aristotle and Max Black to the conceptual metaphor theory of Lakoff and Johnson.

3 Background: This chapter details the historical and socio-technical context of the Deepwater Horizon explosion and the resulting response efforts by BP and the US government.

4 Methodology: This section outlines the data collection process, specifying the criteria for selecting speeches and explaining the systematic manual analysis of metaphorical expressions.

5 Results & Discussion: This chapter categorizes and discusses specific conceptual metaphors found in the discourse, such as the oil spill as an enemy or a disease, and how they serve as linguistic tools for the respective parties.

6 Interpretation: This chapter synthesizes the findings to compare the political agendas of the White House and BP, highlighting how metaphors are utilized to protect or rebuild their public reputations.

7 Summary: The final chapter provides a concise review of the analysis, confirming the central hypothesis that metaphors are deliberately used to distort concepts and push institutional agendas.

Keywords

Metaphors, Deepwater Horizon, Oil Spill, BP, White House, Rhetoric, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, Discourse Analysis, Political Agendas, Public Relations, George Lakoff, Personification, Environmental Crisis, Linguistic Expressions, Communication Strategy

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the core focus of this research paper?

The paper fundamentally investigates how metaphors are utilized as linguistic tools by BP and the Obama Administration to shape public perception of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill.

What are the primary thematic areas explored?

The research explores the intersection of language, political discourse, and corporate communication, specifically focusing on how metaphorical concepts are mapped onto the oil spill to serve institutional goals.

What is the primary research question?

The study aims to determine which metaphors are used by the respective parties and how these metaphors portray the oil spill and the institutions involved to influence the public.

What methodology is applied in the study?

The author employs a qualitative approach based on Lakoff and Johnson’s conceptual metaphor theory, involving the manual extraction and categorization of metaphorical linguistic expressions from official speeches.

What does the main body of the work cover?

The main body examines various conceptual metaphors—such as OIL SPILL AS ENEMY, REMOVING OIL IS WAR, and OIL SPILL AS DISEASE—discussing their frequency, target domains, and intended rhetorical effects.

Which keywords best characterize this work?

Key terms include Metaphors, Deepwater Horizon, Political Agendas, Rhetoric, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, and Public Relations.

How does the usage of the "OIL SPILL AS ENEMY" metaphor benefit the involved institutions?

By personifying the oil spill as a malicious enemy, it creates a moral binary that forces the audience to look for a "good" savior, a vacuum which BP and the White House are eager to fill to improve their standing.

What is the difference between BP's and the White House's use of metaphors?

While both use war-like imagery, the White House uses metaphors to distance itself from the disaster and emphasize its role as an enforcer and helper, whereas BP uses them primarily to signal accountability and commitment to "make things right" to regain public trust.