METAPHORS OF POWER IN ENGLISH AND UZBEK POLITICAL DISCOURSE

Dekhkonova Sevarakhon

Authors

Dekhkonova Sevarakhon Independent Researcher

Keywords:

metaphor, political discourse, power, conceptual metaphor, English, Uzbek, cognitive linguistics, intercultural communication

Abstract

Metaphors are pervasive in political language, enabling abstract concepts like power to be communicated through concrete imagery. In political discourse, metaphors “structure what we perceive” and offer persuasive framing. This comparative study examines how metaphors of power operate in English and Uzbek political texts. Drawing on cognitive metaphor theory and recent analyses of political speeches and media, we identify dominant metaphorical themes in each language. In English discourse, metaphors such as war, journey, and machine commonly frame notions of authority and governance.

References

1.Digonnet, R. (2014). Power and metaphor. Lexis: Journal in English Lexicology, 8, 125–144.

2.Kurbonmurotova, M. (2025). Metaphorical lexis and its semantic implications in Uzbek and English political discourse. Academic Research in Modern Science, 4(48), 223–227.

3.Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.

4.Mamadaliyeva, X. (2025). Metaphorical shift in the translation of English political discourse into Uzbek. Academic Research in Modern Science, 4(48), 118–123.

5.Nguyen, D. T. (2025). Conceptual metaphors in English political discourse. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 8(7), 4942–4947.

6.Sagatova, M. P. (2023). Metaphors in political discourse. Oriens, 3(22), 89–91.

7.Yakubov, F. J. (2023). Siyosiy diskursda metaforalarning ishlatilishiga doir mulohazalar. Academic Research in Educational Sciences, 119–127.

8.Kurbonmurotova (2025) discusses recurrent metaphorical patterns in Uzbek and English media texts. Both languages share universal images such as “politics is war” and “politics is a journey,” but Uzbek discourse also features culturally specific metaphors (e.g. nature imagery) reflecting local worldview.

9.Yakubov (2023) analyzes Uzbek political speech and finds that natural elements are often used metaphorically (e.g. “siyosiy iqlim” “political climate,” “qahr-g‘azab bo‘roni” “storm of anger”)*.

10.Nguyen (2025) examines conceptual metaphors in English politics and observes that metaphors are chosen to pursue power persuasively: “political speakers frequently… use metaphors” to exert persuasive effects.

11.Digonnet (2014) finds in U.S. inaugural speeches that metaphor is a “vital process for the composition of a political speech”, allowing creativity and memorability. He notes that effective political metaphorical framing often requires being “striking”.

12.Sagatova (2023) similarly asserts that metaphors in politics have a strong emotional impact and can manipulate public opinion, noting that mastering metaphorical language helps politicians *“gain or keep power”*.

13.Mamadaliyeva (2025) highlights translation issues: some English political metaphors must be “adapted or replaced” in Uzbek to suit cultural context.