Argument by multimodal metaphor usually plays a vital role of persuasion daily. In this paper, we analyse the argumentation of Lin Dan Commercial (LDC), an anti-corruption advertisement broadcasted on China Central Television, with conceptual metaphor theory and multimodal metaphor, in order to carry out an evaluation of the reasonableness and effectiveness of the argument. On practice, this research aims to ascertain how to make a full use of the argument by multimodal metaphor for a reasonable and effective publication of anti-corruption. The research finds out, based on a conceptual metaphor WORK IS A MATCH, LDC constructs an argument by multimodal metaphor Copyright © by the paper's authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes.
which is adopted as a strategic manoeuvring at each stage of a critical discussion. It fully utilizes the sense of identity of conceptual metaphor on the basis of reasonableness. In the meanwhile, however, there is a shortcoming in the advertisement because of the mistaken use of a concept “hold the backcourt boundary”.
In past twenty years Chinese internet industry has been keeping rapid development. The net has been much more popular and played abundant types of roles daily. Online video has been one of the most important ways of amusement. According to the report of CNNIC, online video has been the fourth significant Internet business besides three traditional businesses: instant communication, searching engine and news. Chinese Internet user of video has grown 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 11.4% 15.1% 33.8% 21.7% 13.3% 6.5% 10.5% 0.8% to 500million, increasing by 16.4% of 2014. This amount covers 73.2% of all Internet users (2016, p. 24). Such a large group of users also offers a big market for commercial (See Figure 1). By December, 2015, Internet has been enterprises’ top choice for marking, taking about 33.8% of the whole. Advertisement is a typical argumentative discourse. Online video advertisement, facing numerous Internet users, takes the advantages of visual mode, acoustic mode and verbal mode to achieve the argumentative target. Multimodal metaphor is usually adopted as an argument in video advertisement. It, however, is distinct from verbal metaphor because of its unique argumentative function. Advertisement for Public Interest (API) is distinct from traditional commercial advertisement because the API in China aims to serve actions or businesses for public so as to publicize positive morality, behaviors, thoughts, ideas, etc. It is of much societal values. API has been widely used for convey government position, addresses social-psychological problem, resolve conflict, etc. Hence, it is significant to investigate how to realize a reasonable and effective argumentation with multimodal metaphor in API so as to conduct public values.
In this paper, the section 2 reviews the multimodal argumentation and conceptual metaphor theory as well as relevant Chinese studies on advertisement. The section 3 introduces the standard theory and strategic maneuvering (the extended theory) of Pragma-Dialectics, the argumentation theory used in this research. The synopsis of LDC is in section 4. First, we analyze the multimodal metaphors in this advertisement (section 5), which lays the foundation of a further Pragma-Dialectical analysis and evaluation of multimodal metaphor as an argument (section 6). The last part is the conclusion.
In this section, the study briefly reviews researches on multimodal argumentation and advertisement studies
At the beginning, multimodal argumentation is constructed on the basis of visual
argumentation. Usually it is acknowledged that visual argumentation may stem from the
middle of 1990s, symbolized by Leo Groarke’s paper “Logic, art and argument” published on
Informal Logic. In the past 20 years, scholar had fierce discussions on several issues, including
legality of argumentativity of picture
From the perspective of rhetoric, metaphor is nothing but a figure of speech, especially in
literature. But in past three decades, studies of cognitive linguists like Lakoff and Johnson
deeply changed the understanding of a metaphor: Metaphor is not only a figure of speech but
also a basic cognitive mechanism affecting the human’s construction of conceptual system
and corresponding behaviours
to SHORE UP the theory.
All these expressions share one conceptual metaphor between the lines THEORIES (AND
through the concrete daily concept BUILDING. Likewise, there also are expressions ‘All this paper has in it are raw facts, half-baked ideas, and harmed-over theories (IDEAS ARE FOOD)’, ‘Those ideas died off in the Middle Ages (ideas are people)’, ‘It looks different from my point of view (UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING)’, ‘They have a. strong, healthy marriage. (LOVE IS A
Johnson, 1980, pp. 47-51). As Lakoff points out, the meaning of metaphor is also different
that it refers to a ‘a cross-domain mapping in the conceptual system’ (1993, p. 30).
Hence, the usage would not be limited within only one communication symbol such verbal
language, but also in sound, picture, colour, lines spaces and other modes to construct and
express concepts
Pragma-Dialectics is one of three main approaches to multimodal argumentation studies
In 1970s, Dutch scholars Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, etc. propounded
complex aimed at resolving a difference of opinion before a reasonable judge by advancing a
constellation of reasons the arguer can be held accountable for as justifying the acceptability
of the standpoint(s) at issue.’ (van Eemeren, 2010, p. 29) In such a ration communication,
each participant should be a rational as well. The whole text consists of argumentative moves.
But actually, the meaning and logic in natural language often is ambiguous. Sometimes there
are redundant or irrelevant discourse even irrational behaviors such as abuse, hitting. We thus
must reconstruct the natural argumentative discourse into an analytical overview before
evaluation
The standard theory of Pragma-Dialectics attaches attention on the issue of reasonableness in
evaluation; however, the daily argumentation should be not only reasonable but also effective
in persuasion so that the protagonist could convince the audience accept the standpoint. Give
that Frans H. van Eemeren and Peter Houtlosser tried to introduce the rhetorical aspect to
dialectics and put forward “strategic maneuvering”. “Strategic maneuvering” refers to ‘the
continual efforts made in all moves that are carried out in argumentative discourse to keep the
balance between reasonableness and effe
types and the function of correspondent context in augmentation analysis. van Eemeren points
out, ‘[T] the structure of argumentation is all adapted to a context in which doubts, opposition,
objections, and counter
The recognition and understanding of words, pictures and sound by people is decoding
information in various modes. As a result, researchers cannot figure out a standpoint,
arguments supporting it and inner-connections easily. Moreover, metaphor in a multimodal
discourse cause it to be more complex. Fortunately, conceptual metaphor analysis could be a
useful bridge in the process. But metaphor in argumentation has not received due attention
and few studies introduced the results of cognitive science (especially linguistics) in to
modern argumentation theories (Santibáñez, 2010, p. 975). Though few scholars paid
attention on the issue of metaphor in argumentative dis
This research takes Lin Dan Commercial as example to illustrate the Pragma-Dialectical analysis with conceptual metaphor theory in the activity type of video advertisement. Lin Dan Commercial won the Price of Excellence in 2013 CCTV Competition of Advertisement for Public Interest. This advertisement was broadcasted on both of TV and Internet simultaneously and voted by audience. The advertisement got many praise once it was published The detailed information is listed in the table as follows: At beginning of the advertisement, the court lights come on and the whole badminton court becomes bright and clear gradually (Figure L1-l2. Lin Dan’ voiceover: “Every athlete encountered with numerous opponents.”). A vague figure in sports suit appears on the court, holding a bat (Figure L3. Lin Dan’ voiceover: “They have experienced victories and failures.”). The screenshot becomes clear enough that the spectator can find out he is Lin Dan who staring at the backcourt boundary of the opponent’s court through the mid-court line (Figure L4. Lin Dan’ voiceover: “For us, when hitting the shuttlecock, we must keep our eyes on the backcourt”). The camera follows Lin’s eye to the side line and backcourt boundary of the other side (Figure L5-7). Lin Dan starts to hit (Figure L8) and the shuttlecock falls within the boundary (Figure L9. Lin Dan’ voiceover: “Every point is really important. Hence every stroke must be kept in within the lines.”). Lin Dan jumps high and hit again (Figure L10-13). All shuttles fall within the backcourt boundaries (Figure L14). The camera slowly moves to ③ The address of Lindan Commercial: http://www.cctvgygg.com/zuopin. the backcourt boundary (Figure L15-17. Lin Dan’ voiceover: “Only right judgment and holding the backcourt boundary can bring about victory”). In the meanwhile, the camera switches to Lin Dan. In lights Lin Dan says, “On the court of life, we also should eye on the backcourt boundary” (Figure L17-18). And the back of a player in red occur in the screenshot. He jumps to kill but the shuttle flies out of the boundary but other strokes succeed (Figure L19-23. Lin Dan’ voiceover: “If the shuttle goes out, we still can get the point back”). Lin comes into the screenshot and continues, “No matter being a human or doing your job, we cannot go beyond the backcourt boundary. Otherwise what you lose can never be made up.” (Figure L24) In the screen, a slogan in red is shown: “Your life cannot go beyond the boundary; the backcourt boundary must be held” (Figure L25).
The multimodal metaphor in advertisement is a visualized conceptual metaphor. Pictures, sounds and voiceovers used in LDC show that the whole of the advertisement is designed on the basis of conceptual metaphor. At the end of LDC, Lin Dan uses a metaphorical expression “Your life cannot go beyond the boundary; the backcourt boundary must be held.” The metaphorical fragments complicate the identification and analysis of propositions in a multimodal argumentation. Thus it is necessary to conduct an analysis within the conceptual metaphor theory as a “bridge” between argumentation and multimodal expressions, in order to reveal the function a multimodal metaphor plays in argumentation.
From the perspective of content, LDC could be divided into three parts: boundary. This explication uses a concept “backcourt boundary” as a metonymy to activate the conceptual metaphor LIFE IS BADMINTON. The boundary between the first part the second is Lin’s another metaphorical voiceover, “On the court of life, we also should eye on the backcourt boundary”. It further points out the source domain is BADMINTON and the target DOMAIN is life. The second party indicate the result brought about by “the shuttlecock beyond the backcourt boundary”. The third part draws a conclusion.
According to conceptual metaphor theory, LIFE IS BADMINTON is a process to understand abstract LIFE with assistance of BADMINTON. Two decades ago Kress and van Leeuwen pointed out ‘particular modes of communication should be seen in their environment, in the environment of all the other modes of communication which surround them, and of their functions’ (1996, p. 33). We have noticed LDC is an anti-corruption advertisement for the public, aiming to show the importance of incorruptibility. The target could be limited into CAREER from LIFE, viz. CAREER IS A MATCH. The mappings are shown as follows: COURT PLAYER REFREE HITTING
SIDE LINE
(BOUNDARY)
SHUTTLECOCK
So how does the advertisement represent the conceptual metaphor through multimodal
approach? The advertisement starts with a screenshot on an empty court and then Lin Dan,
the man of symbol comes into the shot, pointing out every athlete encountered with numerous
opponents and experienced victories and failures (L1-2). The concrete badminton court
becomes the limit of business in career. Hence,
A larger size of court means more power an official owns and smaller, less. In the
advertisement the range of power of a working staff is represented through a countable size
of an area. ④ Cognitive linguists argue the mind of human is embodies. It grows from
experience in life from body, physical and culture environment
Dan argues “For us, when hitting the shuttlecock, we must keep our eyes on the backcourt” (L4-6). At the same time, the camera moves to the side lines and backcourt boundary (L7-9). Seven groups of similar close shots are adopted in the second part (L23-26).
BACKCOURT BOUNDARY The backcourt boundary one type of lines printed on the court, referring to the boundaries at two ends of the field of football, basketball, volleyball, tennis, badminton, etc. If the ball or shuttlecock flies beyond the boundary, the opposite would score one. From the perspective of audience, the groups of shots are based these primary metaphors OUT IS BAD and IN IS GOOD. In the meanwhile, Lin Dan also requires all athlete should “focus on the backcourt boundary”. In L6 the audience attention goes through the middle net and fall on Lin’s eyes that staring on the front. The following plot indicates he is stare on the backcourt boundary of the other side. Information from visual verbal mode contains a conceptual metaphor: UNDERSTAND IS SEE
SEE SHORT (LENGTH) IS BAD
OBEY STRICTLY
OBEY LOOSELY CARELESSLY
OBEY Three primary metaphors function as basis here: UNDERSTAND IS SEE, LONG (LENGTH) IS GOOD and SHORT (LENGTH) IS BAD. We often use “see” to expression the concept of understanding. If the cognitive subject sees relevant concepts such as lines of the badminton court he/she would catch the meaning. And length of seeing represents his/her attitude. Working staffs should keep sharp mind like athletes and be aware where backcourt boundary is. The result of match is another important concept involved in CAREER IS A MATCH. The screenshot of L10 emphasis “every point is important” and the case uses a series of shots to describe the endeavor for success. For instance, the player dashes for killing (L10-11), jumps for strong hitting (L13-16, L25), etc. 1. STRONG IS
FAST 2. STRONG IS
HIGH 3. WEAK IS LOW 4. WEAK IS SLOW HIGH LOW SLOW
MORE FORCE IN HITTING The primary metaphors for this complex metaphor is from the cognition of altitude and speed. In a match the quality of stroke also affects the result. L22-23 in the case show the conceptual metaphor THE RESULT IN WORKING IS RESULT OF MATCH is adopted. Through analyzing the conceptual structures of multimodal metaphors, this research clarifies the mappings beneath multimodal arguments and embodied supports for these propositions. Theses, however, is the first step for a critical discussion of multimodal arguments and in the next section, a Pragma-Dialectical based on previous analysis would be conducted This section is to analyze the reasonableness and how multimodal metaphors function as a strategic maneuvering to enhance the effectiveness of LDC
The aforementioned introduction to Pragma-Dialectics has shown the four stages of an argumentative discourse after reconstruction.
Confrontation stage We figure out the difference of opinion the advertisement would like to resolve is not about badminton or life, the superficial ones but “whether an official can execute his/her power beyond limitation.” Besides, an advertisement for public interest aims to serve the public for right social values so the target audience would not be the corrupted officials but common people and some officials who may be corrupted. They usually doubt the protagonist’s standpoint at issue. Hence the difference of opinion is a single non-mixed one.⑤ Opening stage In the argumentation, the protagonist contains discipline inspection officials and Lin Dan. Their standpoint is that “all officials cannot execute their power beyond limitation”. The antagonist includes people who doubt the protagonist’s standpoint. Actually, the difference of opinion at issues is a simple value judgment but the key is how convince the audience effectively on the basis of reasonableness. The procedural starting points are rule for advertisement in broadcasting and the material starting points mainly concerns rules of badminton and the identity of Lin Dan.
Argumentation stage On the aforesaid conceptual metaphorical analysis, we reconstructed
LDC as follows:
⑤ The amount of propositions in a difference of opinion at issues (one or more) and the attitude
of the antagonist lead to four distinct types of differences of opinion: single non-mixed,
single mixed, multiple non-mixed and multiple mixed difference of opinion
1.1a.1a.1b (The badminton knowledge of a world champion of badminton is correct.) 1.1a.1c career is a match. 1.1a.1b (Rules of badminton regulate the shuttlecock cannot fly out of side lines.) 1.1a.1c.1a RANGE OF POWER IS SIZE OF COURT.
1.1a.1c.1a.1 big is good; small is bad. 1.1a.1c.1b backcourt boundary is rules and laws.
1.1a.1c.1b.1 in is good; out is bad. 1.1a.1c.1c see is obey. 1.1a.1c.1c.1a see is understand. 1.1a.1c.1c.1b carefully is long time is; carelessly is short time. 1.1a.1c.1d doing business is hitting the shuttlecock.
1.1a.1c.1d.1a strong is fast; weak is slow.
1.1a.1c.1d.1b strong is high; weak is low.
1.1a.1c.1e result of work is result of match ⑥ A proposition in parentheses () means this is an expressed proposition and is added by the analyst. 1.1a.1c.1e.1a success in work is victory in match 1.1a.1c.1e.1b failure in work is loss in match 1.1b Power beyond limitation should be forbidden, even if just once.
1.1b.1a If you lose one point in badminton, you could get it back later. 1.1b.1b Any one mistakes about the execution of power in work cannot be made up. The context and metaphor analysis points out the implicit standpoint is “All officials cannot execute their power beyond limitation.” Lin Dan gives two arguments, 1.1a and 1.1b supporting the standpoint. 1.1a contains three sub-arguments: a) an argument from authority embedded in the multimodal metaphor argument; b) rules of badminton which is regarded as a widely acknowledged unexpressed premise; c) a multimodal argument based on conceptual metaphor CAREER IS A MATCH. In the complex metaphors (1.1a.1c.1a-1e) supporting 1.1a.1c, primary metaphors play a role of bridge connecting the basic cognitive domains, such as “rules and laws--IN IS GOOD and OUT IS BAD—backcourt boundary”. It forms a series of subpropositions supporting the upper. The second main sub-argument is 1.1b. Different from 1.1a, 1.1b gives a further requirement that power beyond limitation should be forbidden, even if just once. The difference between career and match puts a further emphasis on the importance of “limitation” in working.
Concluding stage At the end of the advertisement, a slogan in red occurs in the middle of screen that make a comparison between (career) life and badminton again, “Your life cannot goes beyond the boundary; the backcourt boundary must be held.” From the perspective of the protagonist, the information shown indicates the difference of opinion has been resolved.
On the basis of argumentative reconstruction, we give an evaluation on the argument scheme
and the strategy of appeal to authority used in LDC.
6.2.1 Argument Scheme of Multimodal Argument
Multimodal argument is constructed on the basis of conceptual metaphor. Correspondingly,
the argument scheme of the multimodal argument is an analogical scheme. In
PragmaDialectics, the scheme of analogy, one of three argument schemes, refers to that ‘a standpoint
is defended by showing that something referred to in the standpoint is similar to something
that is cited in the argumentation, and that on the grounds of this resemblance the standpoint
should be accepted’
analogical scheme shown as follows:
Y is true of X, Because: Y is true of Z, (Premise 1)
And: Z is comparable to X. (Premise 2) In the structure, what premise 1 “Y is true of Z” concerns is a judgment of fact. It is decided by the cognitive background of the participant of the argumentation so this premise would not be taken into consideration in reasoning. The key point to the argument lies in premise 2 that is about the similarity between tow analogues. Walton also points out the similarities between analogues are the decisive factor to the reasonableness of an analogy (D. N. Walton, 2006;
The aforementioned analysis has proved the argumentation in LDC is on the basis of CAREER
IS A MATCH. But different from literal analogy, two concepts involved in a conceptual
metaphor is from different cognitive domains, forming a cross-domain mapping. Hence we
should not only seek for the number of analogues between these two in evaluation, but also
for an abstract similarity
There is only one critical question in the scheme: Could the proposition asserted by Expert E be true of acceptable? Wagesmans argues, however, the scheme given by Walton is not systematic enough whereas the Pragma-Dialectical on is too general (2011, p. 335). Hence Wagesmans made a revision: 1.
STP 1.1 ARG 1.1.1 ARG 1.1.1’ ATP (1.1.1→1.1) 1.1’ ATP (1.1→1） 1.1’.1 ARG 1.1’.1 ATP (1.1’1→1.1’)
STP: Your life cannot goes beyond the boundary; the backcourt boundary must be held. 1.1 Standpoint O is asserted by Expert Lin Dan 1.1.1a Lin Dan is an expert in the field of badminton 1.1.1b The case shows Lin Dan adheres to the standpoint indeed. 1.1’ Accepting the standpoint asserted by Lin Dan is acceptable
1.1’1c The standpoint is consistent with what other (types of) experts’ assertions.
With the assistance of conceptual metaphor theory and multimodal metaphor, this paper conducts an argumentative analysis of a Chinese advertisement for the public within the framework of Pragma-Dialectics, in order to figure out a paradigm for the analysis of metaphorical argumentation in video. The research argues arguments in video advertisement are always implicit and unclear because of multi modes and metaphors involved. Hence, researchers should analyze the conceptual metaphors in target argumentation first and then Pragma-Dialectics could reconstruct the argumentation better. In this paper, argumentation in the case of LDC is reasonable. It mainly uses the scheme of analogy and appeal to authority together.
The case investigated in this study is a video advertisement for the public interest that is different from commercial advertisement still. The standpoint in such an advertisement is usually a widely acknowledged value judgment, rules or morality. The argumentation in a commercial advertisement which aim at profits need more discussions still.
University Press1997. political cartoons: A pragma-dialectical analysis of the use of topoi that are based on common cultural heritage. In E. Feteris, B. Garssen & F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Keeping in touch with pragma-dialectics: In honor of Frans H. van Eemeren (pp. 5974). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
of metaphors. In Verbal and visual rhetoric in a media world (pp. 429-439). Leiden:
Num. Screenshot: Badmiton Court & Lin Dan Subtitles
Plot L1 L2 L3 Court lights come on.
Every athlete
Lights become encountered
stronger. Voicewith numerous over and opponents. (每 一 个 运 动 员 ， 都 面 对 过 无 数 的对手。) corresponding subtitles occur. L5 L6 L7
For us, (对我们 来说，)
Camera focuses on Lin Dan 每 打 出 一 个 球 (When hitting the shuttle (每 打出一个球)， we must keep our eyes on the backcourt boundary (眼睛 始 终 要 盯 着 底 线。).
Lin is in on side of court and in a gesture showing he is preparing for the opponent’s stroke.。 (SHOT SWITCH) The screenshot move along with Lin’s perspective to the opponent’s boundaries. L9 L10 L11
Every point is really important. (每 一 分 都 至 关 重 要。)
Voiceover occurs. (SHOT SWITCH: through the opponent’s perspective) Lin Dan is to hit. (SHOT SWITCH) Lin’s stroke L13 L14 L15
Hence every stroke must be kept in within the lines.
Lin Dan jumps for hitting L17 L18 L19
Only right judgment (只有 正确的判断), Holding the backcourt boundary (坚守 底 线 ， 才 能 守 住胜利)。 (SHOT SWITCH /CLOSE SHOT) the badminton falls in at the corner of backcourt boundary and border Camera focuses on the backcourt boundary L21 L22 L23
On the court of life (在 人 生 的 赛场上), we also should (SHOT eye on the SWITCH) Lin backcourt Dan is speaking boundary (也有 需 要 顶 住 的 底 线).
If the shuttle (SHOT goes out (球 出 SWITCH) The 界了), back of another
athlete in red we still can get the point back (丢掉的一分还 可以拼回来).
The athlete’s kill in the air L25 L26 L27 The shuttle flies beyond the boundary.
Another kill by the red player Badmintons do not go beyond the boundary.