A frequently encountered expression in political discourse across languages is the assertion that someone has not ‘done their homework’. As the expression is a combination of structural metaphor and understatement, it is a figurative frame that simplifies public debates by presenting complex issues such as economic reforms as simple tasks and stifles critical and consensual political debates by replacing questions of fairness and adequacy with unquestionable moral obligation. In spite of this manipulative force, metaphor research has paid little attention to this metaphor. I investigate its emergence and pragmatic effects in American and German newspaper discourse through the Corpus of Historical American English/Corpus of Contemporary American English and Die ZEIT corpora. Findings for both English and German show that, while the metaphor was originally used for positive self- and negative other-representation, it is now used increasingly often without specifying whether or not someone has done their homework, which is evidence to suggest that it has become accepted in public discourse as a normal way of framing political issues.
BoersFDemecheleerM (1997) A few metaphorical models in (western) economic discourse. In: LiebertWARedekerGWaughLR (eds) Discourse and Perspective in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 115–130.
5.
BurgersCKonijnEASteenGJ (2016) Figurative framing: Shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony. Communication Theory26(4): 410–430.
6.
CaffiC (2007) Mitigation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
7.
ChannellJ (1999) Corpus-based analysis of evaluative lexis. In: HunstonSThompsonG (eds) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 38–55.
8.
Charteris-BlackJ (2004) Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
9.
Charteris-BlackJEnnisT (2001) A comparative study of metaphor in Spanish and English financial reporting. English for Specific Purposes20(3): 249–266.
10.
Charteris-BlackJMusolffA (2003) ‘Battered hero’ or ‘innocent victim’? A comparative study of metaphors for euro trading in British and German financial reporting. English for Specific Purposes22(2): 153–176.
11.
ChongDDruckmanJN (2007) Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science10(1): 103–126.
12.
Cortés de los RíosME (2010) Cognitive devices to communicate the economic crisis: An analysis through covers in The Economist. Ibérica20(1): 81–106.
13.
DeignanA (2005) Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
14.
Dobrovol’skijDPiirainenE (2005) Figurative Language: Cross-cultural and Cross-linguistic Perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
15.
FulbrookM (2002) History of Germany 1918–2000: The Divided Nation. Oxford: Blackwell.
16.
FuoliM (2018) A step-wise method for annotating APPRAISAL. Functions of Language25(2): 229−258.
17.
FuoliMHommerbergC (2015) Optimising transparency, reliability and replicability: Annotation principles and inter-coder agreement in the quantification of evaluative expressions. Corpora10(3): 315–349.
18.
GibbsRWLonerganJE (2009) Studying metaphor in discourse: Some lessons, challenges and new data. In: MusolffAZinkenJ (eds) Metaphor and Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 251–262.
19.
GriceP (1989) Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20.
Herrera SolerH (2008) A metaphor corpus in business press headlines. Ibérica15(1): 51–69.
21.
HolmgreenLL (2003) Setting the neo-liberal agenda: How metaphors help shape socio-economic ‘realities’. Metaphorik.de5(1): 90–114.
22.
JanichN (2015) Sprachkritische Aktion: Unwort des Jahres. Available at: www.unwortdesjahres.net (accessed 6 March 2018).
23.
KemperA (2016) Haben Sie schon Ihre Hausaufgaben gemacht? Eine Formulierung wird zur Floskel. ZEITmagazin20: 42.
24.
KövecsesZ (2009) Metaphor, culture, and discourse: The pressure of coherence. In: MusolffAZinkenJ (eds) Metaphor and Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 11–24.
25.
KreuzRJKasslerMACoppenrathL (1998) The use of exaggeration in discourse: Cognitive and social facets. In: FussellSRKreuzRJ (eds) Social and Cognitive Approaches to Interpersonal Communication. New York: Psychology Press, pp. 91–112.
26.
LakoffG (2002) Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
LakoffG (2008) The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist’s Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics. London: Penguin Books.
28.
LakoffGJohnsonM (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
MartinJRWhitePRR (2005) The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
32.
O’Mara-ShimekMGuillén-ParraMOrtega-LarreaA (2015) Stop the bleeding or weather the storm? Crisis solution marketing and the ideological use of metaphor in online financial reporting of the stock market crash of 2008 at the New York Stock Exchange. Discourse & Communication9(1): 103–123.
33.
Pragglejaz Group (2007) MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol22(1): 1–39.
34.
Rojo LópezAMOrts LlopisMÁ (2010) Metaphorical pattern analysis in financial texts: Framing the crisis in positive or negative metaphorical terms. Journal of Pragmatics42(12): 3300–3313.
35.
SchiappaE (2003) Defining Reality: Definitions and the Politics of Meaning. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
SeminoE (2002) A sturdy baby or a derailing train? Metaphorical representations of the euro in British and Italian newspapers. Text & Talk22(1): 107–139.
38.
StavrakakisYKatsambekisG (2014) Left-wing populism in the European periphery: The case of SYRIZA. Journal of Political Ideologies19(2): 119–142.
39.
SullivanK (2013) Frames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
40.
SüssmuthR (1997) Vor der Bewährung: Der Bundestag in rauen Zeiten. Die ZEIT10: 3.
41.
TaverniersM (2017) Metaphor in pragmatics. In: BarronAGuYSteenG (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Pragmatics. London: Routledge, pp. 323–340.
