Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theoretical Frameworks

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Ayatollah Khomeini Through the Lens of the Iran-Iraq War

Part of the book series: Studies in Iranian Politics ((STIRPO))

  • 184 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter introduces a theoretical framework for the study of Khomeini’s corpus during the war, which is a combination of CDA (Critical Discourse Analysis) and CMT (Critical Metaphor analysis and CMT). This book’s theoretical framework is examined in five stages. The first stage introduces cognitive approaches, constructivist discourse analysis and poststructuralist discourse analysis as the main three potential alternative approaches to CDA. However, after explaining why these approaches cannot be used to analyse Khomeini’s discourse, in stage two CDA is presented as the first part of the theoretical framework of this book. Despite all its advantages, CDA fails to recognise the importance of cognitive approaches (Chilton in Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2005; Koller in Metaphor and gender in business media discourse: A critical cognitive study. Palgrave Macmillan, 2004). Therefore, to cover this lapse, stage three suggests that cognitive metaphors should be added to CDA as a complementary theory. Stage four introduces the theoretical framework of the research: a combination of the CDA and CMT. Finally, stage five justifies the use of CDA and CMT as two “Western theories” in a non-Western case study. Although a combination of CDA and CMT per se is not new, the theoretical framework introduced in this chapter mainly focuses on the political aspects of language rather than its linguistic aspects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See next chapter

  2. 2.

    See chapters 4 and 5.

  3. 3.

    See Chapter 5.

  4. 4.

    Seen in Chapter 6.

  5. 5.

    See Chapter 7.

References

  • Achugar, M. (2017) Critical discourse analysis and history. In J. Flo Wastnidge rdew & J. Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (pp.410–429). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth, S., & Hardy, C. (2004). Critical discourse analysis and identity: Why bother? Critical Discourse Studies, 1(2), 225–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. (2001). Metaphors of dictatorship and democracy: Change in the Russian political lexicon and the transformation of Russian politics. Slavic Review, 60(2), 312–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Attia, M. (2007). A critical cognitive study: The Egyptian written media. In C. Hart & D. Lukeš (Ed.), Cognitive linguistics in critical discourse analysis: Application and theory (pp. 81–106). Cambridge Scholars.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aydın-Düzgit, S. (2013). Critical discourse analysis in analysing European Union foreign policy: Prospects and challenges. Cooperation and Conflict, 49(3), 354–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bayram, F. (2010). Ideology and political discourse: A critical discourse analysis of Erdogan’s political speech. Annual Review of Education, Communication and Language Sciences, 7(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bougher, Lori D. (2012). The case for metaphor in political reasoning and cognition. In Political Psychology, 33, 145–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breeze, R. (2011). Critical discourse analysis and its critics. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPRA), 21(4), 493–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2016). Social research methods (5th ed.). Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burr, V. (2003). Social constructionism. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carta, C., & Morin, J. (2014). EU’s foreign policy through the lenses of discourse analysis: Making sense of diversity. Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Charteris-Black, J. (2014). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiang, W., & Duann, R. (2007). Conceptual metaphors for SARS: ‘War’ between whom? Discourse & Society, 18(5), 579–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chilton, P. (2005). Manipulation, memes and metaphors. Manipulation and ideologies in the 20th century: Discourse, language, mind. In L. De Saussure & P. Schulz (Eds.), Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century (pp. 15–43). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Coulson, S. (2006). Metaphor and conceptual blending. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 32–39). Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • El-Sharif, A. (2011). A linguistic study of Islamic religious discourse: Conceptual metaphors in the prophetic tradition (PhD book). Queen Mary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, N., Mulderrig, J., & Wodak, R. (2011). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (2nd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Filardo-Llamas, L., & Boyd, M. (2018). Critical discourse analysis and politics. In J. Flowerdew & J. Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies (pp. 410–429). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fletcher, C. (2005). The methodology of Abdolkarim Soroush: A preliminary study. Islamic Studies, 44(4), 527–552.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavriely-Nuri, D. (2012). The normalization of war in Israeli discourse. Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, R. W. (2011). Evaluating conceptual metaphor theory. Discourse Processes, 48(8), 529–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goatly, A. (2006). Ideology and metaphor. English Today, 22(3), 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, L. (2006). Security as practice: Discourse analysis and the Bosnian war. Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C. (2017). Metaphor and intertextuality in media framings of the (1984–1985) British miners’ strike: A multimodal analysis. Discourse & Communication, 11(1), 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, C., & Lukeš, D. (Ed.). (2007). Cognitive linguistics in critical discourse analysis. Cambridge Scholars.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holsti, O. (1970). The “operational code” approach to the study of political leaders: John Foster Dulles’ philosophical and instrumental beliefs. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 3(1), 123–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzscheiter, A. (2010). Children’s rights in international politics. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Howarth, D., & Torfing, J. (2005). Discourse theory in European politics. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2011). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller, V. (2004). Metaphor and gender in business media discourse: A critical cognitive study. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G. (2017). The president is the nation: The central metaphor Trump lives by [Online]. Available at https://georgelakoff.com/2017/08/01/the-president-isthe-nation-the-central-metaphor-trump-lives-by/. Accessed 4 September 2019.

  • Lakoff, G. (2022). Moral politics: How liberals and conservatives think (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, H. (1997). Foreign policy and discourse analysis. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, N., & Lederman, J. (2015). What is a theoretical framework? A practical answer. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(7), 593–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mabon, S. (2020). Houses built on sand: Violence, sectarianism and revolution in the Middle East (Identities and geopolitics in the middle east) [Forthcoming]. Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mammadpour, M. (2008). The divine encounter and apocalyptic revelation (Didar-e Farahi va Fotuhat-e Akhar al-Zaman). Tehran: Nazar.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, K. (2000). Contributions of the cognitive approach to political psychology. Political Psychology, 21(4), 805–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., & Wodak, R. (2001). Methods of critical discourse analysis. Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mio, J. (1997). Metaphor and politics. Metaphor and Symbol, 12(2), 113–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musolff, A. (2012). The study of metaphor as part of critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies, 9(3), 301–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ng, C., & Koller, V. (2013). Deliberate conventional metaphor in images: The case of corporate branding discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 28(3), 131–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppermann, K., & Spencer, A. (2016). Telling stories of failure: Narrative constructions of foreign policy fiascos. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(5), 685–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortony, A. (2012). Metaphor and thought. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapport, A. (2017). Cognitive approaches to foreign policy analysis. In M. Smith (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopaedia of foreign policy analysis. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reus-Smit, C., 2013. Constructivism. 217–240. In S. Burchill, A. Linklater, J. Donnelly, T. Nardin, M. Paterson, C. Reus-Smit, A. Saramago, T. Haastrup and A. Sajed (Eds.), Theories of international relations. Bloomsbury Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, M., & Walker, S. (2006). Beliefs and leadership in world politics: Methods and applications of operational code analysis. Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoor, C. (2015). Political metaphor, a matter of purposeful style: On the rational, emotional and strategic purposes of political metaphor. Metaphor and the Social World, 5(1), 82–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoor, C. (2017). In the theatre of political style: Touches of populism, pluralism and elitism in speeches of politicians. Discourse & Society, 28(6), 657–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shabestari, M. (2002). Hermonetic, Ketab va Sonat (2nd ed.). Trahe No.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, M., & Bonham, G. (1973). Cognitive process and foreign policy decision-making. International Studies Quarterly, 17(2), 147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slingerland, E., Blanchard, E., & Boyd Judson, L. (2007). Collision with China: Conceptual metaphor analysis, somatic marking, and the EP-3 incident. International Studies Quarterly, 51(1), 53–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soroush, A. (1995). Ghabzo baste Teorike Shariyat [The theoretical contraction and expansion of Sharia]. Serat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thibodeau, P., & Durgin, F. (2011). Metaphor aptness and conventionality: A processing fluency account. Metaphor and Symbol, 26(3), 206–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warnaar, M. (2013). Iranian foreign policy during Ahmadinejad. Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391

    Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 63–94). Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wrexham, UK

    Meysam Tayebipour

Authors
  1. Meysam Tayebipour
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Meysam Tayebipour .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tayebipour, M. (2023). Theoretical Frameworks. In: Ayatollah Khomeini Through the Lens of the Iran-Iraq War. Studies in Iranian Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-14907-8_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation