Cross-cultural Conceptualization of the Financial and Economic Crisis in the Media: the force Metaphor

Merging Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) with Cognitive Linguistics (CL) has brought new perspectives to analysing social reality (Van Dijk, 2001; Musolff 2004; CharterisBlack, 2005; Hart, 2010). Accordingly, this paper adopts Critical Metaphor Analysis as first suggested by Charteris-Black (2005, 2014) and seeks to investigate a social phenomenon – the financial and economic crisis – in Lithuanian and British media. The aim of the research is to analyse to what extent the media in the UK and Lithuania conceptualize differently the financial and economic crisis via the force metaphor. The paper explains the force metaphor by employing the Force-Dynamics System (Talmy, 2000), according to which a crisis is conceptualized following the patterns crisis as the agonist and crisis as the antagonist� The findings demonstrate that the pattern of the crisis as the agonist with the scenarios of aggression, affecting something or somebody, natural force, loss, suffering and resistance prevails in both discourses. The pattern of the crisis as the antagonist with such scenarios as causing crisis, fighting against crisis, overcoming crisis falls behind. Though Lithuanian and British discourses differ in how they construct the scenarios, the rhetorical impact of the force metaphor is achieved similarly through telling a coherent story of the crisis: the crisis is a dangerous, threatening and aggressive entity, which affects the country and its people; it is apparently uncontrollable, and losses and suffering are inevitable; we look into the causes of the crisis, we fight against it and finally we overcome it.


Introduction
Traditionally, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Cognitive Linguistics (CL) view metaphor differently.In CDA, the function of language, including metaphor, is narrowed down and metaphor is seen only as a linguistic requisite or a set of power tools (Stenvol, 2008, 37, 38), whereas in CL metaphor is given a leading role in shaping and constructing social reality.Hart (2010, 6, 23) maintains that mainstream CDA has been neglecting CL for a variety of reasons, one of them being the different methodology applied within each field.Paradoxically, but due to the methodologically eclectic nature within CDA and CL, it became possible to find common ground in combining the two approaches.Merging CDA with CL has therefore brought new perspectives to analysing social reality.For example, Van Dijk (2001, 96) adopts a socio-cognitive approach and focuses on the interdependence of the discourse-cognition-society triangle.He claims, for example, that racism is a mental and social phenomenon that should be analysed in line with historical, cultural socio-economic, philosophical, logical and neurological considerations.
Admittedly, the integration of CL within the framework of CDA is mostly limited to metaphor analysis.Despite the fact that cognitive linguists attempt to develop various approaches to metaphor within CDA, perhaps the most prominent and successful is Critical Metaphor Analysis or CMA (Charteris-Black, 2005/ 2011, 2014;Goatly, 2007;Koller, 2014;Musolff, 2004;Hart, 2010, etc.).In this approach, metaphor is regarded as a cognitive mechanism of ideology, having the power to influence and persuade the audience.This paper seeks to investigate a social phenomenon of the financial and economic crisis from the perspective of CMA.This means that the aim of the paper is to determine the extent to which the media in the UK and Lithuania differently conceptualize the financial and economic crisis via the force metaphor and what rhetorical implications arise as a result.The focus of the present study is therefore multifaceted, as it takes into consideration the cognitive peculiarities of the social phenomenon of economic crisis, viewing the economic crisis from a critical perspective, i.e. how public opinion is formed and influenced by the media.It also takes into account cross-cultural aspects of two culturally and historically different European countries.
The Nature of the force Metaphor: the "Force-Dynamics System" As the paper discusses only one metaphor out of many structuring the concept of economic crisis, the nature of the force metaphor needs to be explained.Our experience is conceptualized through image schemas (Johnson, 1987;Lakoff, 1987;Lakoff & Turner, 1989), which are concepts arising from embodied experience and which are comprehended as a "recurrent pattern, shape, and regularity in, or of, these on-going ordering activities" (Johnson, 1987, 29).The main image schemas summarized by Evans and Green (2006, 190) are the following: space (up-down, front-back, near-far, leftright), containment (container, in-out, surface, full-empty), locomotion (momentum, source-path-goal), unity / multiplicity (merging, collection, splitting, part-whole, count-mass), force (compulsion, blockage, counterforce, diversion, removal of restraint, enablement, attraction, resistance), etc.These basic image schemas give rise to metaphorical thinking.Thus, the force image schema is the focus of this paper.
Closely related to the force image schema is the theory of the Force-Dynamics System proposed by Talmy (2000).According to this theory, physical entities interact with each other exerting force, resisting it, overcoming resistance, blocking the expression of force, or removing the blockage.As Talmy (2000, 410) suggests, this system generalises the traditional linguistic notion of causation, which maintains that an entity causes another entity to behave in a particular way.The Force-Dynamics System derives from basic embodied human experience.Pressure and motion are basic elements operating in this system.Talmy distinguishes two basic patterns underlying other more complex Force-Dynamics patterns.The first pattern is steady-state force dynamics, according to which there are two entities exerting a force on each other.One of the entities is more salient in terms of the fact that this entity, or the Agonist, is capable of showing a tendency to use force, whereas the other entity, or the Antagonist, undergoes the pressure, either overcoming it or failing to overcome it.For example, the sentence The ball kept rolling because of the wind blowing on it (in Talmy, 2000, 416) shows that the agonist ball has an intrinsic tendency toward rest and is affected by the stronger antagonist wind, which forces the agonist ball to move.In the shifting force-dynamic pattern, the factor of change through time comes into display and the steady-state force dynamics pattern brings about a set of change-of-state patterns.For example, in the sentence The ball's hitting it made the lamp topple from the table (in Talmy, 2000, 418), the Antagonist ball, being stronger than the Agonist lamp which has an intrinsic tendency towards rest, confronts the Agonist and causes it to change from a state of rest to action (topple from).
The Force-Dynamics System operates in the process of constructing arguments in the domain of discourse.As Talmy (2000, 452) points out "(t)his is the rhetoric of persuasion and includes efforts to exhort, to convince, and to logically demonstrate".Typically, the Force-Dynamics System is employed to analyse construals of meaning construction differing from metaphor.For example, Hart (2011) analyses immigration discourse through such Force-interactive construals as conjunctions (e.g.despite, because), prepositions (e.g.on, into), adverbials (e.g.still) or lexical elements (e.g. prevent, stop, let, blockage, enable, etc.) and he claims that the analysed closed class, semi-closed class and open class elements disclose the ideological potential of force-dynamic conceptualizations (2011,283).However, Talmy (2000, 430) and Hart (2011, 273) ISSN 1392-8600 E-ISSN 1822-7805 Žmogus ir žodis / Svetimosios kalbos / 2017, t. 19, Nr. 3 admit that, although Force-dynamic schemas are pre-eminently likely to structure our conceptualizations of physical interactions, these schemas underlie psychological, social, political, legal and linguistic interactions due to metaphorical extensions.For example, the sentence Our government exerted pressure on that country to toe our line (in Talmy, 2000, 438) illustrates metaphorical extension of the lexical item pressure indicating physical force, to the domain of socio political interaction where pressure acquires the meaning of power.Thus, this paper focuses only on metaphorical extensions of the Force-Dynamics System and the following chapter outlines the major studies in this area.

The Force-Dynamics System in Metaphorical Extensions
As mentioned above, metaphorical instantiation of the Force-Dynamics System provides a firm basis for argumentation in different discourses within CDA studies.Thus, metaphor, being an ideological tool, "represents a certain way of viewing the world that reflects a shared system of belief as to what the world is, and culture-specific beliefs about mankind's place in it" (Charteris-Black, 2007, 23).The force metaphor, directly related to the Force-Dynamics System, has been extensively analysed by different scholars working within the CDA framework.Although they discuss such concepts as war, conflict, aggression, disaster, violence, fight, battle, etc., it has to be admitted that all these concepts stand in hyponymic relation to the metaphor of force.Semino (2008, 100-101), referring to the hyponym 'war', maintains that in political discourse metaphorical expressions instantiating the war metaphor are conventionally used to describe either conflicts between individuals, groups, parties, governments or oppositions, or to illustrate intractable problems and strategies developed in order to solve them.In this way, such metaphorical expressions as battle, snipers, war against infl ation, combating unemployment, etc. become typical means of argumentation.Charteris-Black (2005/ 2011, 2007) demonstrates empirically how conflict metaphors work in constructing arguments.By drawing detailed rhetorical portraits of prominent political leaders around the world, he claims that some leaders tend to resort to conflict metaphors in order to express their ideas and beliefs.Margaret Thatcher's rhetorical style stands out in this respect as she systematically used conflict metaphors to communicate a political myth.By constructing social and economic problems, the ideology of socialism, trade unions and political opponents as enemies, she presents herself as a heroic warrior fighting against large and dangerous external forces (2005 / 2011, 89, 98).Similarly to Thatcher, the Malaysian politician Mahathir has a political leadership style containing the same metaphors of conflict and enemy.The enemy has been changing over the years -first, it was the colonizing power of Britain; then it changed to the Chinese; and finally, it became the 'west' or the abstract process of globalization, which threatened Islamic, indigenous Malay values (2007, 169).In this way, the verbally aggressive nature of these political leaders expresses their values and shows their determination to take strict measures against the problems the countries encounter.Quite a different political message is likely to be communicated by Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela through the force metaphor in their political addresses.Their discourse can be characterized as conveying a more positive image of political actions through the metaphors of force than those employed by Thatcher or Mahathir.As Charteris-Black (2007, 67-68) points out, in Gandhi's discourse the metaphor of non-violence is war / physical force prevails.This metaphor seems to be paradoxical because Gandhi employs the war metaphor to express his attitude that non-violence is more successful in achieving political goals than physical struggle.By the use of oxymoron containing metaphors, Gandhi enhances a rhetorical effect.Mandela uses the imagery of water as a metaphor of natural force.He conceptualizes the political force within Africa as a tide, while the external force of overseas allies is seen as the sea lapping on the shores of South Africa.Although water metaphors often have negative implications, in Mandela's discourse they communicate satisfactory outcomes (Charteris-Black, 2007, 91-92).
In line with Charteris-Black's ideas about the ideological power of metaphor, other scholars emphasize the ubiquitous nature of the force metaphor.For example, Goatly (2007) provides a detailed study on how metaphors assume a dominant persuasive and manipulative role in political discourse.By saying that metaphors 'wash the brain' (2007, 2), he claims that activities are typically conceived of as fighting, which in turn is subdivided into different types of attacking (hitting, punching, shooting, throwing, wounding, cutting).This exaggerates and intensifies the notion of competition (2007,72) and encourages an adversarial system of politics (2007, 85). De Landtsheer (2007/ 2010, 2009) developed Metaphor Power Theory, which "allows for the qualification and quantification of emotive power in discourse through a metaphor power index" (2007 / 2010, 61).This theory takes into account the frequency of metaphors, underlines the importance of innovative and original metaphors and assumes that metaphors from different semantic fields have different emotional appeal.De Landtsheer distinguishes six categories and attaches the highest power to category 6.As she points out, category 4 comprises disaster and violence metaphors, which are thought to imply a stronger emotional involvement of the message sender and message receiver.Obviously, De Landtsheer gives high emotive importance to these metaphors.Furthermore, Cameron, Low and Maslen (2010), advocating the discourse dynamics approach, highlight the importance of real-world discourse analysis and focus on metaphorical conceptualization of the issue of terrorism.They claim that terrorism is systematically constructed through the metaphor of violent physical action (ibid., 131), and this metaphor, motivated by people's everyday experience and cultural conventions, conveys "a positive sense of power, control and determination in the face of terrorism" (Cameron, Maslen, 2010, 254).Summing up, Charteris Black, Semino, Goatly, De Landtsheer, Cameron, Low and Maslen can be mentioned as just a few scholars who draw attention to the importance of the force metaphor in discourses.This paper does not attempt to give a complete overview of the vast array of studies carried out in this field, but seeks only to show the prevailing tendencies.In this way, the paper analyses how the force metaphor structures Lithuanian and British media discourse while disclosing attitudes and beliefs about the economic crisis.

Data and Methods
The global financial crisis of 2007-2008 is considered one of the most severe in the last hundred years.The collapse of large financial institutions seriously affected country economies worldwide, and extensive international media coverage was given to the crisis.Therefore, this paper aims to look into how the financial and economic crisis was conceptualized metaphorically in Lithuania and the UK.To carry out cross-linguistic and cross-cultural research, two corpora were constructed containing respectively 109.883 and 103.096 words.The texts about the economic and financial crisis were selected from the Lietuvos Rytas and the Independent, two dailies in Lithuania and the UK.The time span was October 2008 to May 2011.
It may seem that the paper adopts a top-down approach, as the analysis goes from the conceptual level of the force metaphor to the language level of metaphorical instantiations of the conceptual metaphor.However, it is also the case that a prior bottom-up analysis was conducted when the texts about the financial and economic crisis in British and Lithuanian media were analysed to find all metaphorical expressions related to the financial and economic crisis (hereafter 'crisis').The analysis was carried out by applying CMA suggested by Charteris-Black (2005) and MIPVU procedure (Steen et al., 2010).CMA employs a three-stage procedure: metaphors are first identified, next they are interpreted and finally they are explained (Charteris-Black, 2005, 26).The identification of metaphors was done using the AntConc concordance program.The Lithuanian corpus was searched for the key word krizė (crisis) and its contextual synonyms sunkmetis (hard times), sunkumai (hardship) and nuosmukis (downturn), while the British corpus was searched for the keyword crisis and its contextual synonyms recession and downturn.To decide if the collocations obtained with the key words were metaphorical, the MIPVU procedure was used1 .The second step was to relate the identified metaphors at the linguistic level to metaphors in thought, or in other words, to the conceptual metaphors.This was performed by categorizing the metaphorical expressions according to the semantic fields they belong to.In this way the metaphor of force was established.Finally, metaphor explanation, the third step, emerged as an attempt to relate the Force-Dynamics System to socio-political events.In this regard, metaphor is considered as a cognitive mechanism of ideology.

Results: Identification and Interpretation
In the Lithuanian corpus, out of 538 hits with the key words kriz*, nuosmuk*, sunkme* and sunkum* 159 tokens were identified as being instantiations of the force metaphor, whereas in the British corpus the ratio between the hits with the key words crisis, recession and downturn and metaphors is 553 to 163.
In line with Talmy's proposed theory of Force-Dynamics System (2000), the findings demonstrate that all metaphors at the language level fall into two big groups when the crisis is comprehended as either the Agonist or the Antagonist.As was mentioned above, the Agonist is the entity that exhibits a tendency to use force, while the Antagonist is the one that experiences the pressure.Table 1 presents the findings in Lithuanian and British media discourse.As can be seen from Table 1, the pattern the crisis as the agonist prevails over the pattern the crisis as the antagonist in both Lithuanian and British media discourses, making up 62.2 % and 68.1 % against 37.8 % and 31.9 %, respectively.These findings illustrate that the crisis is comprehended as an active entity exerting pressure on the country, its economics and people rather than being in the position of a weaker entity undergoing pressure exerted by the governments in an attempt to overcome the crisis.Further, both metaphorical patterns will be analysed in detail.

Crisis as the Agonist
The scenario of aggression and threat The most salient metaphors related to the crisis as the agonist in both Lithuanian and British discourses are those expressing aggression and threat.47 metaphorical tokens (29.6 %) in Lithuanian media discourse and 60 metaphorical tokens (36.8 %) in British media discourse illustrate how severe the crisis is and how adversely it affects the countries.
The collocational pattern CRISIS + VERB is most frequently used in British and Lithuanian media to express the aggressive character of the crisis.The following verbs employed in British media discourse -hit, bite, knock, hurt, damage, squeeze, force, crush, batter, fl oor, throw off the course -are rather conventionalized ways of speaking about the crisis.In Lithuanian media discourse, the level of conventionality of this pattern differs in comparison to the British.The verbs smogti (strike), trenkti (hit), griauti (destroy), žlugdyti (scathe), išnaikinti (demolish), purtyti (shake), draskyti (tear), sukrėsti (shock) can be considered conventional to a greater or lesser degree.However, the following verbal phrases with the crisis as the agent are novel ways of speaking about the crisis: Moreover, the crisis is seen as an aggressive attacking or threatening animal.Examples (5), ( 6) and ( 7) expose aggression-related elements such as teeth and the act of biting.The crisis is also indirectly depicted as a blood-sucking leech through the verb išsiurbė (sucked) in example (8).In example (9), the concept of the bull belongs to another source domain through which the crisis is conceptualized.All these examples Nominal metaphorical expressions conveying aggression are not so frequent in either discourse.In British discourse, the crisis is understood as a psychic shock or being on a long fuse.In Lithuanian discourse, the nominal metaphors of mušimas (beating), smūgis (blow), spardymas (kick) were used to speak about the crisis.They are deverbal nouns and they contribute to the previously discussed collocational pattern CRISIS + VERB.The noun gniaužtai (clutches) also shows the forceful character of the crisis.
The concept of threat can be considered as a subtype of aggressive behaviour, and it manifests in both discourses.In British discourse, the crisis is described through the following words: threat, threaten, warn, looming, daunting, mounting fears over sth.In Lithuanian discourse, the words are the following: baisus (terrible), baubas (bogeyman), pavojus (danger), grėsmė (threat), gąsdinti (threaten), grėsti (menace), bijoti (be scared of).Examples ( 10) and ( 11) illustrate the most frequent metaphors of the threat scenario in British and Lithuanian discourses, respectively.
(10) Renewed fears of a global recession sent the world's stock markets into a state of capitulation yesterday.
(Economic recession became a bogeyman for people all over the world at the end of last year.) All in all, it can be concluded that the aggression and threat scenarios are typical of both Lithuanian and British discourses.However, the type-token ratio (TTR) is significantly different across the discourses.In British discourse, the number of the same metaphorically used words varies (or types) from 1 to 16 tokens and the TTR is 38.3 %, which shows that the conventionality of aggression-related metaphors is higher than in Lithuanian discourse where the number of the same metaphorically used words varies from 1 to 5 tokens and the TTR is 61.7 %.This shows that Lithuanian discourse displays greater metaphorical variety.
The scenario of affecting something or someone The scenario of the crisis as the agonist affecting something or someone is closely related to the previously discussed scenario of aggression and threat.Both show how the crisis exerts power, but the latter scenario does not retain an aggressive character.It only demonstrates the active role of the agonist.In Lithuanian discourse, this scenario makes up 19.9 % (27 tokens) and is the second most productive, whereas in British discourse it makes up 10 % (17 tokens) and is the third in rank order according to its productivity.
(Yes, the hard times impoverished artists but at the same time they made way to creative freedom because commercial advantages had completely blocked the artistic process.) As in Lithuanian discourse, verbs of similar meanings are used in British discourse to convey the crisis' active role.Also, such verbs as cause, spawn, impact, prevent, make far less easy, add to, increase, continue to jam up, lay bare, spiral out of control, push up, fi lter through, affect, has a defi nite affect, and curb split into two groups showing respectively negative (14 tokens; examples ( 14) and ( 15)) and positive (3 tokens; example ( 16)) consequences of the crisis.( 14) The fi rst fi nancial crisis of the global age has laid bare the weaknesses of unbridled free markets.
(15) The current economic crisis affects us all and we should all take responsibility not to undermine efforts that have been made to stabilize the economy.
(16) Economic downturn spawns new dynamism.It can be seen that in both discourses, when the collocational pattern CRISIS + VERB is used transitively, the affected antagonist is typically expressed through the following concepts: country, its people, government, economics, market, banks, inflation, workplaces, etc.
The scenario of natural force The linguistic realizations of the scenario of natural force vary in terms of their frequency in both discourses.It seems to be quite developed in Lithuanian discourse, making up 15.7 % (25 tokens) and underdeveloped in British discourse, making up only 3.7 % (6 tokens).In British discourse the crisis is comprehended as a storm, tornado or vortex.Consider the following example: (17) Not so long ago, Mr Brown and his successor as Chancellor, Alistair Darling, were arguing that Britain would weather the storms of the global economic fi nancial crisis better than other countries� Similarly, in Lithuanian discourse the crisis is also most frequently viewed as a storm.It gets such metaphorical nominal references as audra (storm), stiprus vėjas (strong wind), taifūnas (typhoon), cunamis (tsunami).In addition, the concept of storm is also created through verbs related to strong wind: siausti, įsisiautėti, šėlti, purtyti, praūžti, įsismarkauti.All these verbs are synonyms of the verb 'to blow strongly'.Consider the following examples: (18) Ypač nemažai abejonių kyla nežinant, ką ir kodėl tolimiausiuose pasaulio kampeliuose veikia Lietuvos kariai tuo metu, kai tėvynėje siaučia krizė.
(A lot of people were arguing that Lithuania ranks so low among other countries in the economic map that the crisis typhoon, devastating the world, will hardly hit Lithuania.)Interestingly, in addition to the storm metaphor, the crisis is conceptualized via two opposite metaphors: cold and fire.In the case of the cold metaphor, such linguistic metaphors as Lietuvą jau kausto krizė (Lithuania is being frozen by the crisis), krizės įšalas (the frozen solid ground of the crisis), jo (nuosmukio) šalčio pakąsti (bitten by the freeze of the downturn), krizė smarkiai aptirpdė atsargas (the crisis has melted the stock) were observed to have been used when speaking about the crisis.The fire metaphor manifested through words containing an element of igniting, fanning and extinguishing the fire: (pa / su)kurstyti krizę (ignite and fan the fire), įsiplieskusi krizė (spark the fire), gesinti krizės sukeltus gaisrus (put out the fire caused by the crisis).
The scenario of loss, suffering and resistance Within the pattern of the crisis as the agonist, the scenario of affecting something or somebody in one way or another can be analysed from a different angle, that is, from the point of view of the affected side.Thus, if the crisis exerts power, the other side comes under pressure, and the scenario of loss, suffering and resistance comes to the fore.This scenario has not been observed in Lithuanian discourse but is highly important in British discourse as it ranks second, making up 14.1 % (23 tokens), after the aggression scenario.In most cases, the metaphors of this scenario can be said to be on the verge of varying between the war and illness metaphors.Such mixing of metaphors manifests in the lexemes that are characteristic of both concepts, highlighting the aspects of suffering and loss.The following metaphors occurred in British discourse: losses from the crisis, suffer in a recession, endure the recession, surviving the crisis, vulnerable to a downturn, spread the pain of the downturn, limit the pain and duration of the downturn, victims of recession, severe / sharp economic recession, severity, a psychic shock, etc.Consider the following examples: (20) Over the next few months, virtually every big name in the world of banking had to admit the losses from the sub-prime crisis.
(21) Fear not!We will show you how to endure the forthcoming recession with a bit of grit, some nous and the wise advice of our post-war forebears.
(22) Even so, should the economic downturn prove severe, it is still likely to be a psychic shock for anyone under, say, the age of 40, for whom the austerity years are not even a folk memory.
The preceding examples demonstrate a range of difficulties caused by the warfare or illness-like nature of the crisis: Example (20) illustrates that the banking sector suffered a substantial loss due to the crisis; example (21) focuses on suffering and enduring the crisis; example (22) demonstrates the intensity of the crisis and its outcomes.The scenario of resistance seems to be directly related to the elements of suffering and enduring the crisis.For example: (23) We think that [our business model] will not just withstand a downturn but will continue to grow through it.
(24) […] for those who think that even the mighty Tesco must eventually succumb to the downturn, there are plenty of reasons for believing it may remain largely immune.
In examples ( 23) and ( 24), the element of being strong and not affected by the crisis is brought to the fore.Though the metaphor succumb to the downturn in example (24) demonstrates the opposite of resisting the crisis, the context proves it to be only a vague possibility but not reality.
To conclude, the metaphorical pattern of the crisis as the agonist has highly developed scenarios of aggression, affecting somebody or something, natural force, loss, suffering and resistance.Lithuanian and British discourses do not stand out as being particularly different in constructing these scenarios unless we speak about the natural force and loss, suffering, resistance discourses.Obviously, the natural force scenario is far more developed in Lithuanian discourse with the focus on storm, cold and fire� Lithuanian discourse however does not show any signs of the loss, suffering, resistance scenario, in contrast to British discourse where this scenario is likely to be especially important in terms of its frequency.

Crisis as the Antagonist
The metaphorical pattern of the crisis as the antagonist, where the crisis is seen as an entity affected by somebody or something, falls into three groups (see Table 1): causing crisis, fighting against crisis and overcoming crisis.The discussion of these parts will be presented in a chronological way by first elaborating the causes of the economic and financial crisis, second the activities taken against it and finally the way it was dealt with.Most of the metaphors follow the collocational pattern VERB + CRISIS.
The scenario of causing crisis This scenario is not likely to be well developed in Lithuanian and British discourses.It makes up only 3.2 % (5 tokens) in Lithuanian and 6.1 % (10 tokens) in British discourses.Moreover, only the verb sukelti (cause) is used in Lithuanian discourse.In British discourse, this part manifests in a variety of verbs showing different aspects of the crisis and its causes: cause, precipitate, induce, compound, and accelerate.Also, the concept of making it worse has an indirect relation to the causes of the crisis: exacerbate, make it worse, turn the crisis into a near disaster.The scenario of fighting against crisis In Lithuanian discourse this scenario is relatively unimportant, making up only 3.2 % (5 tokens), while in British it seems only slightly more important, making up 8 % (13 tokens).Consider the following examples: (28) Valdžios institucijų kompetencijos stoka -taip pat labai rimta problema, kuri trukdo efektyviai kovoti su krize.
(A lack of competence of governmental institutions is also a very serious problem, which impedes fighting against the crisis effectively.)(29) A. Kubiliaus Vyriausybė ir valdančioji koalicija jau metus galynėjasi su krize.
(Kubilius' Government and the leading coalition have been wrestling with the crisis for a year.)(30) Ministers said that Britain will battle through the fi nancial crisis as the country slipped into negative growth.
(31) IMF calls for action now to combat global recession.
Lithuanian examples ( 28) and ( 29) illustrate how the crisis is being fought against.Although the prepositional verb kovoti su (fight against) is used most often, some other metaphorical expressions are also used: the prepositional noun kova su (battle against) and the prepositional verb galynėtis su (wrestle with).The English examples show a greater variety of verbal and nominal metaphors: fi ght (against), battle (through) (verb and noun), attack, combat, beat, impose trade war.Examples (30) and (31) with the verbs battle and combat serve to illustrate this.
The scenario of overcoming crisis It is evident that this scenario prevails in the metaphorical pattern of the crisis as the antagonist.The positive outcome of the crisis comes to the fore, making up 31.4 % (50 tokens) and 17.8 (29 tokens) in Lithuanian and British discourses, respectively.The relatively high percentages show the importance of the scenario of overcoming crisis� Though this scenario is particularly salient in Lithuanian discourse, it does not show a diversity of metaphorical types.Only 5 types occur in the analysed discourse, manifesting in the verbs (su)valdyti (manage), įveikti (overcome), susidoroti (cope) and their derivative nouns (su)valdymas (managing) and įveikimas (overcoming).The TTR is 10 %.British discourse is likely to be more varied in terms of the verbs used to describe how the crisis is being tackled: handle, tackle, prevent, head off, avert, reverse, stop, stave off, deal with, curtail, curb.The TTR is 34.4 %.These findings prove that British discourse is more diverse in ways of expressing how to overcome the crisis.
Both discourses are likely to be different not only in TTR but also because of the nature of the verbs used.The Lithuanian and English verbs related to overcoming the crisis show a different degree of completeness when dealing with the crisis.For example, the Lithuanian verb valdyti (manage) (7 tokens) and the deverbal noun valdymas (managing) (4 tokens) convey the process of dealing with the crisis.Often these words go with the prefix -su, which shows that the action is completed.Moreover, the verbs įveikti (overcome) (14 tokens) and susidoroti (cope) (1 token) and the deverbal noun įveikimas (overcoming) (24 tokens) show the completed nature of the situation and the final destruction of the entity.Also, the warfare connotation of the lexemes strengthens the effect of getting done with the crisis.In this case, it means that the crisis was, is, or will be no longer existent.Consider the following examples: (32) Apskritai, vien Vyriausybės pastangų siekiant suvaldyti šią krizę nepakaks.
(Lithuanian citizens expect that the new president will be the leader in dealing with the crisis and this is reflected in the polls of one of the candidates.) In British discourse, the verbs expressing the overcoming of the crisis are of a somewhat different character.In this scenario, the crisis is seen in most cases as an entity that has to be prevented but not destroyed (completeness of the action) as in the Lithuanian discourse.Such verbs as prevent, avert, stop, head off, stave off, curtail, curb, and reverse share the sense of preventing, controlling, limiting (OALD, 2015), which does not entail complete overcoming of the crisis.Nevertheless, there are 'stronger' verbs that share the sense of 'dealing with' (OALD, 2015), namely the following: handle, tackle, deal with.Example (34) illustrates that the crisis has to be prevented, whereas example (35) demonstrates a more uncompromising attitude towards the crisis.
(34) Mr Osborne branded the Prime Minister "irresponsible" for suggesting the Government can "borrow without limit" to stave off recession.
(35) Mr Brown may have handled the fi nancial crisis competently so far -and responded to adversity by recognizing the team charged with leading Britain out of it -but he has also taken full political advantage of the opportunity.
Summing up, the metaphorical pattern of the crisis as the antagonist has a chronologically developed scenario presenting the causes of the crisis, fighting against it and overcoming it.The ratio of metaphorical tokens in the three scenarios remains similar in Lithuanian and British discourses.This means that in both discourses the focus is on overcoming the crisis, and far less attention is directed to its causes and fighting against it.Therefore, it can be seen that paramount importance is given to result-oriented actions, in other words dealing with the crisis.

Rhetorical Implications and Concluding Reflections
As the third stage of CMA implies the rhetorical power of metaphors, it becomes necessary to explicate why metaphors are used and how they "provide coherent representations of a story that a speaker is actively telling" (Charteris-Black, 2014, 196).In this paper, the speaker is understood as the media attempting to provide a particular view of the crisis and influence the reader to see it in one or another way.Also, as was mentioned previously, Talmy's Force-Dynamic schema (2000), underlying the force metaphor, operates in the process of constructing arguments in discourses.Thus, the rhetorical impact of metaphors can be seen by blending CMA and the Force-Dynamics System.
The present findings demonstrate that the metaphorical pattern of the crisis as the agonist is much more prominent in terms of frequency than the metaphorical pattern of the crisis as the antagonist.The former pattern manifests in 99 tokens (62.2 %) in Lithuanian and 111 tokens (68.1 %) in British discourses, whereas the latter pattern manifests respectively in 60 (37.8 %) and 52 tokens (31.9 %) in both discourses.Interestingly, both countries exhibit similar results.On the one hand, the ratio between the agonist and the antagonist shows that the crisis is conceptualized as an entity that is extremely strong and has the force to negatively affect a country's economic situation and various aspects of human life in particular.It assumes a threatening and aggressive character in both discourses.In the case of the natural force metaphor, which is more typical of Lithuanian discourse, the aspect of uncontrollability comes into focus.There is an obvious parallel between the crisis and the inability to control storms, water, cold, and fire.On the other hand, this ratio illustrates what the affected side experiences: feelings of fear, helplessness and the inability to resist the power of the crisis.In contrast to Lithuanian, British discourse highlights the outcomes of the crisis -losses, sufferings -and also points to a feeling of insecurity.
However, it is also true that the importance of the scenario of overcoming crisis within the metaphorical pattern crisis as the antagonist cannot be downplayed.50 metaphorical tokens out of the total 159 tokens in Lithuanian discourse, making up almost 1/3, show a strong desire and determination to deal with the crisis.In comparison, British discourse with 32 metaphorical tokens out of the total 163, making up only 1/5, shows that overcoming the crisis has more or less equal importance to other aspects of the crisis.Moreover, in contrast to Lithuanian discourse, it focuses on the process of preventing the crisis more than on the result, that is on dealing with the crisis.
From all that has been said, it can be concluded that the rhetorical impact of the force metaphor is achieved through telling the target audience a coherent story of the crisis: the crisis is a dangerous, threatening and aggressive entity, which affects the country and its people; it is apparently uncontrollable and losses and suffering are inevitable; we look into the causes of the crisis, fight against it and finally overcome / Svetimosios kalbos / 2017, t. 19, Nr. 3

Table 1 .
FORCE metaphor scenarios in Lithuanian and British discourses More seriously, it also represents a return to the vicious cycles of debt and overconsumption that caused the crisis in the fi rst place.(27)The latest downturn has been partly precipitated by southern Europe.