Metaphor in Web-based Promotional Tourism Discourse: A Quantitative Exploration
Keywords:
metaphor, quantitative research, info-promotion, tourism discourse, tourist destinationsAbstract
DOI: 10.55804/jtsu2346-8149.2025.09.02
The paper aims at systematically examining the frequency and distribution of metaphor-related words in the web-based promotional tourism discourse, which can be regarded as an online hybrid info-promotional/ persuasive register characterised by "description-with-the-aim-to-sell" (Biber and Egbert, 2018). The study employs frequency analysis and comparative statistical research to analyse texts from the official destination websites of an emerging tourist destination such as Georgia, and established touristic countries such as the UK, and the USA. This approach enables a rigorous evaluation of the role of metaphors in promotional tourism discourse and provides statistically grounded insights into how figurative language functions to construct brand identity, shape perceptions, and enhance visitor engagement. The choice of the destinations was motivated by the assumption that developing destinations rely more heavily on metaphors in their promotional discourse compared to the well-established tourism markets (Dann 1996; George 2010; Jaworska, 2017).
The results reveal that the metaphor density in web-based promotional tourism discourse is lower than in general discourse, at approximately 10%, which situates the info-promotional register between fiction and face-toface conversation (Steen et al., 2010). This frequency reflects the dual informational and persuasive functions of this register and promotional discourse of tourism, where clarity and readability must be balanced with emotive and imaginative engagement.
The findings also demonstrate strategic rather than excessive use of metaphors: contrary to the commonly held idea that developing destinations employ more metaphors for their promotion, Georgia exhibited the lowest metaphor frequency, challenging the assumption that developing destinations strategically rely on metaphors to attract tourists. This suggests that there might be factors beyond a developmental status of a destination, such as target audiences, cultural considerations, etc, which might play a significant role in shaping metaphor use.
The overall distributional analysis of metaphors across word classes demonstrates a clear preference for verbs and prepositions, emphasising dynamic, relational, and persuasive functions rather than purely informational ones. Cross-destination comparison indicates shared tendencies alongside regional variations: the UK corpus demonstrates a strong preference for metaphorical adjectives, adverbs, and prepositions, whereas Georgia exhibits a more literal style with lower metaphor density, reflecting distinct promotional strategies and stylistic conventions.
Overall, this study provides important insights into how tourism marketers employ metaphor to balance informational clarity with persuasive impact, strategically shaping promotional narratives and destination brand images. While the research is limited by its focus on frequency and distribution, it highlights a significant role of metaphor in online tourism promotion and sets the stage for future research into metaphor types, cultural resonance, and the interaction of medium, genre, and marketing strategy in shaping persuasive tourism discourse.
License Notice: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
References
Biber, D., and Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., and Egbert, J. (2018). Register variation online. Cambridge University Press.
Burgers, C. F., Konijn, E. A., Steen, G. J., and Iepsma, M. A. R. (2015). Making ads less complex, yet more creative and
persuasive: The effects of conventional metaphors and irony in print advertising. International Journal of Advertising,
(3), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2014.996200
Cohen, E. (2000). Strangeness. In J. Jafari (Ed.), Encyclopaedia of tourism (pp. 558–559). Routledge.
Dann, G. M. S. (1996). The language of tourism: A sociolinguistic perspective. CABI International.
Dann, G. M. S. (2002). The tourist as a metaphor of the social world. In G. M. S. Dann (Ed.), The tourist as a metaphor of the
social world (pp. 1–17). CABI Publishing.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. John Benjamins.
Deignan, A., Littlemore, J., and Semino, E. (2013). Figurative language, genre, and register. Cambridge University Press.
Djafarova, E., and Andersen, C. H. (2008). The contribution of figurative devices to representation of tourism images. Journal
of Vacation Marketing, 14(3), 291–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356766708090589
Fernández-Cavia, J., Vinyals-Mirabent, S., Fernández-Planells, A., Weber, W., and Pedraza-Jiménez, R. (2020). Tourist
information sources at different stages of the travel experience. El Profesional de la Información, 29(2), e290219.
https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.mar.19
Gotti, M. (2007). The language of tourism as specialized discourse. In O. Palusci and S. Francesconi (Eds.), Translating
tourism: Linguistic/cultural representations (pp. 15–34). Editrice Università degli Studi di Trento.
Hidalgo-Downing, L., and Kraljevic-Mujic, B. (2017). Metaphor and persuasion in commercial advertising. In E. Semino and
Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language (pp. 323–337). Routledge.
Iritspukhova, N. (submitted). Exploration of deliberate metaphors in promotional tourism discourse.
Iritspukhova, N. (2023). Metaphor and English promotional tourism discourse: Systematic-narrative hybrid literature review
and future research areas. Anglica: An International Journal of English Studies, 32(2), 93–113.
https://doi.org/10.7311/0860-5734.32.2.05
Jaworska, S. (2017). Metaphors we travel by: A corpus-assisted study of metaphors in promotional tourism discourse.
Metaphor and Symbol, 32(3), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2017.1338018
Koller, V., Hardie, A., Rayson, P., and Semino, E. (2008). Using a semantic annotation tool for the analysis of metaphor in
discourse. Metaphorik.de, 15(1), 141–160.
Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge University Press.
Maci, S. (2007). Virtual touring: The web-language of tourism. Linguistics and Philology, 25, 41–65.
Mocini, R. (2005/2009). The verbal discourse of tourist brochures. Annals, 5, 153–164.
Narváez, I., and Valverde Zambrana, J. M. (2014). How to translate culture-bound references: A case study of Turespaña’s
tourist promotion campaign. JoSTrans: The Journal of Specialised Translation, 21, 71–111.
Ortony, A. (1975). Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory, 25(1), 45–53.
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol,
(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752
Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in discourse. Cambridge University Press.
Semino, E., and Demjén, Z. (Eds.). (2017). The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language. Routledge.
Sopory, P., and Dillard, J. P. (2002). The persuasive effects of metaphor: A meta-analysis. Human Communication Research,
(3), 382–419. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2002.tb00813.x
Steen, G. J. (2007). Finding metaphor in grammar and usage: A methodological analysis of theory and research. John
Benjamins.
Steen, G. J. (2017). Deliberate metaphor theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics,
(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2017-0001
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., and Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic
metaphor identification: From MIP to MIPVU. John Benjamins.
Sulaiman, Z. M., and Wilson, R. (2019). Translation and tourism: Strategies for effective cross-cultural promotion. Springer.
Thibodeau, P., and Flusberg, S. (2022). Metaphor and elaboration in context. In H. Colston, T. Matlock, and G. J. Steen
(Eds.), Dynamism in metaphor and beyond (pp. 223–240). John Benjamins.
Urry, J., and Larsen, J. (2011). The tourist gaze 3.0. Sage.
Van Stee, S. K. (2018). Meta-analysis of the persuasive effects of metaphorical vs. literal messages. Communication Studies,
(5), 545–566.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Online Journal of Humanities ETAGTSU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
