DOI: 10.18413/2313-8912-2016-2-1-23-30



This article presents the results of the author's study of conceptual metaphor in political dystopia “Animal Farm” by George Orwell, an English Socialist writer. The aim of the work was to confirm the hypothesis that the work represents a conceptual metaphorical model “Totalitarian state is Animal Farm” in both structural and meaningful ways. In modern cognitive linguistics, metaphor is regarded as one of the basic mechanisms of cognitive knowledge, structuring and explanation of the world. Since metaphorization has associative connections within the human experience, it creates metaphors which borrow lexical means and meanings from the fields, which are based on the conceptualization of the people themselves and the world in the process of cognitive activity (the donor sphere). The metaphorical process requires a second element − the target sphere (a new conceptual domain). In describing the metaphorical model, we describe the model scenarios related to the model frames and components of each sample frame slots (as described by A.P. Chudinov). The dictatorship in the USSR during the reign of I.V. Stalin is transferred to the structural organization of the farmyard and the qualities of real people − on animals. Orwell gave each animal (or every kind of it) a certain set of properties, characteristics and actions that we have tried to identify and relate to the corresponding prototype. The donor sphere of the conceptual metaphor in this work is the animal world (naturemorfic and zoomorphic metaphors). The target sphere is the Soviet state with the dictatorship of the leader. The working class and the peasantry are portrayed as a spineless flock meekly obeying the will of the leader, who, with the help of his assistants, operates the “flock”. The working hypothesis was confirmed. The research results can be used both in the cognitive theory of metaphor, as well as in such areas as literature, discourse analysis, political linguistics, and others.

This article presents the results of the author's study of political conceptual metaphor in the famous work “Animal Farm” of the English Socialist writer George Orwell.

According to E.S. Kubryakova, cognitive linguistics is the science that deals with cognition in its linguistic reflection [3]. Cognition, in turn, is a cognitive process in itself, and the result of this process is knowledge. Cognition is perception of the world, and the observation and categorization, and thought, and speech, and imagination, and many other psychological processes. One of the most important ideas of cognitive linguistics is that concept defines the semantics of language means. Among the lexical resources that represent concepts in a language, we have identified a metaphor.

In the representation of modern cognitive linguistics, metaphor is one of the basic mental operations, the process of knowledge, structuring and explaining the world around us. Everyday life, language, thinking and action - all this is metaphorical in nature. D. Lakoff and M. Johnson concluded that «the essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of entity in terms of the spirit of another kind». [5] N.D. Arutyunova thinks that “metaphor has the ability to play a huge role in both the practical and theoretical thinking - the ability to capture and create similarities between very different classes of objects and individuals”. [1] In other words, a person is aware of the unknown through the known, and of abstract – through particular things, and thus knowledge moves from one area to another.

Cognitive activity of humans is accompanied by the process of conceptualization, under which modern linguistics means “certain” cross-cutting for different forms of knowledge structuration process and the emergence of various structures of knowledge representating particular minimal conceptual units” [3: 93]. The central object of study in cognitive linguistics is the concept. Concepts are the components of the human consciousness and knowledge of the world. The most important concepts are encoded in the language. The term comes from the concept of philosophy and logic, but in recent years this term has been going through a period of rethinking. V.A. Maslova, summarizing the understanding of the concept of Heidegger, D.S. Likhachev, V.N. Telia and other scientists, gives the following definition: a concept - a “semantic formation marked by linguocultural characteristics and in some way characterizing certain ethnic people ... At the same time - this is a quantum of knowledge that reflects the content of the whole human activity. The concept does not directly arise from the meaning of the word, and is the result of the dictionary definition combined with personal and national experience of people. It is surrounded by an emotional, expressive, evaluative halo” [6: 36].

“Conceptual metaphor - one of the most important cognitive mechanisms based on establishing links between concepts (conceptual framework), belonging to different fields of knowledge (domain)” [14].

The study of conceptual metaphor in foreign linguistics started from J. Lakoff and M. Johnson. P. Chilton, M. Turner, J. Fauconnier, D. Grady, B. Shpelman [5, 10, 13] and others continued this work. The most famous Russian researchers of conceptual metaphor are A.N. Baranov, E.V. Budajev, Y.N. Karaulov, A.P. Chudinov [2, 8].

In our work conceptual metaphor is analyzed on the material of literary discourse, which intersects with the political one in the genre of dystopia. Political discourse is directly related to value orientations in a society. Value categories are often viewed as semantic and cognitive constructs. Political discourse includes newspaper and journalistic texts, oratorical speeches, dealing with policies, official texts of the political subject (resolutions, decrees), political science articles, and others. Literary-political discourse is opposed to the direct political agitation and propaganda in the political discourse “through aesthetic impact forms political consciousness, political preferences and dispositions” [9: 31].

There are various methods of conceptual metaphors research. In this article we use the approach of A.P. Chudinov, as a political metaphor is also seen in the cognitive aspect.

Since metaphorization is based on associative connections within the human experience, the created metaphors borrow lexical means and meanings in the fields, in which a person conceptualizes him/herself the world in the process of a cognitive activity. A.P. Chudinov calls them donor spheres (source spheres, the initial conceptual domain) and divides into four groups: an anthropomorphic metaphor (concepts related to the conceptual areas of “Anatomy and Physiology”, “disease “,» Family «), naturemorfic («Animal world» «The world of plants»), sociomorfic («Crime», «War», «Theatre», «Game and Sport”), Artifact ( «House (building)» and «Mechanism»). [8] Metaphoric process requires a second element -  the target sphere (a new conceptual domain). While the source sphere is specific, the target sphere is abstract and is understood within the source sphere. For example, the dispute in the metaphorical concept is a war, the dispute is the target sphere, while war is the source sphere interacting in such a way, that these elements give us an idea of a dispute as a war.

In addition to the original and new conceptual areas, the following characteristics of a metaphorical model are to be described:

1) typical for this model scenarios that reflect the most typical for the source sphere sequence of situations (for example, the scenario of the «war» implies its preparation, announcement, conduct of hostilities, possibility of injury and death battles participants, victory or defeat, and the like);

2) related to the model frames (as defined  by V.Z. Demyankov, a frame - «a unit of knowledge organized around some concepts, but, unlike the associations containing the data on the material, typical and possible for this concept ... frame organize our understanding of the world as a whole ... frame is a data structure for representing a stereotyped situation «[4: 188], that is, the above-mentioned components of the» war «scenario, each of which is understood to be a fragment of a naive language picture of the world. These fragments are structured corresponding to the conceptual area;

3) components of each frame sample slots, that is, elements of which include some portion of the frame, some aspect of its specificity. For example, «Armament» frame includes such slots as «firearms and cold steel», «military equipment», «ammunition», and so on;

4) component that connects the primary and secondary values covered by the model units, that is, to find out what gives rise to the metaphorical use of relevant concepts, why the conceptual structure of the source sphere appears appropriate to refer to elements of a completely different sphere.

It is proposed to determine its efficiency of a metaphorical model (the ability to deploy and sample deployment direction) and frequency, as well as to identify pragmatic potential, that is, the typical features of the impact on the recipient.

Let us turn to the results of our research of the satirical dystopia «Animal Farm» by George Orwell, which was based on real historical events in Russia from 1917 to the early 1940s. It was written in February 1944.

Some literary critics associated the emergence of «Animal Farm,» with Orwellian scene from his memoirs which tormented him for a long time: One day in the village, he saw a boy about ten years old, who was driving a healthy, strong horse with thin twig. And then he suddenly got the idea that people would not be able to rule over the animals, if they became aware of their strength. In addition, he thought that humans exploit animals almost exactly in the same way as the rich - the proletariat.

G. Orwell`s «Animal Farm», which consists of ten chapters, shows a gradual transition from the construction of a utopia and equality ideas to dictatorship and totalitarianism. Animals, who expelled their master from the barnyard, hoping to get the unlimited freedom and good food, fell victim to the dictatorship of Napoleon the pig.

«Animal Farm» combines several genres - classical dystopia (a genre in literature describing the state in which negative trends eventually prevailed), satire (poetic humiliating rebuke phenomena using different comic stylistic means: hyperbole, irony, sarcasm, grotesque, allegories, parodies, and others.) and allegory (description of abstract concepts through the close associative specific images, creatures, and items). Some researchers call «Animal Farm» a story-parable and fairy tale. It is known that the very G. Orwell called his work a political fairy tale. «Animal Farm: a fairy story» - its original name. On March 19, 1944 Orwell said to Victor Gollancz, the owner of his copyright, «I finished a small story in 30 thousand words with political content. But I'm sure you will not publish it. It is completely unacceptable for you from a political point of view, it is anti-Stalinist».

On our investigation “Animal Farm” we have found a compositional metaphorical conceptual model of this work «Totalitarian state is Animal farm». The dictatorship in the USSR during the reign of I.V. Stalin is transferred to the structural organization of Animal Farm and the qualities of real people - on animals. The donor sphere of conceptual metaphor in this work is the animal world (naturemorfic metaphor). The target sphere is the Soviet state with the dictatorship of the leader. The working class and the peasantry are portrayed spineless flock meekly obeying the will of the leader, who, with the help of his assistants, operates the «flock».

Let us consider the frames and slots of zoomorphic conceptual metaphor in this work.

1. Frame «Composition of the animal kingdom»

Slot 1.1. Animals (mammals)

a) pig - leaders:

old boar Old Major - Lenin or Marx,

Napoleon - Joseph Stalin

Squealer - Vyacheslav Molotov,

Snowball - Leon Trotsky.

b) a workaholic-horse named Boxer - the working class,

c) horse Clover - part of the working class, loyal to the Soviet government,

d) horse Molly - the bourgeoisie,

d) she-goat Muriel - intelligentsia,

e) the dogs of Napoleon - Soviet power structures,

f) sheep - illiterate population of the USSR, coming in the wake of power,

h) the old donkey Benjamin - dissident stratum of society,

i) rats - supporters of Leon Trotsky

k) a cat - skeptics.

Orwell gave a certain set of qualities and characteristics to each animal (or every kind), basing on which the reader who knows the history of the Soviet Union well, can determine the prototype(s).

a) Dystopia starts with the agitation of the pig named Old Major, who summarizes in it the main points and expresses and slogans of the revolution, gives the enemies and friends: «Now, comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it:  our lives are miserable, laborious, and short. ….. No animal in England knows the meaning  of happiness or leisure after he is a year old. No animal in England is  free. The life of an animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth.

Remove Man from the scene, and the root cause of hunger and 
overwork is abolished for ever.  Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend».

In Old Major the image of Karl Marx is guessed - a man whose ideas became the basis of the communist and socialist movements and ideologies (besides, Karl Marx died in March in a dream). Partially Lenin's image is revealed in the image of Old Major (Chapter 5). For example, in the story the body of placing Lenin into Mausoleum is played up - in this case, it is the skull of Old Major, who was hoisted by the animals on the platform and every morning they gave him honor and sang a hymn composed by old Major. (“The skull of old Major, now clean of flesh, had been disinterred from the orchard and set up on a stump at the foot of the flagstaff, beside the gun. After the hoisting of the flag, the animals were required to file past the skull in a reverent manner before entering the barn”). Old Major's ideas were reworked by pigs in a coherent system of views, called animalism. It is obvious that animalism is a metaphorical name of socialism. The author describes all the stages of the revolution from the dissatisfaction of life conditions in Animal farm, preparation and holding of meetings to create a new state: the usurpation of power by Napoleon, duping the crowd by promoting the government views, the creation of a new ideology, opposite of the original one, the appearance of the personality cult of the Leader, and at the end, even greater exploitation of the working people.

Napoleon is a fierce wild boar, who usurped the power and took the rule of the farm after the uprising - a metaphorical image of Stalin. “Napoleon was a large, rather fierce-looking Berkshire boar, the only Berkshire on the farm, not much of a talker, but with a reputation for getting his own way”. In the struggle for power with Snowball, Napoleon, using fierce dogs, expels him from Animal Farm and begins to use repression to gain personal power and suppress dissent. After the seizure of power Napoleon's personality is being exalted, that reminds of the cult of Stalin`s personality.

The dystopia also presents two other pigs-leaders: Snowball, and Squealer. In the description of Snowball Leon Trotsky is recognizable: the liveliness of nature, rapid speech, creativity, but at the same time he is less serious than Napoleon. («Snowball was a more vivacious pig than Napoleon, quicker in speech and more inventive, but was not considered to have the same depth of character»). Snow is the author of the idea of building a windmill on the farm, which will facilitate the hard work of animals. (This project, according to some researchers, is an analogue of industrialization in the Soviet Union in the 20s of the 20th century). Napoleon chases Snowball from the farm; that resembles the situation when in 1929 Stalin expelled Trotsky from the Soviet Union and usurped power.

The third pig-leader - Squealer, a fat pig, with round cheeks, twinkling eyes and quick movements and high-pitched voice, very persuasive and a brilliant orator - is a metaphor of the V.M. Molotov: «The best known among them was a small fat pig named Squealer, with very round cheeks, twinkling eyes, nimble movements, and a shrill voice. He was a brilliant talker, and when he was arguing some difficult point he had a way of skipping from side to side and whisking his tail which was somehow very persuasive». Squealer is responsible for propaganda and agitation on the farm. He constantly praises of Napoleon and his «wise» actions (as well as Molotov, who was the right hand of Stalin, completely fulfilled all their lives to do his will). «Bravery is not enough», said Squealer. «Loyalty and obedience are more important. Discipline, comrades, iron discipline! That is the watchword for today.

We pigs are brainworkers. The whole management and organisation of this farm depend on us. Day and night we are watching over your welfare. It is for YOUR sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples».

b) a workaholic-horse named Boxer is the working class, the proletariat. It is characterized by the most unlimited devotion to the authorities. Under the new system of government it was Boxer who worked for three horses, or even for all animals combined. «Boxer was the admiration of everybody. He had been a hard worker even in Jones's time, but now he seemed more like three horses than one ... His answer to every problem, every setback, was «I will work harder»! « Boxer`s credo in all situations of life was «I will work even more!» and «Napoleon is always right»! His naivety and gullibility prevented him from realizing that he was mercilessly exploited. At the end of the story Boxer undermines his health, and Napoleon, promising to cure him in the hospital, sells his faithful follower to the slaughterhouse and on the money got bought himself a whiskey.

c) The horse Clover is an allusion to the part of the workers, which has slower than the other animals on the farm forgotten the true goals of the revolution and was more attentive to the current events, for example, always checked the Seven Commandments, written on the wall, with what was happening at the moment. G. Orwell shows that these hard workers do not revolt, in spite of the difficult conditions and severe work, willing to remain loyal to the government and carry out the orders of Napoleon. «There was no thought of rebellion or disobedience in her mind. She knew that, even as things were, they were far better off than they had been in the days of Jones, and that before all else it was needful to prevent the return of the human beings. Whatever happened she would remain faithful, work hard, carry out the orders that were given to her, and accept the leadership of Napoleon «.

Clover is shown compassionate and caring with respect to Boxer. She always warned him not to overstrain at work. When he was injured in the battle, Clover bandaged his wounds. In addition, after the terrible Napoleon`s massacre of some rebels, all the other animals “huddled about Clover”.

d) G. Orwell depicts the image of the bourgeoisie in the face of idle white horse, Molly, who is interested in whether the sugar and ribbons will be after the uprising (“The very first question she asked Snowball was:.» Will there still be sugar after the Rebellion? “, “And shall I still be allowed to wear ribbons in my mane?” asked Mollie.»). Of course, the bourgeoisie were concerned with personal well-being, as it was the ruling class of capitalist society before the revolution, which had the property and existed due to the income from this property.

The bourgeoisie is portrayed quite stupid and cowardly. During the fight with people Molly is found hiding in her stall with her head buried among the hay in the manger. Soon after the rebellion Molly runs away to a neighboring farm, which is an obvious allegory of the bourgeois class emigration of people from the Soviet Union.

d) the goat Muriel - communicates with Clover and Benjamin. It seems that it is the intelligentsia, as she always reads commands for Clover. In addition, the author has not found it necessary to add something else to her image.

e) Napoleon personally trained an army of faithful dogs - they were great size and had a fierce look. (“They were the puppies whom Napoleon had taken away from their mothers and reared privately. Though not yet full-grown, they were huge dogs, and as fierce-looking as wolves”). Napoleon`s dogs - the Soviet power structure.

g) Sheep symbolize the illiterate population of the farm (the USSR), coming in the wake of power. When it was necessary to support Napoleon, they bleated in unison: «Four legs good, two legs bad».

h) The dissident stratum of society is an old donkey Benjamin - often silent, but occasionally opens the eyes of animals on the government's actions (for example, when the slaughterer`s van takes the patient Boxer away beyond the farm). It is this character better than anyone else understood what was going on Animal Farm: «Benjamin was the only animal who did not side with either faction. He refused to believe either that food would become more plentiful or that the windmill would save work. Windmill or no windmill, he said, life would go on as it had always gone on - that is, badly». Perhaps, G. Orwell applies himself to precisely this type of people.

s) Rats - supporters of Trotsky, who were declared traitors after the Snowball. (“The rats, which had been troublesome that winter, were also said to be in league with Snowball”).

a) A cat, apparently, is a metaphorical image of people skeptical towards the revolution not willing to work for the newly-formed republic. «And the behaviour of the cat was somewhat peculiar. It was soon noticed that when there was work to be done the cat could never be found. She would vanish for hours on end, and then reappear at meal-times, or in the evening after work was over, as though nothing had happened. But she always made such excellent excuses, and purred so affectionately, that it was impossible not to believe in her good intentions «.

The dystopia also referred to other types of animals, such as cows, bulls, and other smaller characters.

1.2. Birds

On the farm live pigeons, ducks, geese and chicken, not particularly distinguished by mind and the ability to critically view the events on the farm.

a) The chickens are a symbolic image of the Soviet peasantry. The case of the chickens` uprising is described in the work, who did not want to give their eggs for sale when they needed to sit them. This case is an allegory of the peasant uprising in the Soviet Union, which was brutally suppressed.

b) A favorite of Mr. Jones – a talker manual raven Moses preaching about Sugarcandy Mountain - a kind of Paradise, where animals go after the death. Raven Moses symbolizes the clergy. According to other sources, the raven is a metaphorical image of religion, the Russian Orthodox Church. Pigs are protesting against religious beliefs, and Moses leaves the farm.

With this character the reader meets twice before the uprising of the animals (the time of the Russian Empire and the flourishing of Orthodoxy), and after the Battle of the Windmill, when Moses returns to Animal Farm (partial resurgence of Orthodoxy after the Great Patriotic War).

c) Doves - ambassadors serving the international activities of the USSR in the dissemination of the revolution and socialist ideas. «Every day Snowball and Napoleon sent out flights of pigeons whose instructions were to mingle with the animals on neighbouring farms, tell them the story of the Rebellion, and teach them the tune of 'Beasts of England «.

2. Animal Association and Hierarchical Relationships in Them

2.1. Animals Unoins

Animals in this novel are united in one big group - Animal Farm. They live by their own rules, not like the rest of the farm, and, in spite of any changes, even the deterioration of living conditions, they are proud that they are the inhabitants of the barnyard. Animal Farm is a basic metaphoric concept in the work, which immediately sets the negative sense vector to the reader on a subconscious level, and adjusts them to the desired perception of the author of the work.

US Secretary of State John Dulles, referring to the «Animal Farm», wrote: “Soviet Communism believes that human beings are nothing more than somewhat superior animals…and that the best kind of a world is that world which is organized as a well-managed farm organized, where certain animals are taken out to pasture and they are fed and brought back and milked, and they are given a barn as shelter over their heads” [12]. Prior to the publication of «Animal Farm,» Collonel-General of Nazi Germany Heinrich Reinhardt in 1944 compared the Bolsheviks with wild beasts: «Bolsheviks had ravaged like wild beasts» [11]. In the capitalist countries of the world at that time, it was thought that the political system of the USSR, the Bolsheviks and their actions were wrong and inhuman.

2.2. Hierarchical Relationships in the Animal World

As a rule, the herds and flocks have a leader. These images are often used metaphorically in relation to the human collective leaders. They were presented in paragraph 1.1. After the revolution, having become independent from the human master, the main slogan of the Animal farm became the commandment «All animals are equal», but over time the pigs leaders changed it to «All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others». So they put themselves above other animals, usurped power, thus assigning all the possible rights and privileges associated with a privileged position to themselves.

3. Animal Actions

3.1. Aggressive Actions

Aggressive actions in the dystopia appear in the cases describing the battles of livestock to people (Battle of the Cowshed and the Battle of the Windmill) and abuse of farm animals by Napoleon. This slot allows the author to express special aggressiveness and ruthlessness of action of Napoleon and his dog leash in relation to the traitors and «enemies of the people»: «Napoleon stood sternly surveying his audience; then he uttered a high-pitched whimper . Immediately the dogs bounded forward, seized four of the pigs by the ear and dragged them, squealing with pain and terror. The dogs promptly tore their throats out». Chickens who raised a rebellion on the farm, were slaughtered.

Noteworthy is the episode where animals-»pests» are sentenced to death for petty «crimes» similar to those that appeared in the process of Soviet 30-s: so, geese admitted that they hid grain and ate it at night and sheep - that polluted drinking water wells.

3.2. Non-aggressive Interaction

For conceptual metaphor identified in the text only those types of interactions are significant that characterize the relationship between the warring parties and the relationship among the animals of the farm. So, having sent Boxer for a slaughter and carefully concealing this fact, Napoleon made a pompous speech in honor of the Boxer horse («Napoleon himself appeared at the meeting on the following Sunday morning and pronounced a short oration in Boxer's honour»), introduced him as an example for the other animals, how to work hard, not sparing himself, and throughout the trust of the leader, as did the deceased. Napoleon promised to erect a monument and put  a good wreath on the grave, as well as arrange a grand funeral in honor of the boxer. Thus, G. Orwell was able to briefly and succinctly describe the Napoleon's interaction with people as stiff-necked, lying, hypocritical, sometimes puffy parading.

G.Orwell focuses on the change in Napoleon's aggressive attitude to the outside world (that is, to other countries): «Napoleon announced that he had sold the pile of timber to Frederick».

In the last chapter the writer depicts a scene of a people`s deputation visit to Animal Farm (that, in principle, was impossible, according to the principles enshrined in animalism). Human society has approved modern methods of farming, discipline and order on the farm. Moreover, from now on through the mouth of Mr. Pilkington all conflicts of interest were proclaimed to have been left in the past: «Not only the most up-to-date methods, but a discipline and an orderliness which should be an example to all farmers everywhere ... He would end his remarks .. by emphasising once again the friendly feelings that subsisted, and ought to subsist, between Animal Farm and its neighbours. Between pigs and human beings there was not, and there need not be, any clash of interests whatever «.

3.3. The Ways of Animal Life

This slot shows a metaphorical interpretation of actions that are typical of certain prototypes. The writer draws the reader's attention to the hard work on the farm (in the USSR): «Boxer and Clover would harness themselves to the cutter or the horse-rake ...». «And every animal down to the humblest worked at turning the hay and gathering it». The dissident layer works in a different way as the well-known stubborn animal (donkey Benjamin): «He did his work in the same slow obstinate way as he had done it in Jones's time, never shirking and never volunteering for extra work either».

Milk and apples on the farm ate only the pig (an indication of the selfishness and privilege of authoriries). Snowball convinces the animals that it is solely for their benefit: «It is for YOUR sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples».

Venality of bourgeoisie is expressed through human actions and feeding of Molly: «A fat red-faced man in check breeches and gaiters, who looked like a publican, was stroking her nose and feeding her with sugar».

4. Treatment of Animals

4.1. Animals as an Object of Exploitation and Aggression

In this slot political actors, metaphorically designated as owners or pigs, used others for profit or other selfish needs. For example, pig-leaders in the «Animal Farm» forced the exhausted animals to build and then double rebuild devastated after the fightings mill in extremely difficult conditions ( «Napoleon announced that the windmill was to be built after all. He did not give any reason for having changed his mind, but merely warned the animals that this extra task would mean very hard work, it might even be necessary to reduce their rations «).

After the chickens have refused to hand over the eggs («Squealer announced that the hens must surrender their eggs»), chickens` uprising was surpressed. Napoleon ordered not to feed the chickens at all threatening them with death: «He ordered the hens' rations to be stopped, and decreed that any animal giving so much as a grain of corn to a hen should be punished by death».

4.2. Animals as an Object of Care

These metaphors illustrate how the owners of the situation are sometimes forced to feed, to lure, to walk someone to provide a good service facility and luxurious personal habitation. For example, in the beginning of the narrative the owner of the farm, Mr. Jones, is a subject that takes care of the animals: «Mr. Jones feeds us. If he were gone, we should starve to death «. «For whole days at a time he would lounge in his Windsor chair in the kitchen, reading the newspapers, drinking, and occasionally feeding Moses on crusts of bread soaked in beer».

Except zoomorphic conceptual metaphor in this dystopia we distinguished anthropomorphic, artifact and military metaphors. Here we are briefly listing the other frames and slots, which are part of the metaphorical model of «totalitarian state is Animal farm.»

2, 3. Anthropomorphic and Artifact Metaphors


Mr. Jones - Russian Empire and (or) the king

neighboring farm - countries:

Foxwood - US

Mr. Pilkington - Winston Churchill

Pinchfield - Germany

Mr. Frederick - Adolf Hitler

Mr. Whymper - intermediary between the Soviet Union and the international community.

«Foxwood, was a large, neglected, old-fashioned farm, much overgrown by woodland, with all its pastures worn out and its hedges in a disgraceful condition. Its owner, Mr. Pilkington, was an easy-going gentleman farmer who spent most of his time in fishing or hunting according to the season. The other farm, which was called Pinchfield, was smaller and better kept. Its owner was a Mr. Frederick, a tough, shrewd man, perpetually involved in lawsuits and with a name for driving hard bargains. These two disliked each other so much that it was difficult for them to come to any agreement, even in defence of their own interests «.

Mr. Whymper - a lawyer, for the purpose of a personal gain decided to establish trade relations between the farmyard and their sworn enemies - Mr. Frederick and Mr. Pilkington; intermediary between the Soviet Union and the international community. «Mr. Whymper, a solicitor living in Willingdon, had agreed to act as intermediary between Animal Farm and the outside world «.

The Windmill - NEP - the New Economic Policy or industrialization of the USSR in the 20-ies of XX century. The same mill symbolizes the manipulation of other animals for the leaders own benefit.

The Barn – on the wall of which pigs-leaders wrote “Seven Commandments” - can mean forced unanimity.

Animal state anthem «The Beasts of England» - the analogy of «The Internationale» - international proletarian anthem. «The tune and even the words of 'Beasts of England' were known everywhere. It had spread with astonishing speed. The human beings could not contain their rage when they heard this song, though they pretended to think it merely ridiculous. They could not understand, they said, how even animals could bring themselves to sing such contemptible rubbish. Any animal caught singing it was given a flogging on the spot. And yet the song was irrepressible».

So, like the one of the lines of «The Internationale» («With the Internationale rise up the human race!»), with the first lines of the hymn «Beasts of England» the international nature of Animalism is also expressed («Beasts of England, beasts of Ireland, Beasts of every land and clime «). The «Internationale» has the line: «Only we, the workers world-wide Great army of labor, have the right to own land». The anthem «Beasts of England», respectively, tells about a happy future without human oppression, an era of freedom and abundance. Or, more succinctly in the English version of the hymn: «And give to all a happier lot». The similarity is obvious in both hymns.

Socialism - animalism. «But the luxuries of which Snowball had once taught the animals to dream, the stalls with electric light and hot and cold water, and the three-day week, were no longer talked about. Napoleon had denounced such ideas as contrary to the spirit of Animalism. The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally «.

Taking the eggs away from hens – food allotment.

4. Military metaphor

The Battle of Cowshed - The Civil War.

The Battle of the Windmill) - The Great Patriotic War.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the use of conceptual metaphor has allowed the author to compress and concentrate the information in such a way that the main events of nearly 20 years period fit on a small number of pages. Conceptual metaphorical model of this dystopia «Totalitarian state is Animal Farm», implicitly specified in the title, defines the negative pragmatic vector and demonstrates to the reader G. Orwell`s point of view on the Stalinist version of socialism in Russia, his extremely negative attitude to totalitarianism.

Reference lists

  1. Arutyunova N.D. The  Theory of Metaphor. M., 1990. 512 p.
  2. Budaev A.V., Chudinov A.P. Cognitive Theory of Metaphor: New Horizons. URL: http://www.journals.urfu.ru/index.php/Izvestia1/article/view/ 780 (date of access: February 7, 2016).
  3. Kubryakova E.S. The Initial Stages of Formation of Cognitivism: Linguistics − Psychology − Cognitive Science] / E.S/ Kubryakova // Linguistics Issues. 2006. № 4. Pp. 34-47.
  4. Kubryakova E.S. (general ed.) Concise Dictionary of Cognitive Terms. M.: Philological Faculty of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, 1997. 245 p.
  5. Lakoff George, Johnson M. Metaphors we Live by. Translated by N. Pertsov. M., 1987. 387 p.
  6. Maslova, V.A. Cognitive Linguistics: textbook / V.A. Maslova. 2nd ed. Mn.: TetraSistems, 2005. 256 p.
  7. Orwell George. Animal Farm and a Collection of Essays: A Book for Reading in English. St. Petersburg: CROWN print, KARO, 2014. 256 p.
  8. Chudinov A.P. Russia in a Metaphorical Mirror: Cognitive Study of Political Metaphors. Yekaterinburg, 2001. 238 p.
  9. Sheigal E.I. Semiotics of Political Discourse. M.: ITDGK “Gnosis”. 326 p.
  10.  Chillton P., Lakoff G. Foreign Policy by Metaphor // Language and Peace/ ed. by Ch. Schaffner, A. Wenden. L., N.Y., 2004. P. 37-74.
  11.  Kershaw, Ian. The End: Hitler's Germany, 1944-45. UK, 2011. 592 с.
  12. LaFeber W. America, Russia, and the Cold War 1945 - 1984. NY, 1985. 348 p.
  13.  Turner M., Fauconnier G. Conceptual Integration and Formal Expression//Metaphor and Symbolic Activity. Vol. 10 (3). P.183-204.
  14. URL: http://www.scodis.com/?q=ru/conceptual_metaphor (date of access: February 8, 2016).