43
Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on
IMMIGRATION - The case of France and the US
Aurélie Héois, Jean Moulin Lyon 3 University (aurelie.heois@univ-lyon3.fr)
Bérengère Lafiandra, Jean Moulin Lyon 3 University
(berengere.lafiandra1@univ-lyon3.fr)
Abstract
The objective of this article is to study the representations of IMMIGRATION in newspaper
cartoons, with a specific focus on MOTION. Our work fits into the field of cognitive linguistics,
and more particularly the Conceptual Metaphor Theory expanded to multimodal settings
(Lakoff/Johnson 1980; Forceville 2009). The corpus under scrutiny is composed of 28 cartoons
selected in American and French newspapers. Through the analysis of the representations of
IMMIGRATION MOTION, we observe that the mismatch between the textual and pictorial modes
creates cognitive dissonance, which is in turn strengthened by complex networks of
metaphors. We notice discrepancies in metaphor interactional patterns between French and
American cartoons and their representations of IMMIGRATION: the former favors integration
while chaining is more salient in the latter. Regardless of the language (and culture), the
depiction of IMMIGRATION is mostly accompanied by metaphors linked to violence (literal or
symbolic).
Ziel dieses Artikels ist es, die Darstellung von IMMIGRATION in Zeitungskarikaturen zu
untersuchen, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der Bedeutungskomponente Bewegung liegt. Das
untersuchte Korpus besteht aus 28 ausgewählten Karikaturen in amerikanischen und
französischen Zeitungen. Die Arbeit fußt auf der Tradition der kognitiven Linguistik,
insbesondere auf der Konzeptuellen Metapherntheorie und auf ihrer Erweiterung auf
multimodale Kontexte (Lakoff/Johnson 1980; Forceville 2009). Die Analyse der Repräsentationen
der Bedeutungskomponente Bewegung innerhalb des Immigrations-Motivs zeigt,
dass die Diskrepanz zwischen dem Text- und dem Bildmodus eine kognitive Dissonanz
erzeugt, die wiederum durch komplexe Netzwerke von Metaphern verstärkt wird. Wir stellen
Diskrepanzen in den Interaktionsmustern der Metaphern zwischen französischen und
amerikanischen Cartoons und ihren Darstellungen von Immigration fest: Jene bevorzugen die
Integration, während diese durch einen häufigeren Rückgriff auf Verkettungen gekennzeichnet
sind. Unabhängig von der Sprache (und Kultur) wird die Darstellung der
Immigration meist von Metaphern begleitet, die mit (physischer oder symbolischer) Gewalt
verbunden sind.
1. Introduction
The aim of this multimodal contrastive study is to analyze how the visual and
linguistic representations of IMMIGRATION in newspaper cartoons interact to
create meaning. In this study, we will only focus on the notion of MOTION in
French and American newspaper cartoons between 2000 and 2021.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
44
The concept of IMMIGRATION inherently includes the notion of MOTION as
exemplified by the following definitions:
immigrate: “To come to settle in a country (which is not one’s own)” (Oxford
English Dictionary online);
immigrer: “entrer dans un pays étranger pour s’y établir” (Le Grand Robert).
In the two definitions, a person (or group of persons) moves from point A to
point B; this motion is expressed respectively by the verbs come and entrer.
However, these verbs are merely examples and motion can also be expressed
by other means (Stosic/Aurnague 2017; Talmy 2000).
While the concept of IMMIGRATION is clearly about MOTION, cartoons are, by
definition, definitely static:
cartoon: “A full-page illustration in a paper or periodical; esp. applied to
those in the comic papers relating to current events. Now, a humorous or
topical drawing (of any size) in a newspaper, etc.” (Oxford English
Dictionary online).
Thus, studying a visual static representation of MOTION in cartoons may appear
paradoxical at first glance, and that is the starting point of this article. As a
result, we will investigate how the cartoon genre deals, visually and
linguistically, with MOTION when treating the specific subject of IMMIGRATION.
As shown in Talmy (2000), languages can express MOTION in different linguistic
ways1; therefore, one of the objectives of the present study is to determine
whether such differences can also be found through a multimodal analysis.
Considering the nature of the chosen medium, i.e. cartoons, our study is
restricted to two modes: “written signs” and “pictorial signs” (Forceville 2009:
23), which will be referred to as the “textual mode” and the “pictorial mode”
respectively.
1 In his analysis of MOTION, Talmy (2000: 117-118), and many other linguists after him,
distinguishes between satellite-framed and verb-framed languages depending on how one
language generally expresses the notion of PATH. Romance languages, such as French, are
usually classified in the verb-framed languages, while English is a satellite-framed language.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
45
We restricted our analysis to tropes2, mainly metaphors and metonymies, as
preliminary observations of the cartoons suggested that the multimodal
representations of MOTION in immigration cartoons were mostly based on
highlighting-hiding processes (Kövecses 2002). This multimodal analysis follows
the Conceptual Metaphor Theory (Lakoff/Johnson 1980) and its extension to
multimodality (Forceville 2009; Pérez-Sobrino 2017).
Thus, the present study offers a preliminary investigation of American and
French newspaper cartoons and attempts to answer the following question:
how do multimodal tropes, such as metaphor and metonymy, interact in a static
medium? And more specifically, how do they deal with the notion of MOTION
within the topic of IMMIGRATION? And how do they create meaning?
The first section presents the theoretical background this study fits into and the
state of the art on multimodality and immigration. The second section defines
the methodology we adopted for the selection and analysis of the cartoons. A
third section provides the preliminary results and observations concerning the
representations of IMMIGRATION MOTION3 as well as the multimodal metaphors
identified in the cartoons. Finally, a short discussion is provided with
concluding remarks.
2. Multimodality and immigration
2.1 Expanded Conceptual Metaphor Theory
Our analysis is placed within the cognitive linguistic framework and more
particularly that of Conceptual Metaphor Theory (from now on CMT) as
initially developed by Lakoff and Johnson (1980), which we expand to
multimodal context following Forceville (2009) and Pérez Sobrino (2017).
Expanding CMT to multimodal settings is fully in accordance with the
assumptions made by Lakoff and Johnson, namely that metaphor frames our
cognitive system and is not only verbal and shapes the way we think and
2 This analysis was originally presented in the international conference entitled “Multimodal
Tropes in Contemporary Corpora”, Centre d’Études Linguistiques – Corpus, Discours et
Sociétés, Jean Moulin Lyon 3 University, Lyon, 19-20 May 2022.
3 The expression IMMIGRATION MOTION is used through this article as an economical means
to refer to “the notion of MOTION within the topic of IMMIGRATION”.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
46
understand the world. Therefore, it has a strong cognitive dimension, as
illustrated by Kövecses (2002: 57):
[I]f the conceptual system that governs how we experience the world,
how we think, and how we act is partly metaphorical, then the
(conceptual) metaphors must be realized not only in language but also
in many other areas of human experience.
As a result, we expect to find, in multimodal settings, similar metaphors and
metonymies that have been found in verbal settings (see next section). We will
consider the two notions in their usual definitions, following Lakoff and
Johnson (1980) and Kövecses and Radden (1998).
In her multimodal analysis of advertisement, Pérez Sobrino (2017), following
Forceville (2009), applies the expanded version of CMT to multimodal settings
with a specific focus on the patterns of interaction between the tropes. She
distinguishes between two types of interaction, namely integration and
chaining (Perez-Sobrino 2017: 70):
Integration consists in the assimilation of one conceptual operation
into another, whereas in chaining, the target domain of one
conceptual operation serves as a source domain for another. In this
view, chaining is qualitatively more complex than integration.
Each type of interaction includes different patterns (Perez-Sobrino 2017: 72).
Patterns of integration include “Multiple source target metonymy”,
“Metaphtonymy” and “Metaphoric amalgam”, while patterns of chaining
include “Metonymic chain” and “Metaphoric chain”. Similarly to Pérez-Sobrino
(2017), our corpus also combines the textual and pictorial modes, thus, it is not
surprising that similar patterns of interaction were found in the cartoons under
scrutiny. However, while patterns may be linked to modes, the metaphors we
are expecting in this analysis are strongly linked to the theme IMMIGRATION.
2.2 Literature review: immigration and its representations
Many different studies on IMMIGRATION and its representations exist in the
literature. Most of them have shown that the target domain of IMMIGRATION is
often conceptualized verbally – through the textual mode – in terms of NATURAL
DISASTERS, INDIGESTIBLE FOOD, SOLDIERS, SPREAD OF DISEASE, WASTE, OBJECTS or
PARASITIC ORGANISMS (Charteris-Black 2006; Hart 2011; Musolff 2011; O’Brien
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
47
2003; Semino 2008; van Dijk 2000; Silaški/Đurović 2019, 2021), as illustrated in
(1).
(1) [T]he vast tide of illegal immigration that had produced a shadow
population of literally millions of undocumented aliens in the United
States (McNary v. Haitian Refugee Ctr., Inc., 498 U.S. 479, 481 (1991), cited
in Cunningham-Parmeter 2011: 1581).
As explained by KhosraviNik (2010: 13), the negative representations of
migrants often rely on aggregation, collectivization and functionalization
processes:
These can be defined as linguistic processes through which these
groups of people are systematically referred to and constructed as one
unanimous group with all sharing similar characteristics,
backgrounds, intentions, motivations and economic status or
reducing these groups to their functions e.g. ‘entrants’.
Thus, migrants are verbally depicted as commodities whose main characteristic
is to enter, that is to say to go from point A to point B, B being a closed entity.
In addition to these numerous studies on the textual mode, some recent studies
have focused on the visual mode by studying cartoons on immigration.
Özdemir and Özdemir (2017) have shown that visual metaphors such as that of
the wave or that of the barbed wire can often be noted in cartoons on immigration
(2017: 55): “The barbed-wire metaphor is used as a symbol of the exclusionist
attitude of all countries. […] Wave and flood figures are also commonly used in
cartoons to illustrate the dangerous and destructive characteristics of the
refugee influx”. Silaški and Đurović (2021) concur with their study on the
omnipresence of the FORTRESS scenario in European cartoons on immigration.
Swain (2012: 86) points out that “Cartoons are primarily a visual genre, but
have, and frequently take up, the option of including verbal text”. As a result,
cartoons constitute particularly relevant media when studying multimodality.
Following all these studies, this article aims to offer a multimodal analysis of
the representations of MOTION in cartoons on immigration. The starting point,
MOTION, probably makes the originality of this approach as it focuses on the
dynamic nature of IMMIGRATION and some of its salient ‘participants’ (see
Figure 2 below). Our study is however preliminary in nature as the corpus
under scrutiny is limited.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
48
3. Methodology
3.1 Corpus selection
Our corpus was selected on Google®, with the tool Google® Images. Two
different corpora were created. One includes French cartoons and the other is
composed of American cartoons.4 Both corpora were created through a similar
process. First, we selected a region (“France” and “US”, respectively) in the
parameters Google® offers and searched images with the help of two keywords
“immigration AND dessin” and “immigration AND cartoon”, respectively. We
also restricted our search to cartoons published between 2000 and 2021.
We then defined four different criteria for the selection. First, (1) only cartoons
directly related to immigration as their main theme were selected. This allowed
us to obtain a relevant corpus for our study of immigration. As a result, cartoons
dealing with immigration policies, for instance, were rejected.5 Then, as our
objective was to carry out a preliminary analysis, we chose to have two rather
small corpora and we selected (2) only the first twenty hits6 for each
language/region. Thirdly, (3) we only retained cartoons that were related to the
news; in other words, we kept cartoons that had been published in newspapers
or equivalents and rejected those that had been published by other
organizations such as NGOs for example (cartooning for peace7 is an example we
rejected).8 Finally, our fourth criterion concerned multimodality as the cartoons
(4) had to include the two modes, namely pictorial and textual. In other words,
cartoons with visual elements only were rejected. As an illustration, the two
cartoons in Figure 1 were included in our corpus:
4 The selected cartoons were published in French or American media respectively.
5 Cartoons on immigration policies can also reflect a certain point of view on immigration,
but they add elements which are out of the scope of the present study.
6 Considering the Google algorithm is unpredictable, the same search can lead to different
results.
7 https://www.cartooningforpeace.org/cartoonotheque/migrations-et-frontieres/.
8 In order to have genre homogeneity, we only focus on news cartoons.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
49
Fig. 1: Examples of IMMIGRATION cartoons (from left to right: US08; FR01)
No general conclusion can be drawn from this work as its aim is to provide a
preliminary study which enables us to qualitatively compare French and
American cartoons and make some patterns emerge.
In order to reach that goal, we added a fifth criteria and filtered our 40 cartoons
and only kept the ones encoding multimodal MOTION. This restriction made it
possible to study if there existed a mismatch or a match between the pictorial
and textual motion depicted in the cartoon. In other words, the notion of
MOTION9 had to be coded both textually and visually. We then obtained 13
cartoons for the French corpus and 15 for the American one, which we encoded
according to the following methods.
3.2 Cartoon encoding
As an analytical framework, we divided the concept of MOTION into relevant
and salient elements10 as Figure 2 summarizes: with spatial elements such as
origin, destination, path (in the direction of the destination), and border along
with other participants whether animate (migrant(s) and host country),
inanimate (means of transportation) or related to the motion event (manner of
motion). The aim of this encoding is to analyze which of these elements of
immigration MOTION are highlighted or hidden since “[h]ighlighting necessarily
goes together with hiding” (Kövecses 2002: 80), but also to observe how they
interact with each other to express MOTION. For each cartoon, we identified
9 In this study, MOTION includes the whole continuum from static events to dynamic ones.
10 As in any schematization of a concept, other participants/elements could have been
selected.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
50
whether the elements were present or not, and, if present, which mode(s)
was(were) used to depict them.
Fig. 2: The conceptualization of immigration
Our first encoding step concerned multimodal, in other words how the textual
and pictorial modes encoded it. For each cartoon, we took the point of view of
the migrant(s) and encoded six possible directions, namely: “forward”,
“backward”, “downward”, “upward”, “static” or “multiple directions”.11
The second step consisted in identifying the multimodal metaphors. To do so,
we followed the methodology described by Pérez-Sobrino (2017: 88-90):
 Identification of the target domain (IMMIGRATION);
 Identification of the source domain (involving MOTION);
 Identification of the conceptual operations;
 Identification of non-core operations;
 Identification of interaction patterns (chaining, integration).
In our case, the first step of identification was made easy by the nature of our
study, in other words, the target domain was always IMMIGRATION. For the
second step, in order for our analysis to be relevant regarding our aims, we
restricted our study to source domains involving MOTION. This means that, to
be considered, a source concept should always imply a translational movement
from a point A to a point B, or the reference to a location for static events. For
instance, even though we found several instances of it, the GAME source domain
11 While our linguistic encoding of MOTION relies on definitions, the pictorial encoding may
not be as straightforward as cartoons are, by nature, static, and there is no “picture dictionary”
available. Hence, our analysis is experiential and based on multiple cues when possible. For
instance, when a wall with a door is represented, we may consider the MOTION to be static if
the door is closed, forward if the door is open with people facing the door, and backward if
the door is open but with people turning their back to it (see cartoons FR04 – Figure 6 – and
FR10 – Figure 7 – for illustration).
Origin Path Destination
Migrant(s) Host country
Border
Means of transportation
Manner
Conceptualization of IMMIGRATION
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
51
was not selected as it does not inherently involve a translational movement,
although it may. Conversely, the JOURNEY domain was selected as it fits this
movement criteria. We then identified the various conceptual operations
relevant for the study of IMMIGRATION MOTION, mostly metaphors. In cases
other (non-motional) metaphors were combined with MOTION metaphors, we
then identified them. Finally, we mapped Pérez-Sobrino’s patterns of
interaction (see section 3.2) with the metaphors we found. Because our data is
limited to small corpora, we only distinguished between the two macro-types
of interaction, namely chaining and integration.12
In addition, we paid attention to the UP/DOWN orientational metaphors
(Lakoff/Johnson 1980: 14-22) as we observed that many cartoons were
organized with UP/DOWN structures and that it supported the meaning of other
metaphors.
Finally, we proceeded to the description of our corpora according to the
parameters we encoded: first, through the description and analysis of single
variables, and then through their interactions.
4. Results and analysis
4.1 Immigration mapping
In this part, we will present the first relevant observations regarding the
encoding of the participants of IMMIGRATION as presented in Figure 2. These
observations are summarized in Figure 3.
US FR Total
Migrant 15 13 28
Origin 4 7 11
Destination 15 13 28
Border 13 10 23
Path 10 9 19
12 Considering the size of our corpora, using a finer-grained categorization of the patterns
would have made it impossible to identify trends to be explored in further research.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
52
Means of
transportation
5 8 13
Manner of motion 8 2 10
Total 15 13 28
Fig. 3: Representation of immigration participants in the corpora (number of cartoons)
First, if we focus on the origin, that is to say point A, it is striking to note that it
is rarely coded. However, when we did find the origin in our corpus, it was
usually coded visually with stereotypical clothes (sombreros, turbans etc.)
and/or textually with stereotypes in speech bubbles (accents, broken language
etc.).13 When the origin is coded in American cartoons, it generally represents
immigration from South/Central America and Mexico to the US. As for French
cartoons, they even more rarely specify the origin of the migrants, although in
some cases, the Middle East or Northern Africa can be inferred through, once
again, stereotypical clothes. Let us consider the two examples in Figure 4.
Fig. 4: Examples of cartoons encoding the origin (from left to right: FR02; US11)
In the cartoon on the left (FR0214), the origin, Mexico, is coded only visually with
the sombrero, which is a typical Mexican hat. Without the hat, we could not
infer where the migrants come from. In the cartoon on the right (US11), the
origin can only be deduced thanks to the speech bubble in the top right-hand
corner, when the ICE guard naively mocks the Latino pronunciation of Jesus,
saying “HAY-SOOS” instead. With that text, we can then guess that the
13 Those are cases of metonymies.
14 This cartoon is part of the French corpus as it was published in a French newspaper. It is,
however, a representation of immigration to the US.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
53
migrants come from a Spanish-speaking country, most likely from Central or
South America.
Two other participants of IMMIGRATION were also rarely coded: the means of
transportation and the manner of motion. What we can note about these two
elements in the two corpora is that the means of transportation are more
frequently coded in the French cartoons, visually represented by a boat, than in
the American ones. Conversely, the manner of motion is more frequently coded
in the American cartoons than in the French ones and usually textually, with
the adjective illegal or the adverb illegally, which insists on the fact that the
migrants may be undocumented.
In 100% of the cartoons, the migrants and the destination are coded. For
migrants, on the one hand, this is not surprising since it was both one of the
keywords and a selection criterion in our methodology. They are often
represented (visually) with people, but also metaphorically, and particularly
with the metaphor of the wave, as will be developed in the third section. On the
other hand, destination is represented through metonymies in the corpus (flag,
president, monument etc.) as illustrated in Figure 5.
Fig. 5: An example of the visual encoding of the destination (US05)
In this example (US05), the destination is coded thanks to a monument, the
Statue of Liberty, which is not only a symbol of the host country, the US, but
metaphorik.de 34/2023
54
also of its border. Besides, the destination is here multimodally coded since it is
also written U.S. on the sign.
The omnipresence of the destination can be explained by the methodology and
more precisely the use of Google® parameters when we selected the region
“France” or “US”, it is no surprise then to see the cartoons represent either
France or America as the destination. Considering that some migrants are going
to these host countries, it is expected to see the movement from the destination’s
point of view. We did not find any representation of immigration with France
or the US as the origin, which is not surprising as both countries are part of the
top five host countries in the world (Pew Research Center, cf. Gonzalez-
Barrera/Connor 2019).
4.2 Motion directions
One main of this study is the analysis of the notion of MOTION within the topic
of IMMIGRATION, and more specifically the analysis of MOTION directions. We
tried to determine whether there was a match or a mismatch between the textual
and the pictorial modes; in other words, if the direction coded in the text and
the image was the same. In 13 (out of 28) of the cartoons, the direction is the
same visually and textually: 6 of them present a static event, 5 a forward
movement, 1 backward and 1 a forward/backward movement. The coded
motion is therefore mainly the absence of movement (static event) or a forward
movement, as can be seen in the following cartoons.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
55
Fig. 6: Examples of multimodal match in motion direction (forward on the left, static on the
right) (from left to right: US15; FR04)
In Figure 6, the cartoons both illustrate a match between the text and the
pictorial element concerning motion. Visually, in the cartoon on the left (US15),
one can see a wave, metaphorically representing migrants. The wave is
represented as moving from the sea to the beach, which is its natural movement
from point A to point B and which can be described as forward. Besides, in the
text, which is written on the wave, immigration also denotes a forward
movement from point A to point B. As a result, there is a match between the
forward movement coded in the picture (the wave) and in the text (immigration).
In the cartoon on the right (FR04), there is also a multimodal motion match, but
this time with a static event. In the visual mode, the borders of France are
represented, they refer to a geographical zone, a specific location, which is
unlikely to change. This static event is reinforced by the representation of the
migrants who are stopped at the border of the country as they find a closed
door: they cannot enter the destination. In the text, the static event is coded in
the speech bubble through the nouns terre (French for territory) and pays (French
for country), which, because they refer to a location, also denote a static event.
In the other half of our corpus (15 out of 28 cartoons), there is a mismatch in
directions between the text and the image. Let us consider the two examples in
Figure 7.
FR_La Croix_2012
metaphorik.de 34/2023
56
Fig. 7: Examples of multimodal mismatch in motion direction (from left to right: US09; FR10)
In Figure 7, the directions coded textually and visually are not the same in the
cartoon on the left (US09), since in the picture, the migrant, who is represented
as the Statue of Liberty, is a monument. Therefore, the pictorial mode encodes
a static event while the textual mode refers twice to a backward movement: first,
with the phrasal verb “send back” and then, with the speech bubble “one-way
ticket to France”15. There is thus a mismatch between the static nature of the
monument and the backward movement that is textually present to highlight,
and mock, Donald Trump’s anti-immigration policies: all migrants have to go
back to their origins, even the Statue of Liberty. This multimodal mismatch
underlines the paradoxical nature of Trump’s immigration policies.
In the cartoon on the right (FR10), the mismatch between the pictorial and
textual modes also reinforces humor through a play on polysemy (two different
meanings of the verb rentrer) with a probable aim to criticize Nicolas Sarkozy’s
immigration policies, also known as “immigration choisie” (French for preferred
immigration). In the pictorial mode, a forward movement is coded as the
migrants are moving towards the borders of the destination, here represented
15 The reference to France here is understood as a backward movement because the Statue of
Liberty was created by a French artist, Bartholdi. As a result, and according to our
schematization of immigration, France encodes here the origin of the migrant.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
57
as a night club.16 But then, so as to make the viewers understand the title of the
cartoon and the notion of “immigration choisie”, the forward movement is
applied textually only for the first two skilled migrants (a scientist and a
surgeon) with the first speech bubble “Toi, tu rentres” (French for you’re coming
in) repeated twice whereas a backward movement applies to the third migrant
in the second speech bubble “tu rentres en charter” (French for you’re going back
(home) by plane). The mismatch in directions, a forward movement for the
pictorial mode and a backward movement for the text concerning the third
migrant, enables the cartoonist to show that only skilled migrants are welcome
in France under Nicolas Sarkozy’s presidency.17
4.3 Metaphor analysis
Finally, we identified six different metaphors related to MOTION (whether a
static event or a movement from point A to point B) in our corpora. Figure 8
presents these metaphors along with their relative presence in our two corpora.
Metaphors US corpus FR corpus
IMMIGRATION IS WAR Yes + Yes =
IMMIGRATION IS A NATURAL CATASTROPHE Yes + Yes -
IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY Yes - Yes ++
DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER Yes ++ Yes =
A MIGRANT IS AN OBJECT (THAT CAN BE
MOVED)
Yes = Yes =
THE PATH TOWARDS DESTINATION IS A
MAZE
Yes - Yes -
Fig. 8: The 6 MOTION metaphors18
16 The night club interpretation is inferred through two cues: the sign on the door, “Boîte de
la République”, uses a common French denomination for a night club, “boîte” (literally box);
this meaning of boîte is reinforced by the depiction of Nicolas Sarkozy as a bouncer who
decides who can enter and who cannot.
17 Nicolas Sarkozy was the French President between 2007 and 2012.
18 The use of “++”, “+”, “-“, and “=” is only relative to each corpus. “++” is used when the
metaphor seems to prevail in the subcorpus; “+” is used when the metaphor is present several
metaphorik.de 34/2023
58
Our qualitative observations suggest a difference between the two corpora in
terms of metaphors: the most salient metaphor in French cartoons is
IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY while DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER appears to be
characteristic of American cartoons. The sixth metaphor of Figure 8, THE PATH
TOWARDS DESTINATION IS A MAZE, only appears in 2 cartoons in our corpus, as a
result, we do not consider it salient enough and do not include it in our present
analysis. As mentioned in the methodological section, on top of what we
identify as “MOTION metaphor”, we took into account the UP/DOWN conceptual
metaphors as well. Our encoding of the corpora shows that this metaphor tends
to structure most of the cartoons and usually act as a reinforcement for the
MOTION metaphors we identified.
As previously stated, metaphors often work in combination with other
metaphors (and with metonymies) so as to create meaning, as is illustrated in
Figures 9 and 10.
Fig. 9: An example of metaphor combination (cartoon) (US04)
times without as much salience; “=” is used when the metaphor is present to a lesser extent;
and “-“ is used when the metaphor is present only once in the corpus.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
59
Fig. 10: An example of metaphor combination (diagram)19
The diagram illustrates how different processes interact in the cartoon (US04).
The metaphors are represented in red20 and the metonymies in blue. The
fundamental metaphor DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER is here actualized as HOST
COUNTRY IS A PRISON. It is supported linguistically through camp and visually
through the fence as well as the children’s striped clothes, which represent a
prisoner’s outfit. This metaphor leads to two other metaphors, on the one hand
MIGRANTS ARE OBJECTS, reinforced by little animals and dehumanize written on the
signs, and IMMIGRATION IS WAR, with a reference to the second world war, both
visually and textually. Moreover, the multimodal encoding of MOTION
emphasizes the static position of migrants, who are therefore depicted as
objects, so as to support the idea that Donald Trump’s immigration policies are
dehumanizing.21
19 WWII stands for “the second World War”. The different shades of red allow to distinguish
between a conceptual metaphor (dark red), metaphors (lighter red), and metaphor
participants (light red).
20 The light red frames including the “=” sign show relevant metaphorical mappings which
support the capitalized metaphors.
21 The fact that migrants are depicted as children further strengthens the criticism of Trump’s
immigration management and policies as children are construed as both vulnerable and
harmless.
DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER
HOST COUNTRY IS A PRISON
Migrants = prisoners
+ ”dehumanize”
+ ”little animals”
Migrants = not human
MIGRANTS ARE OBJECTS THAT
CAN BE MOVED / DISPOSED OF
Concentration camp for prison
IMMIGRATION IS WAR
WWII for war
Migrants = Jewish people (WWII)
Visual/Textual = static
metaphorik.de 34/2023
60
4.4 Chained metaphors
As shown in the example above, metaphors combine in complex ways to create
meaning. Following Pérez-Sobrino (2017: 70), we categorized the metaphors
according to two macro-types of metaphor combinations and interactions,
namely integration and chaining (see section 3.2).
A difference between the two corpora can be observed. In this study, American
cartoons favor chaining while French cartoons mostly instance integration. Two
types of chaining are salient in the US corpus, namely from DESTINATION IS A
CONTAINER to A MIGRANT IS AN OBJECT THAT CAN BE MOVED and from
IMMIGRATION IS A NATURAL CATASTROPHE to IMMIGRATION IS WAR, the latter
being usually combined with the UP/DOWN conceptual metaphor. One type of
integration stands out in the French corpus, namely the combination of the
metaphors IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY and DESTINATION IS CONTAINER. Figure 9
is an example of chaining from the American corpus.
Fig. 11: Example of chaining of IMMIGRATION IS A NATURAL CATASTROPHE  IMMIGRATION IS
WAR (US13)
In Figure 11 (US13), the metaphor IMMIGRATION IS A NATURAL CATASTROPHE
leads to IMMIGRATION IS WAR. The border is represented with the dam, which
refers to a real dam between Mexico and the US, the Boquilla dam. The
migrants’ origin is behind the dam, represented as a crumbling wall made of
bricks. Migrants are themselves represented as the water on the brink of
breaking the dam, thus, as a flood, which is why the first metaphor is
IMMIGRATION IS A NATURAL CATASTROPHE. Moreover, the violence of water on
the dam can be grasped with small silhouettes, probably Americans, who are
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
61
running for their lives because they are threatened by the giant hand made of
water, which is about to crush them. This can lead to IMMIGRATION IS AN
INVASION which can be encompassed in the conceptual metaphor IMMIGRATION
IS WAR.
Figure 12 presents an example of the second type of chaining present in the
American corpus, from DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER to A MIGRANT IS AN OBJECT.
Fig. 12: Example of chaining of DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER  A MIGRANT IS AN OBJECT
(US06)
First of all, there is an unexpected direction from UP to DOWN in this cartoon
(US06) since usually UP IS GOOD and DOWN IS BAD. As a result, in this example,
the immigration of the baby may not be an improvement in its life. This is
strengthened by the destination being represented as a locked ballot box, a
CONTAINER. The migrant baby is moving towards the box. He is thus associated
with a ballot, an OBJECT, which is why DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER leads to A
MIGRANT IS AN OBJECT, which enables the cartoonist to criticize Joe Biden’s
political opportunism, as migrants are used for election purposes. Furthermore,
this process of functionalization of migrants (KhosraviNik 2010) is not only
perceived in the pictorial mode, with the box, but also in the textual one, in the
speech bubble with the verb stuff.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
62
Fig. 13: Example of integration of IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY + DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER
(FR10)
Figure 13 reproduces again the cartoon FR10 which was analyzed in section 4.2
(Figure 7) for its multimodal MOTION mismatch. This cartoon also illustrates the
process of integration through the combination of IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY
with DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER. Here, these two metaphors are associated
and lead to a complex metaphor, namely IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY THAT STOPS
AT THE BORDER (OF THE CONTAINER). The source domain of the JOURNEY can be
inferred because the migrants are walking towards the destination, France,
which is represented as a VIP night club, hence as a CONTAINER, but also
through the use of charter in the speech bubble (French for charter flight). This
cartoon is not representative of the rest of the French corpus as the means of
transportation is not represented as a boat here; however, it is multimodally
very rich. As mentioned in 4.2, there is a multimodal forward movement only
for skilled migrants while the apparently unskilled migrant has to go back to
his origin and is not allowed to enter the host country, the CONTAINER: THE
JOURNEY therefore stops at the border for him, which is how the cartoonist
pictures the notion of preferred immigration.
5. Conclusion
This study of the representations of IMMIGRATION through multimodal MOTION
in French and American cartoons first suggests that there are three main types
of multimodal representations when it comes to IMMIGRATION, regardless of the
country: forward match, static match, or mismatch. In case of a forward match,
the cartoon depicts a forward migratory movement both in the text and the
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
63
image. In most cases of our corpora, this forward MOTION goes hand in hand
with violence, and more specifically with the metaphor IMMIGRATION IS A
THREAT/WAR. In case of a static match, that is to say when the pictorial and
textual modes both code a static event, the main idea which is conveyed in our
corpora relates to the functionalizing and/or dehumanization of migrants and
is supported by the metaphor A MIGRANT IS AN OBJECT. Finally, in case of a
mismatch, what the cartoons depict are two irreconcilable points of view,
usually those of the migrant and the host country: the former wants to come
and settle, the latter would rather they remain in their home country, or at least
outside the host country.
What is striking in these cases of mismatch is that they create a cognitive
dissonance in the viewer/reader. Whether this dissonance creates humor, or
another feeling, would require another type of experimentation and analysis.
Nonetheless, it aims to create a reaction, as Özdemir and Özdemir (2017: 33-34)
point out: “The difference between cartoons and other visual communication
tools is that they use satire, making readers laugh as well as think.”
Our analysis also suggests that cartoons are complex objects which usually aim
to convey a message through pictorial elements and minimal text. This message
is supported by means of metonymies and metaphors which combine in various
ways together and with other elements (culture, history, etc.). We observed, in
our limited corpora, a difference between France and the US in terms of the
main interactional pattern used to convey meaning: integration was more
salient in the French cartoons while chaining was favored in the American
cartoons. Moreover, different metaphors stood out depending on the corpus:
IMMIGRATION IS A JOURNEY was the only clearly salient metaphor in the French
corpus, while DESTINATION IS A CONTAINER was often found in its American
counterpart, along with, but to a lesser extent, IMMIGRATION IS WAR and
IMMIGRATION IS A NATURAL CATASTROPHE.
Many questions arise from these observations on the differences in
representations between the US and France. First, a study on a wider sample of
cartoons on IMMIGRATION from these two countries could shed light on whether
these differences in metaphors and interaction patterns are contextual (related
to our corpora only) or real. In the latter case, insights from historical, political
and sociocultural contexts would probably be needed in order to understand
and explain these differences. Furthermore, more general research on cartoons
metaphorik.de 34/2023
64
on the one hand, and on interaction patterns on the other, in these two countries,
could help us understand how entrenched these differences are. Indeed, it is
possible that some metaphors are more easily combined through integration
while others may work better in chaining, making this difference in interaction
patterns a side-product of the cognitive preference for some metaphors over
others.
6. Bibliography
Charteris-Black, Jonathan (2006): “Britain as a container: immigration
metaphors in the 2005 election campaign”, in: Discourse & Society 17(5), 563-
581.
Cunningham-Parmeter, Keith (2011): “Alien Language: Immigration
Metaphors and the Jurisprudence of Otherness”, in: Fordham Law Review
79(4), 1545-1598.
Forceville, Charles (2009): “Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a
cognitivist framework: Agendas for research”, in: Forceville,
Charles/Urios-Aparisi, Eduardo (eds.): Multimodal Metaphor, Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter, 19-42.
Gonzalez-Barrera, Ana/Connor, Phillip (2019): “Around the World, More Say
Immigrants Are a Strength Than a Burden”, Pew Research Center,
https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/03/14/around-the-worldmore-
say-immigrants-are-a-strength-than-a-burden/(14.09.2023).
Hart, Christopher (2011): “Force-interactive patterns in immigration discourse:
A Cognitive Linguistic approach to CDA”, in: Discourse & Society 22(3),
269-286.
KhosraviNik, Majid (2010): “The representation of refugees, asylum seekers and
immigrants in British newspapers: A critical discourse analysis”, in: Journal
of Language and Politics 9(1), 1-28.
Kövecses, Zoltán (2002): Metaphor. A Practical Introduction, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Kövecses, Zoltán/Radden, Günter (1998): “Metonymy: Developing a cognitive
linguistic view”, in: Cognitive Linguistics 9(1), 37-78.
Lakoff, George/Johnson, Mark (1980): Metaphors We Live By, Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
Le Grand Robert – Version numérique (2022) : Éditions Le Robert, available on
subscription at: https://grandrobert-lerobert-com.acces.bibliothequediderot.
fr/robert.asp (19.05.2022).
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
65
Musolff, Andreas (2011): “Migration, media and ‘deliberate’ metaphors”, in:
metaphorik.de 21, 7-20.
O’Brien, Gerald V. (2003): “Indigestible Food, Conquering Hordes, and Waste
Materials: Metaphors of Immigrants and the Early Immigration Restriction
Debate in the United States”, in: Metaphor and Symbol 18(1), 33-47.
Oxford English Dictionary online (2022), Oxford University Press, available on
subscription at: http://www.oed.com (19.05.2022).
Özdemir, Özlem/Özdemir, Emrah (2017): “Whose problem is it anyway? The
depiction of Syrian refugee influx in political cartoons”, in: Syria Studies
9(1), 33-63.
Pérez Sobrino, Paula (2017): Multimodal Metaphor and Metonymy in Advertising,
Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Semino, Elena (2008): Metaphor in Discourse, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Silaški, Nadežda/Đurović Tatjana (2019): “The great wall of Europe: Verbal and
multimodal portrayals of Europe’s migrant crisis in Serbian media
discourse”, in: Viola, Lorella/Musolff, Andreas (eds.): Migration and Media,
Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 183-202.
Silaški, Nadežda/Đurović Tatjana (2021): “Fortress Europe under siege: The
representation of the European migrant crisis in political cartoons”, in:
Gudurić, Snežana/Prćić, Tvrtko (eds.): Where our languages and cultures
meet and mix: a view from Serbia, Novi Sad: Faculty of Philosophy University
of Novi Sad, 571-583.
Stosic, Dejan/Aurnague, Michel (2017): “DinaVmouv: Description, INventaire,
Analyse des Verbes de MOUVement. An annotated lexicon of motion
verbs in French”, consulted on 20 May 2022, http://redac.univtlse2.
fr/lexicons/dinaVmouv_fr.html (19.05.2022).
Swain, Elizabeth (2012): “Analysing evaluation in political cartoons”, in:
Discourse, Context & Media 1(2-3), 82-94.
Talmy, Leonard (2000): Toward a cognitive semantics (vol. II): Typology and Process
in Concept Structuring, Cambridge: The MIT Press.
Van Dijk, Teun A. (2000): “The Reality of Racism: On analyzing parliamentary
debates on immigration”, in Zurstiege, Guido (ed.): Festschrift für die
Wirklichkeit, Wiesbaden: Springer, 211-225.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
66
7. Corpora
7.1 French corpus
[FR01] FR_Chappatte_2015, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.chappatte.com/images/leurope-et-les-immigrants/.
[FR02] FR_Chappatte_2019, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.chappatte.com/images/trump-impose-des-taxes-aumexique/.
[FR03] FR_Dessins_Miss_Lilou_2016, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
http://dessinsmisslilou.over-blog.com/2016/03/la-nouvelle-reponseeuropee...
aux-migrants.html.
[FR04] FR_LaCroix_2012, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL: https://www.lacroix.
com/Actualite/France/Faut-il-restreindre-l-immigration-_NG_-
2012-03-20-780207.
[FR05] FR_Le_monde_2015, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/plantu/2015/12/02/sextape-devalbuena-
un-piege-contre-daech-le-dessin-du-monde-de-ce-mercredi-2-
decembre/.
[FR06] FR_Le_monde_2017, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/plantu/2017/08/07/migrants-accueilselectif-
le-dessin-du-monde-de-ce-lundi-7-aout/.
[FR07] FR_Le_monde_2018_1, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/plantu/2018/06/28/leurope-apres-ladefaite-
allemande/.
[FR08] FR_Le_monde_2018_2, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/plantu/2018/06/21/trump-plushumain-
le-dessin-du-monde-de-ce-jeudi-21-juin/.
[FR09] FR_Le_monde_2018_3, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.lemonde.fr/blog/plantu/2018/04/23/brigitte-etemmanuel-
macron-chez-trump-le-dessin-du-monde-de-ce-lundi-23-
avril/.
[FR10] FR_Philippe_Tastet_2006, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.philippetastet.com/nicolas-sarkozy-pour-uneimmigration-
choisie.
[FR11] FR_Toute_la_culture_2015, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://toutelaculture.com/actu/politique-culturelle/la-situation-desmig...
resumee-en-dessins/.
Héois/Lafiandra: Multimodal representations of MOTION in cartoons on IMMIGRATION
67
[FR12] FR_Urtikan_2014, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.urtikan.net/dessin-du-jour/un-president-inaugure-enfinle-
musee-de-limmigration/.
[FR13] FR_Urtikan_2015, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.urtikan.net/dessin-du-jour/europe-un-plan-daction-pourlimmig....
7.2 American corpus
[US01] US_Chappatte_2018, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.chappatte.com/en/gctheme/european-union/.
[US02] US_Independent_2021, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.independent.com/2021/04/03/immigration-reform-mustbegin-
with-secure-borders/.
[US03] US_Mercury News_2017, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.mercurynews.com/?returnUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.m
ercurynews.com%2F2017%2F01%2F30%2Fcartoons-donald-trumpsimmigration-
from-mexico-to-muslims%2F%3FclearUserState%3Dtrue.
[US04] US_Mercury News_2019, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/06/26/political-cartoons-trumpadministr...
migrant-camps/.
[US05] US_Mercury News_2021_1, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.mercurynews.com/?returnUrl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.m
ercurynews.com%2F2021%2F03%2F22%2Fcartoons-immigration-policyin-
focus-as-border-crossings-rise%2F%3FclearUserState%3Dtrue.
[US06] US_Mercury News_2021_2, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2021/03/22/cartoons-immigrationpolicy-
in-focus-as-border-crossings-rise/.
[US07] US_mprnews_2014, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2014/11/24/immigration-cartoonsparks-
outcry-over-racism.
[US08] US_orangecountyregister_2018, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.ocregister.com/2018/06/19/trump-goes-all-in-onimmigration-
political-cartoons/.
[US09] US_Philadelphia Inquirer_2019, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/cartoons/immigration-trumpstatue-
of-liberty-20190815.html.
metaphorik.de 34/2023
68
[US10] US_reviewjournal_2021, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/michael-ramirez/cartoonopening-
the-floodgates-2259417/.
[US11] US_Seattletimes_2018, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/immigrant-children-wwjd/.
[US12] US_Startribune_2013, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.startribune.com/sack-cartoon-immigration/196804601/.
[US13] US_The Week_2021, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://theweek.com/articles/973377/5-cartoons-about-bidensimmigration-
troubles.
[US14] US_thedestinlog_2021, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://eu.thedestinlog.com.
[US15] US_washingtontimes_2019, consulted on 20 May 2022, URL:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/cartoons/immigration/illegalimmigration-
201903.