Against the backdrop of increasingly complex global energy transitions and geopolitical shifts, this study systematically examines the metaphorical framing in China’s new energy discourse, with a specific focus on its institutionalization phase in 2024. Grounded in the Discourse Dynamics Approach to Metaphor and drawing on Complex Dynamic Systems Theory, six systematic metaphors (Machine, Journey, Organism, Competition, Construction, Space) in China Daily’s new energy reports are analyzed in this research. Employing a mixed-methods approach that combines corpus analysis with metaphor trajectory visualization, the study reveals that by 2024, China’s new energy discourse had reached a stage of high institutionalization, characterized by a layered and synergistic metaphorical ecosystem where technical-temporal framing (Machine and Journey) operates in parallel, ecological and competitive metaphors strategically alternate, while institutional and spatial metaphors provide foundational narrative support. This pattern demonstrates how metaphors have transformed from persuasive tools into standardized cognitive mechanisms for internal coordination and external communication, reflecting the maturation of China’s new energy policy into a maintenance phase. The findings reveal that metaphorical systems function as a vehicle for institutionalized discourse, whereby established cognitive frameworks are transmitted and reinforced in the practice of policy implementation.

Hu Mengnan, Zhang Mingjin. A Study of Metaphor System Based on Discourse Dynamics Approach—In the Case of New Energy Reports in China Daily. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences (2025), Vol. 8, Issue 12: 60-70. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJHSS.2025.081210.

[1] Cameron, L., et al. The Discourse Dynamics Approach to Metaphor and Metaphor-led Discourse Analysis[J]. Metaphor and Symbol, 2009, (2): 63-89.

[2] Gibbs, R. W. & L. Cameron. The Social-cognitive Dynamics of Metaphor Performance[J]. Cognitive Systems Research, 2008, (1-2).

[3] Cameron, L. Patterns of Metaphor Use in Reconciliation Talk[J]. Discourse & Society, 2007, 18(2): 197-222.

[4] Liao Meizhen. Constructing a Metaphorical Discourse Analysis Framework from the Perspective of Complex Adaptive Systems[J]. Journal of Hubei University (Philosophy and Social Science), 2022, 49(06): 103-113+170.

[5] Cameron, L. & A. Deignan. The Emergence of Metaphor in Discourse[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2006, (4): 671-690.

[6] Cameron, L. Metaphor Shifting in the Dynamics of Talk[J]. Confronting Metaphor in Use, 2008, (1).

[7] Ritchie, D. & L. Cameron. Open hearts or smoke and mirrors: Metaphorical framing and frame conflicts in a public meeting[J]. Metaphor and Symbol, 2014, 29(3): 204-223.

[8] Pelosi, A. & H. Feltes & L. Cameron. Urban violence in Brazil and the role of the media: Communicative effects of systematic metaphors in discourse[J]. Metaphor and the Social World, 2014, 4(1): 27-47.

[9] Semino, E. & Z. Demjén & V. Koller. “Good” and “bad” deaths: Narratives and professional identities in interviews with hospice managers[J]. Discourse Studies, 2014, 16(5): 667-685.

[10] Semino, E. & Z. Demjén & J. Demmen. An integrated approach to metaphor and framing in cognition, discourse, and practice, with an application to metaphors for cancer[J]. Applied Linguistics, 2018, 39(5): 625-645.

[11] Shan Liyang. A Study on the Meaning System of Metaphorical Language in Public Discourse: Based on a Complex Systems Approach to Metaphor Analysis[J]. Journal of Zhejiang Gongshang University, 2020, (05): 77-85.

[12] Liu Wenyu, Sun Mingyue. A Discourse Dynamics Analysis of China’s “Poverty Alleviation” Metaphors: Taking China Daily Editorials as an Example[J]. Journal of Discourse Studies, 2023, (02): 67-82.

[13] Cameron, L. Confrontation or complementarity?: Metaphor in language use and cognitive metaphor theory[J]. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 2007, 5(1): 107-136.

[14] Cameron, L. & R. Maslen. Metaphor Analysis: Research Practice in Applied Linguistics, Social Sciences and the Humanities[M]. Sheffield: Equinox, 2010.

[15] Geeraerts, D. The sociosemiotic commitment[J]. Cognitive Linguistics, 2016, 27(4): 527-542.

[16] Larsen-Freeman, D. Complexity theory: The lessons continue. In L. Ortega & Z. Han (Eds.), Complexity Theory and Language Development[M]. John Benjamins, 2017.

[17] Musolff, A. Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios[M]. Bloomsbury, 2016.

[18] Zinken, J. Discourse metaphors: The link between figurative language and habitual analogies[J]. Cognitive Linguistics, 2007, 18(3): 445-466.

[19] Steen, G. J. The contemporary theory of metaphor— now new and improved[M]. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 2011, 9(1): 26-64.

[20] Charteris-Black, J. Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis[M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

[21] Koller, V. Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse: A Critical Cognitive Study[J]. Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.

[22] Gibbs, R. W. Metaphor Wars: Conceptual Metaphors in Human Life[M]. Cambridge University Press, 2017.

[23] Lakoff, G. The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and Thought[M]. Cambridge University Press, 1993.

[24] Nerlich, B., & Jaspal, R. Metaphors we die by? Geoengineering, metaphors, and the argument from catastrophe[J]. Metaphor and Symbol, 2012, 27(2): 131-147.

[25] Larson, B. Metaphors for Environmental Sustainability: Redefining Our Relationship with Nature[M]. Yale University Press, 2011.

[26] Gee, J. P. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method[M]. Routledge, 2014.