IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication Mar 2024

Metaphor, Stance, and Identity: A Corpus-Based Study of CEO Letters in Chinese and American Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

Chunyu Hu Guangdong University of Foreign Studies ; Aoran Zhang ; Yilin Xu Guangdong University of Foreign Studies

Abstract

<bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Background:</b> Corporate social responsibility (CSR) reports are strategic tools for winning stakeholder support and trust through building and maintaining favorable identities and positive images. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Literature review:</b> The metaphorical construction of corporate identity in CSR reports has received little scholarly attention. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Research questions:</b> 1. What are the main genre-specific conceptual metaphors used in Chinese and American CEO letters within CSR corporate reports? 2. How do the metaphors build companies’ corporate identities? <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Data and method:</b> We collected 630 Chinese and American CEO letters in CSR reports, identified linguistic metaphors by using the Metaphor Identification Procedure Vrije Universiteit (MIPVU), inferred genre-specific conceptual metaphors, and conducted comparative analysis of metaphor-based stance and identity. <bold xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">Results and conclusions:</b> Although Chinese and American companies share several genre-specific conceptual metaphors, there exists variation in the metaphor scenarios used to produce the stances and evaluations that contribute to favorable corporate identity construction. In the economic dimension, companies from both countries portray themselves as “capable builders,” “competent players,” and “hard-working gardeners,” but only Chinese companies identify themselves as “active architects and travelers following national policy.” In the environmental dimension, Chinese companies delineate themselves as “determined environmental protectors” and “faithful friends” of nature, while American companies describe themselves as “environment-conscious travelers”and “responsible stewards” of nature. Both identify themselves as “good corporate citizens” in the social dimension.

Journal
IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Published
2024-03-01
DOI
10.1109/tpc.2024.3358421
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
modern rhetorical theory genre theory
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (3)

  1. Lambrecht (2025)
    “What People Are Saying” About Extreme Weather: A Comparison of Public Commenta…
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Zao et al. (2025)
    Comparing the Readability of English-Language CEO Statements in Chinese and Ame…
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  3. Liu et al. (2025)
    Charting the Course of Stance Construction in Container Shipping: An Empirical …
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication

Cites in this index (3)

  1. Yu (2020)
    Corporate Environmentalism: A Critical Metaphor Analysis of Chinese, American, …
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  2. Sun et al. (2018)
    Metaphor Use in Chinese and American CSR Reports
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  3. Yu et al. (2017)
    The Generic Structure of CSR Reports in Italian, Chinese, and English: A Corpus…
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
Also cites 48 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039403.96150.b6
     ↗
  2. 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x
     ↗
  3. 10.1002/csr.234
     ↗
  4. 10.1007/s10551-008-9825-x
     ↗
  5. 10.1509/jimk.19.2.30
     ↗
  6. 10.1177/0092070303258971
     ↗
  7. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.10.689
     ↗
  8. 10.1108/CCIJ-02-2013-0011
     ↗
  9. 10.1016/j.scoms.2015.03.005
     ↗
  10. 10.1093/applin/amw058
     ↗
  11. 10.1108/AAAJ-03-2016-2485
     ↗
  12. 10.1017/CBO9781139173865.013
     ↗
  13. 10.1016/j.esp.2023.01.004
     ↗
  14. 10.1177/0149206311436079
     ↗
  15. 10.1108/EUM0000000006146
     ↗
  16. 10.1108/13563281311319472
     ↗
  17. 10.1002/csr.1399
     ↗
  18. 10.1002/csr.1938
     ↗
  19. 10.1177/1750481311427788
     ↗
  20. 10.1075/ps.7.1.03bon
     ↗
  21. 10.1080/1533015X.2017.1411216
     ↗
  22. 10.1177/1461445605054407
     ↗
  23. 10.1177/00187267035610001
     ↗
  24. 10.1080/01638538809544689
     ↗
  25. 10.1075/wll.5.2.06ber
     ↗
  26. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
     ↗
  27. 10.1177/1750481313494498
     ↗
  28. 10.1075/scl.55
     ↗
  29. 10.5040/9781474295413
     ↗
  30. 10.1207/s15327868ms2101_2
     ↗
  31. 10.1075/cilt.175.07gra
     ↗
  32. 10.4324/9780203931943.ch3
     ↗
  33. 10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray
     ↗
  34. 10.3115/1117729.1117730
     ↗
  35. 10.1515/cllt-2015-0030
     ↗
  36. 10.1080/13546805.2020.1842727
     ↗
  37. 10.1080/10926480709336752
     ↗
  38. 10.2200/s00694ed1v01y201601hlt031
     ↗
  39. 10.1075/celcr.14
     ↗
  40. 10.1080/09296174.2013.830554
     ↗
  41. 10.1016/j.esp.2013.07.005
     ↗
  42. 10.1075/rcl.00140.xu
     ↗
  43. 10.1177/160940690600500104
     ↗
  44. 10.1016/j.enpol.2016.10.005
     ↗
  45. 10.1057/s41599-019-0252-7
     ↗
  46. 10.1017/CBO9780511614408
     ↗
  47. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190224868.001.0001
     ↗
  48. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.07.011
     ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 11 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related Articles

  1. Res Rhetorica Jan 2026
    Ethos – between &lt;i&gt;vir bonus&lt;/i&gt; and VIA: Virtue ethics in contemporary rhetorical education ↗
    Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca
    classical rhetoric modern rhetorical theory rhetorical criticism genre theory argument
  2. Peitho Jan 2026
    The Diasporic Cookbook as Chronotope, a Review of Kitchens of Hope&amp;#x3a; Immigrants Share Stories of Resilience and Recipes from Home ↗
    Marcella Prokop
    modern rhetorical theory rhetorical criticism genre theory gender and writing book reviews
  3. Philosophy & Rhetoric Oct 2025
    The Intellectual and Cultural Origins of Chaïm Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca’s New Rhetoric Project: Commentaries on and Translations of Seven Foundational Articles, 1933–1958 ↗
    Christopher W. Tindale
    classical rhetoric modern rhetorical theory rhetorical criticism genre theory discourse analysis revision argument collaborative writing editorial matter
  4. Pedagogy Oct 2025
    Contributors ↗
    modern rhetorical theory rhetorical criticism genre theory cultural rhetorics first-year composition writing pedagogy advanced composition creative writing writing across the curriculum graduate education two-year college service learning teacher development technical communication professional writing labor and working conditions archival research multimodality artificial intelligence literacy studies race and writing gender and writing disability studies literary studies editorial matter
  5. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication Apr 2025
    Synthetic Genres: Expert Genres, Non-Specialist Audiences, and Misinformation in the Artificial Intelligence Age ↗
    Brad Mehlenbacher; Ana Patricia Balbon; Ashley Rose Mehlenbacher
    modern rhetorical theory rhetorical criticism genre theory artificial intelligence multilingual writers