“Not Soldiers but Fire-fighters” – Metaphors and Covid-19

Abstract

Metaphors have been widely used in communication about the Covid-19 pandemic. The virus has been described, for example, as an “enemy” to be “beaten,” a “tsunami” on health services and even as “glitter” that “gets everywhere.” This paper discusses different metaphors for the pandemic, and explains why they are used and why they matter. War metaphors are considered first, as they were particularly frequent and controversial at the beginning of the pandemic. An overview of alternative metaphors is then provided, drawing from the “#ReframeCovid” crowd-sourced multilingual collection of metaphors for Covid-19. Finally, based on both the #ReframeCovid collection and a systematic analysis of a large corpus of news articles in English, it is suggested that Fire metaphors are particularly appropriate and versatile in communication about different aspects of the pandemic, including contagion and different public health measures aimed at reducing it.

Full text

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hhth20
Health Communication
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hhth20
“Not Soldiers but Fire-fighters” – Metaphors and
Covid-19
Elena Semino
To cite this article: Elena Semino (2021) “Not Soldiers but Fire-fighters” – Metaphors and
Covid-19, Health Communication, 36:1, 50-58, DOI: 10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989
© 2020 The Author(s). Published with
license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
Published online: 10 Nov 2020.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1301
View related articles
View Crossmark data

“Not Soldiers but Fire-ghters” – Metaphors and Covid-19
Elena Semino
Department of Linguistics and English Language, Lancaster University
ABSTRACT
Metaphors have been widely used in communication about the Covid-19 pandemic. The virus has been
described, for example, as an “enemy” to be “beaten,” a “tsunami” on health services and even as “glitter”
that “gets everywhere.” This paper discusses dierent metaphors for the pandemic, and explains why they
are used and why they matter. War metaphors are considered rst, as they were particularly frequent and
controversial at the beginning of the pandemic. An overview of alternative metaphors is then provided,
drawing from the “#ReframeCovid” crowd-sourced multilingual collection of metaphors for Covid-19.
Finally, based on both the #ReframeCovid collection and a systematic analysis of a large corpus of news
articles in English, it is suggested that Fire metaphors are particularly appropriate and versatile in
communication about dierent aspects of the pandemic, including contagion and dierent public health
measures aimed at reducing it.
On 17th March 2020, 5 days before the United Kingdom was
put under lockdown due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the Prime
Minister, Boris Johnson, made an official statement that
included the following:
Yes this enemy can be deadly, but it is also beatable – and we know
how to beat it and we know that if as a country we follow the
scientific advice that is now being given we know that we will beat it.
And however tough the months ahead we have the resolve and the
resources to win the fight. (Johnson, 2020a)
On 6th October 2020, after 42,369 official UK deaths from
Covid-19 and enormous societal and economic damage,
Johnson made the following statement in his speech to the
Conservative Party Conference: “your government is working
night and day to repel this virus, and we will succeed, just as
this country has seen off every alien invader for the last thou-
sand years” (Johnson, 2020b).
Metaphorical descriptions of the pandemic as a war (e.g.,
“enemy,” “alien invader,” “fight” in the quotes from Johnson)
have been widely used since early 2020, including by many
other political leaders, such as Xi Jinping in China, Macron in
France, Conte in Italy and Trump in the USA. These meta-
phors have also been widely criticized, however, for inappro-
priately personifying the virus as a malevolent opponent,
creating excessive anxiety, potentially legitimizing authoritar-
ian governmental measures, and implying that those who die
did not fight hard enough. The following are two of many
media headlines expressing these criticisms: “We are not at
‘war’ with coronavirus” (Sanderson & Meade, 2020); and
“Using military language to discuss coronavirus is dangerous
and irresponsible – the US must stop” (Tamkin, 2020).
In this paper, I begin by addressing some questions that
arise from the scenario I have just outlined: Why is the pan-
demic talked about metaphorically? Why are War metaphors
in particular used for the pandemic? Are the critics of War
metaphors right to be concerned? Should metaphors be
avoided altogether? Which metaphors should be used, and
which avoided?
I then introduce an initiative aimed at collecting and
promoting alternatives to War metaphors for the pan-
demic – #ReframeCovid – and go on to discuss a type of
metaphor that, based on an extensive analysis of its usage,
seems to be particularly appropriate and versatile – that of
Covid-19 as a fire, and specifically a destructive and hard-to
-control fire.
Why is the pandemic talked about metaphorically?
Metaphor involves talking and, potentially, thinking, about one
thing in terms of another, where the two things are different
but some similarities or correspondences can be perceived
between them. For example, when Boris Johnson talks about
a “fight” in his statement from March 17th, 2020, he talks about
the attempt to reduce infection, illness, and death from the new
coronavirus in terms of a violent physical confrontation with
an opponent. The two things are obviously different, but we
can perceive similarities between them. For example, both are
difficult and dangerous enterprises that require effort and con-
centration, and both involve harm to people, and, in some
cases, death.
Metaphorical expressions are frequent in language.
Different studies, using broadly similar identification methods,
have found them to occur, on average, between 3 and 18 times
per 100 words (e.g., Cameron, 2003; Cameron & Stelma, 2004;
Steen et al., 2010). More importantly, there are both theoretical
accounts and empirical evidence of the role of metaphors as
crucial cognitive as well as communicative tools. Conceptual
metaphor theory (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980) famously used
CONTACT Elena Semino e.semino@lancaster.ac.uk Department of Linguistics and English Language, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YL, UK
HEALTH COMMUNICATION
2021, VOL. 36, NO. 1, 50–58
https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1844989
© 2020 The Author(s). Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

evidence from patterns of conventional metaphorical expres-
sions in language to propose the existence of conceptual meta-
phors – systematic mappings (or sets of correspondences)
across different conceptual domains whereby a “target”
domain (e.g., LIFE) is understood in terms of a “source” domain
(e.g., JOURNEY). From this perspective, a metaphorical expres-
sion such as “I need some direction in my life” is a linguistic
realization of the conceptual metaphor LIFE IS A JOURNEY.
Target domains tend to correspond to relatively complex,
abstract, subjective, and sensitive experiences (such as life,
death, time, and the emotions), whereas source domains tend
to correspond to relatively simpler, more image-rich, and
intersubjectively accessible experiences (such as motion, com-
bat, people, and animals). Illness, including both physical and
mental illness, is precisely the kind of subjective and sensitive
experience that tends to be talked about, conceptualized and
even experienced through metaphor (Demjén & Semino, 2017;
Tay, 2017).
Crucially, however, metaphors are not neutral ways of
perceiving and representing reality, as each source domain
highlights some aspects of the target and backgrounds others,
facilitating different inferences and evaluations (Lakoff &
Johnson, 1980). For example, War metaphors for illness high-
light the need to eliminate it completely through swift action,
and background the possibility of adapting to and living with
it. As such, in communication, metaphors are important
rhetorical devices, especially when the aim is explanation or
persuasion.
It is therefore not surprising that a new virus, causing illness
and death throughout the world, and requiring urgent and
radical responses from governments and citizens, would often
be talked about through metaphors.
Why are War metaphors in particular used for the
pandemic?
The most frequent and conventional metaphors tend to draw
from basic, embodied, sensorimotor experiences. For exam-
ple, being faced with an aggressive person or animal that
threatens our ability to achieve our goals, or, at worst, to
survive, constitutes a basic, physical and image-rich “pro-
blem” scenario, with strong emotional associations. This sce-
nario can then be exploited metaphorically to think and talk
about a whole range of less tangible problems, such as illness,
debt, or grief. All of these can all be “struggled with,”
“fought,” and “defeated.” Grady (1997) captured this
tendency via the “primary” metaphor DIFFICULTIES ARE
OPPONENTS. Aggressive military powers and invaders are the
most extreme examples of opponents, and wars are the most
extreme examples of dealing with them. This explains why
War metaphors have been found in communication about
difficulties ranging from cancer to climate change (Atanasova
& Koteyko, 2017; Semino et al., 2018b), as well as why a new,
urgent and very serious problem such as the Covid-19 pan-
demic has been talked about through metaphors of fights,
battles, and wars (see also Flusberg et al., 2018 on War
metaphors generally, Wicke & Bolognesi, 2020 on War meta-
phors for Covid-19 on Twitter).
In addition, there are several potential structural correspon-
dences between the conceptual domains of WAR and PANDEMIC,
such as between the virus and an enemy, health professionals
and an army, sick or dead people and casualties, and eliminat-
ing the virus and victory. Indeed, War metaphors have been
found to be used for previous epidemics, including, for exam-
ple, Zika in Brazil in 2015–16 (Ribeiro et al., 2018).
Are the critics of War metaphors right to be
concerned?
Critics of War metaphors are right to be concerned, but War
metaphors can also have useful functions, depending on the
context.
As I have already suggested, there is considerable empirical
evidence that metaphors have framing effects, i.e. they influ-
ence how we think and feel about problems and solutions (for
overviews, see Gibbs, 2017; Landau & Keefer, 2014;
Thibodeau et al., 2017). Such evidence is usually provided
via experiments where different groups of people read differ-
ent versions of a text about a particular issue (e.g., crime,
climate change, cancer), and are then asked the same set of
questions about that issue. The stimulus texts differ only in
terms of whether the issue is described literally or metaphori-
cally, and/or using different metaphors. Typically, differences
in the answers provided by each group can be explained in
terms of the metaphors to which they were exposed, with
evidence of metaphor framing effects on reasoning and infer-
ences. With regard to health messages specifically, for exam-
ple, Scherer et al. (2015) found that metaphorical descriptions
of influenza (as a beast, riot, army, or weed) increased expres-
sions of willingness to be vaccinated, as opposed to a literal
description. In addition, there is evidence that metaphorical
descriptions of particular situations tend to elicit greater
emotional responses than literal counterparts (Citron &
Goldberg, 2014).
Studies investigating the framing effects of War metaphors
in particular have identified both potential strengths and weak-
nesses, depending on the context and other factors (Flusberg
et al., 2018). On the one hand, War metaphors can increase
people’s perceptions of problems as serious and urgent, and
their willingness to modify their behaviors accordingly, for
example, in relation to climate change (Flusberg et al., 2017).
In this sense, if one sets aside any reservations about using war-
related terminology at all, War metaphors could be argued to
have been appropriate at the beginning of the pandemic, to
convey the dangers posed by the virus, justify the need for
radical changes in lifestyle, and generate a sense of collective
responsibility and sacrifice for a common purpose (cf. Flusberg
et al., 2018). With regard to health messages specifically,
Landau et al. (2018) found that Enemy metaphors for skin
cancer can affect the degree of worry about the disease and
the resulting intention to use sunscreen as a preventative mea-
sure. However, the framing effects of the metaphor depended
on “resonance” and “fit,” i.e. they were observed for partici-
pants who had a greater fear of physical aggression (reso-
nance), and when solutions were also described in terms of
the same metaphor, e.g., with sunscreen providing an
HEALTH COMMUNICATION 51

“armour” against sun rays (fit) (see also Thibodeau &
Boroditsky, 2013 for the influence of political orientation on
susceptibility to metaphors).
On the other hand, however, War metaphors have also
been shown to have potentially counterproductive framing
effects. For example, in the context of cancer prevention,
Battle metaphors have been found to increase fatalism and
to decrease people’s willingness to engage in self-limiting
behaviors to lower cancer risk, such as drinking less alcohol
(Hauser & Schwarz, 2015, 2020). Fatalism is a particularly
relevant concern for a long-term pandemic, especially as the
clear-cut victory suggested by War metaphor becomes more
and more elusive. Similarly, as the pandemic requires most
citizens to refrain from their normal activities, framing the
virus as an enemy or an invader to be fought could run
counter to public health messages about reducing contact
with others and staying at home more than usual (see also
Wicke & Bolognesi, 2020).
Other studies of War metaphors for cancer have found
that they can increase the attribution of guilt to a patient
who does not recover, as compared with Journey meta-
phors (Hendricks et al., 2018). This is a well-recognized
problem with the metaphorical representation of sick peo-
ple as “fighters.” Although for some people, in some con-
texts, that metaphor can be empowering (Semino et al.,
2018a, 2017), it frames lack of recovery, or death, as
defeat, as is indeed shown by the cliché, in obituaries, of
the deceased person having “lost their battle” with cancer.
With regard to the pandemic, the representation of, for
example, populist leaders such as Boris Johnson and
Donald Trump as too strong to be beaten by the virus
can indeed reinforce the perception that recovery depends
on character, rather than a combination of demographic
characteristics, genetics, circumstances, and medical treat-
ment. Dr Rachel Clarke questioned this metaphor particu-
larly poignantly when describing her attendance at the
bedside of a man dying of Covid-19 in an article in the
Guardian newspaper:
I look down at the bedsheets, stained with sweat, and the coil
of limbs squirming in fear. It could not be plainer to anyone
here that Winston is no participant in a battle. He is, instead,
merely the battlefield. His body, worn out to begin with, is
being methodically disposed of by a virus so primitive it scar-
cely qualifies as life. Character has precisely nothing to do with
it. It never does in the real world of the hospital where the
good, the bad, the brave and the timid all kneel alike before
cancers and microbes. (Clarke, 2020)
More generally, studies of the framing effects of metaphors
involving an aggressor of some kind are also relevant to the
pandemic. People exposed to the metaphor of crime as a wild
beast (i.e. a potentially violent aggressor) as opposed to a virus,
were found to be more likely to support law-enforcement solu-
tions as opposed to social reform initiatives (Thibodeau &
Boroditsky, 2011). This supports the concern that War meta-
phors may legitimize authoritarian measures that could in fact be
disproportionate, and that could go well beyond the specific
response to the pandemic. Indeed, the establishment of martial
law and or warlike powers for the executive in different countries
reveals the potentially fuzzy boundary between the literal and
metaphorical status of military references during the pandemic.
Should metaphors be avoided altogether?
Calls for metaphors to be avoided altogether, in view of the
potential harm they can cause, have a long history (e.g.,
Hobbes, [1661] (1996); Locke, [1690] (1979); Sontag, 1979).
However, eliminating metaphors is neither feasible nor
desirable. Talking and thinking metaphorically is, as
I have mentioned, a central and often unconscious charac-
teristic of human beings that cannot be eliminated. But,
more positively, metaphors are too precious a resource to
do without. They greatly expand our conceptual and com-
municative abilities, as we can draw from the knowledge
and language associated with a rich source domain to
reason and communicate about a target domain for which
we may otherwise have little vocabulary and conceptual
structure. In the same way as they can be used to deceive
and prevaricate, they can also be used to enlighten and
comfort. The issue is not whether or not they should be
used, but how they should be used.
Which metaphors should be used, and which
avoided?
There are at least a few metaphors that can be safely described
as generally inappropriate or even immoral, such as describing
human beings as vermin or parasites (Musolff, 2010). However,
in most cases, what makes a metaphor appropriate or inap-
propriate, helpful or unhelpful, empowering, or disempower-
ing is not the type of metaphor itself but the way in which it is
used in a specific context for a specific purpose for a specific
audience (Semino et al., 2018a). As we have seen, an argument
can be made even for War metaphors to be used to suggest that
an urgent threat requires an immediate collective effort.
Similarly, while War metaphors for cancer can have the harm-
ful effects I have already described, there is also evidence that
they can be empowering for some people with cancer, in
specific situations (Semino et al., 2017).
In addition, any metaphor can only ever convey a partial
representation of a particular phenomenon. The more complex
and long-term a phenomenon, the more we need different
metaphors to capture different facets and phases, and to com-
municate with different audiences. In a following section, I am
going to argue that Fire metaphors are particularly appropriate
for the Covid-19 pandemic. However, in contexts as different
as science education and communication about cancer, it has
been suggested that a range of different metaphors should be
made available or encouraged, to reflect different aspects, per-
spectives, and needs.
In relation to cancer, for example, my colleagues and
I have developed, on the basis of extensive linguistic research
(Semino et al., 2018b), a “Metaphor Menu for People Living
with Cancer” – a collection of different metaphors based on
the language used by patients, to provide a variety of alter-
native framings and encourage people to develop their own
(http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/melc/the-metaphor-menu/; Demjén &
52 E. SEMINO

Semino, 2020). The Metaphor Menu includes, for example,
a Music metaphor for the experience of having cancer: “to
heal is to convince the cancer cells to sing in tune with the rest
of the body.”
The (metaphorical) idea of a “menu” of metaphors inspired
a similar initiative in relation to Covid-19, to which I now turn.
The #ReframeCovid collection of metaphors
In late March 2020, while most of Europe and other parts of the
world were in lockdown, a group of researchers interested in
metaphor used Twitter to come together and launch an initia-
tive aimed at collecting alternatives to War metaphors for
Covid-19. The initiative – #ReframeCovid – was launched by
two Spanish academics, Paula Pérez-Sobrino (La University of
La Rioja) and Inés Olza (University of Navarra), and was
soon joined by Veronika Koller and myself at Lancaster
University (https://sites.google.com/view/reframecovid/
home). For a detailed account of the initiative, its develop-
ment and engagement with the media, see Olza et al. (in
press). Here I will focus on the core of the initiative – a crowd-
sourced collection of metaphors for Covid-19 other than War
metaphors in any language, which anybody can contribute to
and use via an open-source document covered by a Creative
Commons license (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/
1TZqICUdE2CvKqZrN67LcmKspY51Kug7aU8oGvK5WEbA/
edit#gid=781680773). At the time of writing, the collection
includes over 550 examples in 30 languages, as well as some visual
and multimodal metaphors, contributed by approximately 100
individuals.
The metaphors included in the collection vary in terms of
the areas of experience from which they draw, the aspect of the
pandemic that they capture, and the ways in which they frame
that aspect of the pandemic. Some Sports metaphors, for
example, share some similarities with War metaphors, namely,
the positioning of the virus as an opponent and the contrast
between winning and losing, as in this extract from a speech by
the WHO Director-General (NB: When quoting from the
#ReframeCovid collection, I include, in italics, the name of
the person who contributed that example to the collection,
except where I contributed the example):
1. You can’t win a football game only by defending. You
have to attack as well. (Ghebreyesus, 2020; Isabel Solana)
Other metaphors emphasize the need for patience and sus-
tained effort over a very long period, as in this statement by
the Swedish Prime Minister:
2. Vi befinner oss i ett maratonlopp och måste vara
förberedda på att det här kommer att vara med oss länge.
We are in a marathon and have to be prepared for the fact that
this will be with us for a long time. (Ronge & Eriksson, 2020;
Anna W. Gustafsson)
Journey metaphors can similarly suggest a long and difficult
process with an uncertain conclusion, as in this quote from the
President of Bavaria:
3. Daher sind wir noch nicht über den Berg.
That’s why we’re not over the mountain-[top] yet. (“Osteransprache
des Ministerpräsidenten”, 2020; Aleksandra Salamurovic; https://
www.marktspiegel.de/nuernberg/c-lokales/osteransprache-des-
ministerpraesidenten-dr-markus-soeder-ruft-zu-geduld-und-
durchhalten-auf_a56910)
Metaphors involving weather events or natural disasters tend
to focus on the consequences of Covid-19 for health systems,
but also background the role of the governments responsible
for properly funding those health systems:
4. He [Professor Hugh Montgomery] said there would be
a “tsunami” of cases coming in the next 2 weeks in
London. (Triggle, 2020; Iona Walker)
5. Es en Madrid donde mayores tensiones existen para
soportar la avalancha que sufre el sistema sanitario.
It is in Madrid that there are the greatest tensions to withstand
the avalanche suered by the health system. (Cué, 2020; Isabel
Solana)
Some metaphors are more strikingly original, such as descrip-
tions of the virus as a “a coiled spring ready to get out if we
don’t stay on top of it” and as “glitter” that “gets everywhere,”
or this Norwegian re-framing of what counts as heroic beha-
vior in pandemic times:
6. hvis man skal være helt i dise tider, skal man gjøre som
pinnsvinet. Ikke brøle som en løve eller slås som en titan,
men rulle seg sammen og vente, håper på bedre tider.
if one is going to be a hero in these times, one should act like
a hedgehog. Don’t roar like a lion or fight like a giant, but roll up
in a ball and wait, hope for better times. (Isakstuen, 2020; Susan
Nacey)
The metaphor of the hedgehog (explicitly) contrasts with
combative/competitive metaphors by encouraging the kind
of self-limiting behavior that most people have to adopt to
reduce the transmission of the virus (see Pérez-Sobrino et al.
in press, for a discussion of creative metaphors in the
collection).
The rationale for collecting and sharing alternatives to War
metaphors was an awareness of the dominance of military ima-
gery at the beginning of the pandemic, and the potential short-
comings of this imagery. However, the initiative aims to collect
and share a wide range of metaphorical framings of the pan-
demic, for research and practical use, without endorsing any
particular metaphors. This is consistent with the non-
prescriptive approach that is part of the professional ethos of
researchers on language use. Nonetheless, alongside the other
members of the #ReframeCovid collective, I am often asked for
an opinion about what metaphor or metaphors are most appro-
priate for the pandemic, and it is in fact possible to provide some
answers based on previous research on what makes for an
effective metaphor (Grady, 2017; Thibodeau et al., 2017) and of
systematic analyses of communication about the unfolding pan-
demic. In the next section, I draw from the #ReframeCovid
collection and a large corpus of news articles in English to
suggest that Fire metaphors, and specifically metaphors
HEALTH COMMUNICATION 53

involving forest fires, are particularly appropriate and useful for
communication about the pandemic.
Fire metaphors for Covid-19
The question of what makes a metaphor effective has been
discussed from different perspectives, including laboratory-
based experimental studies (e.g., Thibodeau et al., 2017), and
surveys regarding public messaging initiatives on topics such as
climate change (Grady, 2017). Overall, effective metaphors
tend to involve (a) complex and abstract target domains that
are not linked to preexisting strongly held beliefs and evalua-
tions; (b) source domains that are widely accessible, well-
delineated and image-rich, (c) precise and clearly applicable
mappings from source to target domains, which make
a metaphor “apt.”
Whereas (a) highlights the potential influence of all
metaphors, especially at the start of the pandemic, different
metaphors for Covid-19 can be contrasted in terms of (b)
and (c). Fires are vivid, or image-rich; they are familiar,
even if not necessarily through direct experience; they can
be of different kinds (e.g., forest fires, house fires, dumpster
fires); they have multiple elements and participants (e.g.,
arsonists, trees, fire-fighters, victims, etc.); and they have
a clear evolution (causes, beginnings, middles, ends, and
aftermaths). Therefore, they are a suitable area of experience
for metaphorical exploitation, as shown by previous studies
of Fire metaphors for emotions and of a variety of other
phenomena, from sexual desire to social movements (e.g.,
Charteris-Black, 2017; Kövecses, 2000). However, the fact
that fires can be destructive and hard to control has also
been shown to make Fire metaphors useful tools for inspir-
ing awe and exercising power in religious and political texts
from different cultures and historical periods (Charteris-
Black, 2017), and for legitimizing forceful law-enforcement
interventions in response to social unrest (Hart, 2017).
Concerning the aptness of Fire metaphors, fires cause harm
and destruction by progressively increasing in size and inten-
sity, and are therefore a suitable source domain for any phe-
nomenon that cause damage by “spreading” (Charteris-Black,
2017; Hart, 2017). This clearly applies to a highly contagious
virus for which there is no, or little, immunity in humans. In
what follows I point out several other respects in which Fire
metaphors can be shown to be apt for the pandemic more
generally, and for arguably “beneficial” rhetorical purposes.
Finding Fire metaphors for Covid-19
The discussion of Fire metaphors that follows is based on two
sources of data:
●The #ReframeCovid collection of metaphors.
●The Coronavirus Corpus (https://www.english-corpora.
org/corona/) – an online collection of news articles in
English from around the world from January 2020
onwards; at the cutoff point for my data collection (30
th
September 2020), the corpus consisted of just over
600 million words.
Concerning the #ReframeCovid collection, I searched for
fire-related terms in the column of the spreadsheet that cap-
tures the source domain of the relevant metaphor. That
resulted in seven verbal Fire metaphors from six different
languages (Dutch, English, German, Greek, Italian and
Spanish). Concerning the Coronavirus Corpus, I searched for
“coronavirus” or “covid-19” in a span five words to the left and
five words to the right of “fire.” That generated 946 hits, or
“concordance” lines. I then used the metaphor identification
procedure proposed by Pragglejaz Group (2007) to identify
metaphorical uses of fire-related vocabulary. I included fire-
related similes and other “direct” metaphors (Steen et al.,
2010). I excluded fire-related metaphors for topics other than
Covid-19. That resulted in 54 examples of relevant Fire meta-
phors (see Semino, 2020 for an earlier discussion of Fire meta-
phors in a smaller dataset).
What Fire metaphors can do
In the specific data, I have analyzed, Fire metaphors are used
flexibly and creatively for multiple purposes, particularly to:
●convey danger and urgency;
●distinguish between different phases of the pandemic;
●explain how contagion happens and the role of indivi-
duals within that;
●explain measures for reducing contagion;
●portray the role of health workers;
●connect the pandemic with health inequalities and other
problems; and
●outline post-pandemic futures.
Danger and urgency
Fires can spread quickly, be hard to control, and grow very
large, causing large-scale and irreparable damage. These char-
acteristics can be exploited metaphorically to convey the dan-
gers posed by the coronavirus, and the need for urgent action.
In a Spanish example from the #ReframeCovid collection from
March 2020, the coronavirus is described by an anthropologist
as needing to be approached as “un gran fuego” (“a large fire”),
while a Canadian news report from the Coronavirus Corpus
from August 2020 explains that the US–Canada border is
closed “because of the raging COVID-19 dumpster fire in the
U.S.” (Sims, 2020). When the focus is on uncontrollable spread,
what is evoked is often a forest fire. For example, in June 2020
a Pakistani minister described the coronavirus as “spreading
like a fire in the jungle” in the rural areas of the country, while,
in June 2020, the director of the Center for Infectious Disease
at the University of Minnesota talked about a “forest fire that
may not slow down.”
Different phases
The life cycle of fires can be exploited metaphorically to
distinguish between different phases in the seriousness of
the pandemic, in terms of numbers of new infections and
success or failure in reducing those numbers. In April 2020,
when new daily infections were increasing fast on Rhode
Island, a New York Times article described it as a “a state
where the coronavirus is a fire raging” (Powell, 2020). In
54 E. SEMINO

contrast, in May 2020, the Irish Prime Minister combined
Fire and War metaphors when he stated that, in Ireland, the
coronavirus was a “fire in retreat” but “not defeated,” add-
ing: “We must extinguish every spark, quench every ember.”
Nerlich (2020) quotes New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda
Arnden, who was widely praised for her leadership during
the pandemic, as similarly talking about the importance of
“actively testing those who might be at risk of Covid-19 as
we hunt to find any burning embers of the virus.”
References to metaphorical embers are particularly useful to
suggest that danger still persists even when the number of
infections has substantially decreased.
How contagion happens
Explaining how contagion happens is a particular challenge in
public health communication about the coronavirus: the process
is not just invisible, but it also involves asymptomatic people and
takes place during the most ordinary daily activities. There is also
a fine balance to strike between persuading people to reduce the
chance of being in danger, or being a danger to others, on the
one hand, and, on the other hand, avoiding excessive blame on
individuals. Here Fire metaphors can be particularly useful.
In a semi-technical explanation from the medical website
Medscape, people are trees that provide fuel to a forest fire
driven by wind:
7. Think of COVID-19 as a fire burning in a forest. All of us
are trees. The R0 is the wind speed. The higher it is, the
faster the fire tears through the forest. But just like
a forest fire, COVID-19 needs fuel to keep going. We’re
the fuel. (Wilson, 2020)
In other forest fire metaphorical scenarios, people are “kindling,’
“sparks being thrown off” (when infecting others) and “fuel”
(when becoming infected). In these cases, Fire metaphors con-
vey the dangers posed by people being in close proximity to one
another, but without directly attributing blame: People are
described as inanimate entities (trees, kindling, fuel) that are
consumed by the fire they contribute to spread.
A variant of this metaphor, by three scientists writing for
The Atlantic, involves an urban fire:
8. Think of the coronavirus pandemic as a fire ravaging our
cities and towns that is spread by infected people breathing
out invisible embers every time they speak, cough, or
sneeze. Sneezing is the most dangerous – it spreads embers
farthest – coughing second, and speaking least, though it
still can spread the embers. These invisible sparks cause
others to catch fire and in turn breathe out embers until we
truly catch fire – and get sick. (Tufecki et al., 2020)
Here the reference to “invisible embers” is a particularly vivid
way to portray the danger posed by something as seemingly
innocuous as breath.
Measures to reduce contagion
The use of Fire metaphors to explain how contagion happens
often sets the scene for explaining how new infections can be
stopped. The extract from Medscape above (example 7), for
instance, where people are “trees” and “fuel”, goes on to exploit
the forest fire scenario to convey the effectiveness of quaran-
tines and social distancing:
9. A few fire lines – quarantines and social distancing mea-
sures – keep the fire from hitting all the trees. (Wilson, 2020)
Similarly, the metaphor where people breathe out “invisible
embers” (example 8 above) is used to justify face masks as an
effective measure against the spread of the virus:
10. If we could just keep our embers from being sent out every
time we spoke or coughed, many fewer people would catch
fire. Masks help us do that. And because we don’t know for
sure who’s sick, the only solution is for everyone to wear
masks. This eventually benefits the wearer because fewer
fires mean we’re all less likely to be burned. My mask
protects you; your masks protect me. (Tufecki et al., 2020)
As time went on, Fire metaphors were also used as part of
debates about different approaches to dealing with the pan-
demic. In the extract below, from the 30
th
September edition of
the BBC Radio 4 program The World Tonight, UK virologist
Chris Smith makes an explicit comparison with forest fires to
argue that the resurgence of the virus in the North of England
in September 2020 could only be addressed by stopping contact
between people (as opposed to more limited measures taken at
the time, such as closing pubs early):
11. the way that you stop a disease spreading is in the same way
as if we have a forest fire and we want to stop the fire,
pouring water on it immediately where the fire is doesn’t
actually work, you’ve got to get downwind of the fire and
you rob it of fuel, you create a fire break by cutting the trees
down, so what that translates to in human terms is you
know where the activity is, you stop those people transmit-
ting, you stop them moving and giving it to other people, so
you cut off the supply of fuel and oxygen to the fire
Also, in September 2020, US epidemiologist William Hanage
was quoted as using the metaphor of a house fire to counter the
notion, that had been put forward at the time, that the best
approach to the pandemic was to shield the vulnerable popula-
tion and allow everyone else to live normally, until herd
immunity was achieved:
12. William Hanage, a professor of epidemiology at
Harvard, likens the strategy to protecting antiques in
a house fire by putting them all in one room, standing
guard with a fire extinguisher but simultaneously fan-
ning the flames.
“If the blaze outside the room were adequately controlled
then maybe, just maybe, they would be able to stamp out
all the embers,” he said. “But this approach is to actively
encourage the fire. The risk is that too many sparks make
it through and all you’re left with is ashes.” (Sample, 2020;
Christopher Hart)
HEALTH COMMUNICATION 55

Nerlich (2020) mentions a contrasting use of a house fire
metaphor by a citizen of New York to suggest that the con-
sequences of containment measures may be too high for
society and the economy: “Just because the fire was put out
doesn’t mean the house wasn’t burned down.”
Healthcare workers
Within Fire metaphors, healthcare workers are normally posi-
tioned as firefighters who “run into raging blazes” for the sake
of everyone else. This emphasizes the risks that healthcare
workers run, and can therefore be used to stress the need to
respect social distancing rules and/or wear face masks. For
example, the description of the importance of face masks in
example 8 above is followed by: “Plus, our firefighters would no
longer be overwhelmed” (Tufecki et al., 2020).
Making health inequalities and other problems worse
Fire metaphors can be used to emphasize the additional vul-
nerability of people who live in cramped conditions. For exam-
ple, a South African commentator pointed out that the virus
could spread particularly fast in informal settlements: “Look at
how shack fires happen: you light one fire, and the whole place
burns down” (Kiewit & Smit, 2020). In July 2020, a US judge
was quoted as writing that ICE’s family detention centers “are
on fire [with coronavirus] and there is no time for half mea-
sures” (Travassos et al., 2020).
In a few cases, Fire metaphors are used to suggest that the
coronavirus is making existing problems or crises worse. In
these cases, the metaphorical fire was already burning, and the
coronavirus “add[s] fuel to the fire” or “throws gasoline on the
fire,” for example, in the context of preexisting tensions in US
prisons, or, at the individual level, in the context of long-term
mental health problems.
The future
Fire metaphors can also be adapted to paint different pictures
of a post-Covid-19 future. In such cases, the focus in on being
better prepared for future pandemics, or trying to prevent them
altogether. Nerlich (2020) quotes microbiologist Peter Piot as
using a Fire metaphor to argue for regular investment in the
people and resources who are needed to deal with pandemics:
13. I hope the lesson will really be that we can’t afford to
recreate the fire brigade when the house is on fire, we
need the fire brigade ready all the time, hoping that it
never has to be deployed. (Hamill, 2020)
Italian commentator Paolo Costa includes a reference to the
future in a lengthy forest fire metaphor, from a piece entitled
“Non soldati, ma pompieri” (“Not soldiers, but fire-fighers”):
14. Non solo ci sono continuamente focolai da spegnere e,
quando la sorte si accanisce, giganteschi fronti di fuoco
da arginare, ma è dovere di tutti collaborare quotidia-
namente alla bonifica del terreno affinché scintille,
inneschi, distrazioni più o meno colpevoli non provo-
chino adesso o in futuro disastri irreparabili.
Not only are there constant outbreaks to extinguish and, when
our luck gets worse, gigantic fronts of fire to control, but it is
everyone’s duty to collaborate daily in the reclamation of the soil,
so that sparks, triggers, and more or less guilty distractions do not
cause irreparable disasters now or in the future. (Costa, 2020)
Here the idea of collective responsibility for soil reclamation to
prevent new fires suggests that lifestyles will have to change
long-term in order to avoid future pandemics.
Conclusion
Metaphor is too pervasive and useful a tool for communication
and thinking to be avoided or censored because it can do harm
as well as good. However, some metaphors are more apt than
others, depending on the topic and context, and I have shown
that Fire metaphors can be particularly appropriate and versa-
tile in communication about the Covid-19 pandemic, espe-
cially as compared with War metaphors. Of course, no
metaphor can cater for all aspects of something as complex
and long term as a global pandemic, nor for all contingencies
and audiences. For example, Fire metaphors are not best suited
to highlight the danger of asymptomatic transmission of the
virus; they may be less effective for people with no strong fears
of fires (cf. resonance in Landau et al., 2018); or, conversely,
they may be inappropriate in parts of the world where literal
forest fires are a regular or current threat. Initiatives such as
#ReframeCovid can be particularly useful to bring together the
widest possible range of metaphorical tools for the pandemic,
from marathons to glitter. As I hope to have shown, a well-
informed and context-sensitive approach to metaphor selec-
tion can be an important part of public health messaging.
Funding
This work was supported by the Economic and Social Research Council,
part of UK Research and Innovation. [ES/R008906/1].
References
Atanasova, D., & Koteyko, N. (2017). Metaphors in Guardian Online and
Mail Online opinion-page content on climate change: War, religion,
and politics. Environmental Communication, 11(4), 452–469. https://
doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2015.1024705
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational discourse. Continuum.
Cameron, L., & Stelma, J. H. (2004). Metaphor clusters in discourse.
Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 107–136. https://doi.org/10.1558/
japl.2004.1.2.107
Charteris-Black, J. (2017). Fire metaphors: Discourses of awe and authority.
Bloomsbury.
Citron, F. M., & Goldberg, A. E. (2014). Metaphorical sentences are more
emotionally engaging than their literal counterparts. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience, 26(11), 2585–2595. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00654
Clarke, R. (2020, May 30). “This man knows he’s dying as surely as I do:”
A doctor’s dispatches from the NHS frontline. The Guardian https://
www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/30/this-man-knows-hes-
dying-as-surely-as-i-do-a-doctors-dispatches-from-intensive-care
Costa, P. (2020, March 28). Emergenza coronavirus: Non soldati, ma
pompieri Settimana News http://www.settimananews.it/societa/emer
genza-coronavirus-non-soldati-ma-pompieri/
Cué, C. E. (2020, March 22). Sánchez advierte de que llega la “ola más
dura”y pide fortaleza y unidad. El País https://elpais.com/espana/2020-
56 E. SEMINO

03-21/sanchez-advierte-de-que-llega-la-ola-mas-duray-pide-fortaleza
-y-unidad.html
Demjén, Z., & Semino, E. (2017). Using metaphor in healthcare: Physical
health. In E. Semino & Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of
metaphor and language (pp. 385–399). Routledge.
Demjén, Z., & Semino, E. (2020). Communicating nuanced results in
language consultancy: The case of cancer and the Violence metaphor.
In L. Mullany (Ed.), Professional communication: Consultancy, advo-
cacy, activism (pp. 191–210). Palgrave.
Flusberg, S. J., Matlock, T., & Thibodeau, P. H. (2018). War metaphors in
public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 33(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.
1080/10926488.2018.1407992
Flusberg, S. J., Matlock, T., & Thibodeau, P. H. (2017). Metaphors for
the War (or Race) against climate change. Environmental
Communication, 11(6), 769–783. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.
2017.1289111
Ghebreyesus, T. A. (2020). WHO Director-General’s opening remarks at
the media briefing on COVID-19-23 March 2020; https://www.who.int/
director-general/speeches/detail/who-director-general-s-opening-
remarks-at-the-media-briefing-on-covid-19—23-march-2020)
Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (2017). Metaphor wars: Conceptual metaphors in human
life. Cambridge University Press.
Grady, J. (1997). Foundations of meaning: Primary metaphors and primary
scenes [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of California at
Berkeley.
Grady, J. (2017). Using metaphor to influence public perceptions and
policy: How metaphors can save the world. In E. Semino &
Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language
(pp. 343–354). Routledge.
Hamill, J. (2020, May 21). Coronavirus: Millions could be left with health
complications and a vaccine may never be found, scientist warns. The
Herald https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18467082.corona
virus-millions-left-health-complications-vaccine-may-never-found-
scientist-warns/
Hart, C. (2017). “Riots engulfed the city”: An experimental study investi-
gating the legitimating effects of fire metaphors in discourses of dis-
order. Discourse & Society, 29(3), 279–298. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0957926517734663
Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2015). The war on prevention: Bellicose
cancer metaphors hurt (some) prevention intentions. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(1), 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0146167214557006
Hauser, D. J., & Schwarz, N. (2020). The war on prevention II: Battle
metaphors undermine cancer treatment and prevention and do not
increase vigilance. Health Communication, 35(13), 1698–1704. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1663465
Hendricks, R. K., Demjén, Z., Semino, E., & Boroditsky, L. (2018).
Emotional implications of metaphor: Consequences of metaphor fram-
ing for mindset about cancer. Metaphor & Symbol, 33(4), 267–279.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1549835
Hobbes, T. ([1661] (1996)). Leviathan (R. Tuck, ed.). Cambridge
University Press.
Isakstuen, M. (2020, April 24) Ropingen min trengs ikke mer.
Morgenbladet https://morgenbladet.no/ideer/2020/04/ropingen-min-
trengs-ikke-mer
Johnson, B. (2020a). Prime Minister’s statement on coronavirus (COVID-
19): 17 March 2020 https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-
statement-on-coronavirus-17-march-2020
Johnson, B. (2020b). Prime Minister’s keynote speech at the 2020
Conservative Party Conference https://www.conservatives.com/news/
boris-johnson-read-the-prime-ministers-keynote-speech-in-full
Kiewit, L., & Smit, S. (2020, June 4). Virus spreads like fire in the Cape.
Mail & Guardian https://mg.co.za/news/2020-06-04-virus-spreads-like
-fire-in-the-cape/
Kövecses, Z. (2000). Metaphor and emotion: Language, culture, and body
in human feeling. Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of
Chicago Press.
Landau, M. J., Arndt, J., & Cameron, L. D. (2018). Do metaphors in health
messages work? Exploring emotional and cognitive factors. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 74(2018), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jesp.2017.09.006
Landau, M. J., & Keefer, L. A. (2014). This is like that: Metaphors in public
discourse shape attitudes. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8
(8), 463–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12125
Locke, J. ([1690] (1979)). An essay concerning human understanding
(P. H. Nidditch, ed). Oxford University Press.
Musolff, A. (2010). Metaphor, nation and the Holocaust. Routledge.
Nerlich, B. (2020, September 18) Metaphors and realities:
Coronavirus and climate change. https://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/
makingsciencepublic/2020/09/18/metaphors-and-realities-
coronavirus-and-climate-change/
Olza, I., Koller, V., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Pérez-Sobrino, P., & Semino, E. (in
press). The #ReframeCovid initiative: From Twitter to society via meta-
phor. Metaphor and the Social World.
Pérez-Sobrino, P., Semino, E., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Koller, V., &
Olza, I. (in press). Acting like a hedgehog in times of pandemic:
Metaphorical creativity in the #ReframeCovid collection. Metaphor
and Symbol.
Powell, M. (2020, April 28) Rhode Island pushes aggressive testing, a move
that could ease reopening. New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/
2020/04/28/us/coronavirus-rhode-island.html
Pragglejaz Group. (2007). MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically
used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. https://
doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752
Ribeiro, B., Hartley, S., Nerlich, B., & Jaspal, R. (2018). Media coverage of the
Zika crisis in Brazil: The construction of a “war” frame that masked social
and gender inequalities. Social Science & Medicine, 200(March2018),
137–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.01.023
Ronge, J., & Eriksson, C.-F. (2020, March 10). Löfven om coronaviruset:
”Ett maratonlopp”. Expressen https://www.expressen.se/nyheter/lof
ven-om-coronaviruset-ett-maratonlopp/
Sample, I. (2020, October 7). Why herd immunity strategy is regarded as fringe
viewpoint. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/
07/why-herd-immunity-strategy-is-regarded-as-fringe-viewpoint
Sanderson, B., & Meade, D. (2020, May 5). We are not at “war” with
coronavirus. Ecologist. https://theecologist.org/2020/may/05/we-are-
not-war-coronavirus
Scherer, A. M., Scherer, L. D., & Fagerlin, A. (2015). Getting ahead of
illness. Medical Decision Making, 35(1), 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/
0272989X14522547
Semino, E. (2020, July 1) “A fire raging”: Why fire metaphors work well for
Covid-19. http://cass.lancs.ac.uk/a-fire-raging-why-fire-metaphors-
work-well-for-covid-19/.
Semino, E., Demjén, Z., & Demmen, J. (2018a). An integrated approach to
metaphor and framing in cognition, discourse and practice, with an
application to metaphors for cancer. Applied Linguistics, 39(5),
625–645. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw028
Semino, E., Demjén, Z., Demmen, J., Koller, V., Payne, S., Hardie, A., &
Rayson, P. (2017). The online use of Violence and Journey metaphors
by patients with cancer, as compared with health professionals:
A mixed methods study. BMJ Supportive and Palliative Care, 7(1),
60–66. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000785
Semino, E., Demjén, Z., Hardie, A., Rayson, P., & Payne, S. (2018b).
Metaphor, cancer and the end of life: A corpus-based study. Routledge.
Sims, J. (2020, August 8). COVID-19 adds new dangers to border-crossing
float down from U.S. to Sarnia. The London Free Press. https://lfpress.
com/opinion/columnists/column-covid-19-adds-new-dangers-to-ill-
advised-and-sometimes-deadly-port-huron-float-down
Sontag, S. (1979). Illness as metaphor. Allen Lane.
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, B. J., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., &
Pasma, T. (2010). A method for linguistic metaphor identification: From
MIP to MIPVU. John Benjamins.
Tamkin, E. (2020, April 1). Using military language to discuss coronavirus
is dangerous and irresponsible – The US must stop. New Statesman
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/north-america/2020/04/using-
military-language-discuss-coronavirus-dangerous-and-irresponsible
Tay, D. (2017). Using metaphor in healthcare: Mental health. In E. Semino
& Z. Demjén (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of metaphor and language
(pp. 371–384). Routledge.
HEALTH COMMUNICATION 57

Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors we think with: The
role of metaphor in reasoning. PloS One, 6(2), e16782. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
Thibodeau, P. H., & Boroditsky, L. (2013). Natural language metaphors
covertly influence reasoning. PLoS One, 8(1), e52961. https://doi.org/
10.1371/journal.pone.0052961
Thibodeau, P. H., Hendricks, R. K., & Boroditsky, L. (2017). How
linguistic metaphor scaffolds reasoning. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences, 21(11), 852–863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.07.
001
Travassos, M. A., Foppiano Palacios, C., & Openshaw, J. J. (2020, July 25).
Government Putting Immigrant Detainees at COVID-19 Risk.
Medpage Today. https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/
covid19/87737
Triggle, N. (2020, April 3) Coronavirus: Is the NHS ready for the surge in
cases? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51714498
Tufecki, Z., Howard, J., & Greenhalgh, T. (2020, April 22). The real reason
to wear a mask. The Atlantic https://www.theatlantic.com/health/
archive/2020/04/dont-wear-mask-yourself/610336/
Wicke, P., & Bolognesi, M. (2020). Framing COVID-19: How we con-
ceptualize and discuss the pandemic on Twitter. PloS One, 15(9),
e0240010. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240010
Wilson, F. P. (2020, March 31). COVID-19 death predictions: What do we
need to know? Medscape https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/927791
58 E. SEMINO