Abstract This study seeks to survey the types of metaphor in Bill Clinton’s two speeches delivered in the Jordanian Parliament and the Israeli Knesset in 1994, and how these metaphors are used to intensify different emotions to foster peace between Jordan and Israel. I argue that Clinton uses metaphorical language in his speeches because it is emotionally more intense (Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2011. Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor . New York: Palgrave Macmillan), which consequently heightens the effect of his messages. I also argue that Clinton used prophetic sayings, which were expressed in metaphors, to communicate the values of peace contrasted with the negatives of war. The findings indicate that the epideictic forms of Clinton’s oratory in fostering peace between Jordan and Israel are facilitated in part by transferring socio-pragmatic meanings through the use of metaphors “designed” (Martin, James R. 1999. Grace: The logogenesis of freedom. Discourse Studies 1(1). 29–56) in accordance to the audiences’ “cultural rhetorical resources” (Liebersohn, Yosef Z., Yair Neuman & Zvi Bekerman. 2004. Oh baby, it’s hard for me to say I’m sorry: Public apologetic speech and cultural rhetorical resources. Journal of Pragmatics 36(5). 921–944) to arouse the audience’s feelings. Further, Clinton’s use of prophetic sayings wrapped in metaphors aims at viewing himself as “sounding right” with “right intention” (Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2011. Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor . New York: Palgrave Macmillan, p. 20).
Sadam Issa (2026) studied this question.