Abstract In this paper, we aim to explain how metaphors can be employed for clarificatory purposes in British parliamentary debates. These debates typically involve an exchange of arguments concerning complex issues, which more often than not may require clarification. In clarifying something complex, metaphors are often employed in which an unfamiliar and abstract concept is compared to a more familiar and concrete concept. Because the choice of metaphor affects how an issue is understood and reasoned about, discussants may wish to oppose such a metaphor to avoid biased conceptions or even misunderstandings of the issue under discussion. We present a number of cases in which metaphors used for clarificatory purposes are opposed in a British Public Bill Committee debate on the Digital Economy Bill. Our analyses uncover which metaphors are used for clarificatory purposes, to what extent these clarificatory metaphors contribute to furthering the resolution of a debate on the acceptability of legislative proposals, and what consequences opposing such metaphors may have on the continuation of the debate.

中文翻译：

---

在英国公共法案委员会辩论的议论文中使用澄清性隐喻

摘要 在本文中，我们旨在解释如何在英国议会辩论中使用隐喻进行澄清。这些辩论通常涉及就复杂问题交换论据，这往往需要澄清。在阐明复杂事物时，经常使用隐喻，将不熟悉和抽象的概念与更熟悉和具体的概念进行比较。因为隐喻的选择会影响一个问题的理解和推理方式，所以讨论者可能希望反对这种隐喻，以避免对所讨论的问题产生偏见甚至误解。我们提出了一些案例，其中用于澄清目的的隐喻在英国公共法案委员会关于数字经济法案的辩论中遭到反对。