Dissertation - Final Ever Version

Dissertation (single honours): LE3014
Candidate No: 632554

A Multimodal Analysis of How Apple Inc.
Uses Semantics in Advertisements to
Personalize its Products
Contents
u
Abstract

Candidate No: 632554 Module No: LE3014

1
Abstract
This study conducts a multimodal analysis on Apple adverts published between
2001 and 2015. Deviating from the idea that language always plays the central
role in language, whilst accepting that it often does, this study synthesizes visual
and lexical analysis to demonstrate that textual and visual signs are among social
semiotic resources which contribute to the theme of personalization in Apple
adverts. Adopting Kress and Van Leeuwen’s (2001) Social Semiotic framework,
seven examples of official Apple adverts are analyzed. Acknowledging image,
word, colour and numerous other semiotic modes through which social meanings
of advertisements are coded, the intentional outcome of this study is to illuminate
the varying ways in which the theme of personalization is consistently conveyed
within Apple adverts. Simultaneously, it aims to probe the hypothesis that there
exists a visual syntax and that social semiotic reference occupies a pivotal point
in the relationship between advertising discourse and ideology. Conceptualizing
the processing of signs intends to reveal the implicit messages Apple intends to
communicate about its products to consumers.


2
Acknowledgements

I would like to personally thank Dr Urszula Clark for engaging with my research
and sharing in my excitement for this topic.
I would also like to extend recognition to Russell Printers Ltd for their professional
printing services and altruistic customer care.


3
“Many a small thing has been made
large by the right kind of advertising.”
Mark Twain, 1889.


4
Contents Page No:
Abbreviations……………………………………………………… 6
Introduction………………………………………………………… 7-8
Aims and Objectives……………………………………………… 9-11
Literature Review
Advertising………………………………………………. 12-13
Introduction to Semiotics………………………………. 13-14
Social Semiotic Approaches towards Advertising…… 14
Reading Images and Signs……………………………. 15-17
Iconographic Symbolism………………………………. 17-18
Visual Metaphor………………………………………… 18-19
Signs in Advertising…………………………………….. 20
Multimodality…………………………………………….. 20-21
Linguistic Metaphor…………………………………….. 21-24
Personification…………………………………………… 24-25
Methodology
Data Collection…………………………………………… 26
Ethics……………………………………………………… 27
Data Limitations………………………………………….. 27
Data Analysis…………………………………………….. 27-28


5
Results/Analysis
Campaigns:
Figure 1 (iPod - 2001)………………………................. 29-33
Figure 2 (“Get a Mac” - 2006)………………………….. 34-37
Figure 3 (“Say hello to iPhone” - 2007)……………….. 38-41
Figure 4 (iPhone 5 - 2012)……………………………… 42-44
Figure 5 (MacBook Pro - 2013)………………………… 45-47
Figure 6 (iMac - 2014)…………………………………... 48-52
Figure 7 (Apple Watch - 2015)………………………..... 53-56
Discussion………………………………………………………………..
Does a “Visual Grammar” Exist?.................................. 57-61
The Validity of Social Semiotics as an Approach to Ad
Discourse…………………………………………………. 61-63
Are Visual Codes Driven by Metaphor?....................... 63-64
Conclusion………………………………………………………………. 65-68
Bibliography…………………………………………………………….. 69-83
Appendices……………………………………………………………….
Vector lines:
Figure 1……………………………………………........... 84
Figure 3…………………………………………………… 85


6
Abbreviations

Advert – ad
Figure – Fig
1

1 Please note: This dissertation was typed on Microsoft Word that is set to
American spelling by default. Therefore, some American spellings will ensue.
However, I am aware that the American spellings used in this paper have been
standardized in the Oxford Dictionary e.g. personalized (personalised)


7
Introduction
This research is centred upon a multimodal analysis of advertisements used to
promote Apple products. Marshall McLuhan (1976) famously called advertising
“the greatest art form of the 20th
century” (McLuhan et al., 2008) and his claim
has since been resonated by linguists including Gillian Dyer (1982), Guy Cook
(2001) and Judith Williamson (2010). Together, they realize advertising as
complex interactional media that embraces ideological function and much like art,
recognize that its concept can be decoded and its effects fully appreciated. Many
identify advertising as a somewhat recent phenomenon. Nevertheless, it is a form
of communication, establishing it as “one of the oldest professions in the world”
(Akinbode, 2012: 26). The fundamental goal of all advertisements is to
communicate a message for a specific aim, typically to motivate human behavior
with respect to a commercial offering and hence, language is central to its
domain. However, advertising is a multimodal concept and is not exclusively
limited to words. Visual content holds equal weight in communicating intended
messages. Ultimately, it is the meaning behind the communication that is integral
to its objective, something that can be reduced to language and fully appreciated
through semiotics.
According to Forbes, Apple is currently valued at $124.2 Billion, establishing it as
the most valuable brand worldwide (Badenhausen, 2014). Apple’s high level of
brand loyalty is considered rare for any product. In 2014, Jonathon Ive (Senior
Vice President of Design Apple) explained to Time Magazine “people have an


8
incredibly personal relationship with Apple products” (Arlidge, 2014). John
Sculley (Apple CEO, 1983–1993) told The Guardian newspaper in 1997 "People
talk about technology, but Apple was a marketing company. It was the marketing
company of the decade" (Kahney, 2002). Apple’s globally renowned efforts
towards effective advertising can be appreciated beyond mere commercial
promotion, arguably further resembling a form of art. Its unique influence over
consumers and the “relationships” people share with Apple products, together
with its current dominance in the technological era, establishes Apple’s marketing
as an intriguing field for a linguist to explore and has motivated this study
accordingly. It begs the questions therefore, how does Apple represent its
products through advertisements, what meanings are consumers intended to
interpret from them and ultimately, what effect(s) is this likely to have on the way
people view Apple products? These recent questions deserve comprehensive
investigation.


9
Aims and Objectives
This study seeks to establish how Apple conveys the theme of personalization in
adverts published between 2001 (Subsequent to the iPods release) and the
present date. The rational for reviewing this time period specifically is based on
Apple’s leadership in consumer electronics and its sequential rise in
unconventional marketing campaigns during this time. The investigation aims to
answer the following specific research questions.
i) In what particular ways do the adverts for Apple use semantics to
personalize its products?
ii) Are there any reoccurring themes that can be identified within the
adverts?
iii) What messages do the discovered themes intend to covey to
consumers about Apple products?
Deviating from the idea that language always plays the central role in interaction,
“without denying that it often does” (Norris, 2004: 3), a multimodal analysis will
acknowledge both linguistic and visual meaning as significant contributors to the
theme of personalization. Taking personalized to mean both the act of attributing
human or personal qualities to inanimate objects, as well as, to render something
individual, the semiotic modes through which social meanings of advertisements
are coded will be analyzed. Drawing on Kress and Van Leeuwen’s (2001) Social
Semiotic framework, the signs present in the adverts will be analyzed for


10
“ideational”, “interpersonal” and “textual meaning” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001).
Maintaining explicit focus on how these metafunctions communicate meaning
aims to distinguish the visual representative tactics Apple employs to personalize
its products. This will allow the prevailing connotations to be highlighted and
interpreted systematically. Additionally, it will rely on an array of concepts
provided by other highly appraised semioticians including Machin (2007),
Harrison (2003) and Dillon (2006). This will justify the reasons as to why the
particular semiotic resources signify the prevailing connotations. Subsequently, a
discussion will ensue with regards to what effect(s) these connotations intend to
convey to consumers. Crucially, meaning at both the denoted (surface) and
connoted (Implicit) level will be attended to, echoing the works of Ronald Barthes
(1977) who has distinctly studied advertising from the perspective of sign theory.
With regards to linguistic analysis, figurative linguists including George Lakoff,
Mark Johnson (2003) and Stephen Brown (2011) will be referred to. This will
recognize personification and metaphor as symbolically imperative with regards
to distinguishing the semantic features Apple employs to lexically personalize its
products. These textual elements will be explored in the adverts and evaluated
accordingly with regards to how such lexical choices represent Apple products.
Thereafter, conclusions will be drawn based upon how they interact with the
visual elements to convey a particular effect. Their prevalence and significance
will also be attended to, both in terms of the messages they aim to transmit to


11
consumers about Apple products and how these connotations reflect the
company’s ethos respectively.


12
Literature review
Advertising
Adverts function as “cognitive arguments or affective prompts, known
respectively as central and peripheral cues” (Mick et al., 2004: 23). The nature of
ad discourse is intrinsically persuasive, informative and socially constructing
(Cook, 2001: 5, Dyer, 1986: 129, Durant & Lambrou 2009: 93). Since the
beginning of the 20th century, “advertising has developed into a privileged form
of social discourse that has unparalleled rhetorical force” (Beasley & Danesi,
2002: 16). Undeniably, advertising has become so pervasive as a method of
distributing meaning that it is now considered a fundamental means of
understanding the world, “particularly through which the arbitrary and culturally
determined are made to seem necessary and natural, even as a society is
constantly evolving” (Mick et al., 2004: 30). Nevertheless, researchers have
proclaimed that meaning remains one of the most complex phenomena to
theorize and investigate (Nöth, 1990: 92-102; Ogden & Richards, 1923; Schirato,
1998).

Shannon and Weaver’s (1949) model of communication directed a large extent of
early marketing and consumer research towards advertising. However, a
fundamental weakness in their paradigm was that it demonstrated an explicit
focus towards superficial linguistic messages and ignored underlying meanings
(Mick et al., 2004: 20-21). This lead to a significant lack of progress made in
“understanding pictorial messages or producing more nuanced


13
conceptualizations of ad elements per se” (Mick et al., 2004: 20-21). In response,
semiotics has necessarily gained popularity as a method to providing guidance
on intellectual dilemmas of meaning.
Introduction to Semiotics
“Semiotics is generally described as the study of signs” (Harrison, 2002: 47).
Signs, or “semiotic resources” (Berger, 2010: 11), are a “fusion of form and
meaning” (Kress, 2010:54). Signs are ideological (Voloshinov, 1973: 10), they
“function to persuade as well as to refer” (Chandler, 2007). Words, images,
colours, gestures and objects are all considered signs. Ferdinand Saussure and
Charles Pierce are deemed two key figures in the early development of
semiotics. I will refer exclusively to Saussurean terminology (signified/signifier)
since it was predominantly “Saussurean semioticains like Barthes who wrote
about advertising from the perspective of sign theory” (Beasley & Danesi, 2002:
22).
Saussure took a social approach to the study of signs. His dyadic model
suggested that arbitrary signs construct language and these can be separated
into two parts. “A sign is made up of the signifier, a material vehicle and the
signified, a mental concept or reference” (Dyer, 1996: 118). A signifier is
understood as having “meaning potential but not actual meaning” (Dyer, 1996:
118). Whereas the signified is recognized as “the concept or meaning which the


14
signifier refers to” (Dyer, 1996: 118). The signifier and the signified are “materially
inseparable” (Dyer, 1996: 118).
Social Semiotic Approaches towards Advertising
Social semiotic approaches extend the signification and interpretation of
meaning-making practices to specific cultural and social settings (Kress, 2010).
The application of social semiotic approaches is reasonably affiliated with the
study of advertising. This is because an advertisement is the result of design
(Kress, 2010: 43). Design suggests a presence of choice from a range of
possibilities. According to Kress, “choice is socially meaningful – it is ideological”
(2010: 61).
Advertisements are deliberately synthesized so that they achieve their purpose;
the instruments of signification are predetermined (Barthes, 1977: 152). Visual
composition designers use signs to connote particular discourses that “allow
them to define reality in a particular way” (Machin, 2007. 13). It makes sense
therefore to think of marketers functioning themselves as applied semioticians,
“even though they might not have heard of the science” (Berger, 2010: 71).
Adopting a social semiotic approach towards the study of advertising aims to
“unmask the arrays of hidden meanings in the underlying level” (Beasley &
Danesi, 2002: 31). “Conceptualizing the consumer’s processing of ad signs in
terms of meaning” (Mick et al., 2004: 23) offers valuable insight into the ways in
which a corporation intends to promote its products.


15
Reading Images/Signs
Barthes is recognized as the most distinguished scholar to have tackled the
language of advertising from a social semiotic perspective. He adopted
Saussure’s theory of semiotic analysis for the study of language and applied it to
the study of images. He argued that all images are “polysemous” (Barthes,
1977:156) and concluded, “there exist two levels of interpretation of the linguistic
message, namely, denotational and connotational” (Tanaka, 1994: 1-2). On a
denoted (surface) level, interpreting an image for Barthes is straightforward,
since it is “a message without a code” (Barthes, 1977:17). At the connotative
(implicit) level however, the meaning that will be actualized is “culturally
dependent on pre-existing bodies of knowledge of practical, cultural, natural,
historic or aesthetic nature” (Dyer, 1982: 128).
Saren et al. explained, “advertisements utilize a pre-existing referent system of
meaning, because the product, prior to signification in the advert, has no
meaning” (2007: 128). For this reason alone, Baudrillard has accused advertising
as being an “entirely useless and unnecessary universe” (1998: 164) that exudes
“pure connotation” (1998: 164). Machin declared, “it is these associations that
connote particular ideas and values” (2007: 25) about the advertised brand or
product. Barthes named the connotative “a coded iconic, or symbolic message”
(Dyer, 1982: 128) and referred to these connotative meanings as “myths” (1973).
He uses this concept to “express the dense associations of what is represented
in an image or sign” (Machin, 2007: 28).


16
Despite the duality Barthes draws between denotation and connotation in the
reading of images, Voloshinov maintains that no strict division can be made
because “meaning is always permeated with value judgment” (1973: 105). In
other words, “there can be no neutral, objective description which is free of an
evaluative element” (Chandler, 2007). Barnard (1996) also disagreed with
Barthes. He argued that nobody is ever challenged because their perceived
connotations are invalid, “so no inventory of the connoted meanings generated
by any sign could ever be complete” (1996: 83). This questions the validly of
social semiotics as a sufficient model for the interpretation of meaning.
Conversely to those who have denied the existence of a visual literacy, Kress
and Van Leeuwen have argued that just as “grammar is a means of representing
patterns of experience” (Halliday, 1985: 101) in verbal communication, the same
is also true for the “Grammar of Visual Design” (2006). From this perspective,
meaning is not always infused with subjectivity since there do exist neutral,
objective descriptions of meaning which are agreed upon within a certain culture.
Kress and Van Leeuwen’s (2001) framework realizes that the visual mode is
capable of satisfying the basic communicative functions of language in being able
to “communicate moods, form of address, ideas and textual coherence” (Machin,
2007: 159). Adopting three of Halliday’s (1978) metafunctions of systemic
functional linguistics, they apply them to the visual mode, claiming that an image
can create “ideational”, “interpersonal” and “textual meaning” (Kress & Van
Leeuwen, 2001).


17
Barthes noted how images rarely stand independent of lexical accompaniment
(Stokes, 2013: 125). He believed that words govern the meaning of the images
displayed in adverts by determining for them a single specific meaning (Machin,
2014: 327). Barthes referred to this functionality as “anchorage” (Tanaka, 1994:
2). Van Leeuwen (2005) uses the analogy of an orchestra, comparing the
unification of image and text in multimodal discourse to that of instruments. The
lexical and visual aspects are experienced in unison and become one
communicative act (Cook, 2001; Goddard, 1998). Machin has acknowledged
more recent theories however, which have emphasized how “readers, rather than
captions, anchor the meaning of images” (2014: 327). According to Eagleton,
“you cannot decide whether a statement is ideological or not by inspecting it in
isolation from its discursive context” (1991: 9). This revised understanding stems
from Halliday’s semiotic approach. He indicated that the texts themselves
embody a “meaning potential” (a set of possible meanings) (1978, 1984). The
meaning that will be realized “depends on the context – on who ‘reads’, where,
when, and for what reason” (Machin, 2014: 327).
Iconographic Symbolism
Machin understands the study of iconographic symbolism as the ways in which
people interpret how “certain objects, poses, gestures or other elements in a
visual composition represent people, values or ideas” (2007: 39). Vihma (1995)
effectively demonstrated how most ad designs project a combination of icons,
indices, and symbols that are purposely chosen to serve particular semantic


18
functions. She proposed how certain iconic qualities can influence a reader’s
perception by provoking distinctive responses. “Whiteness indicates cleanliness
or lightweight”, “a glassy look may suggest fragility” and analogies, such as “a
sleek, forward-leaning iron can appear like a fast vehicle” (Mick et al., 2004: 12).
Machin emphasizes how typography can have equally substantive effects. He
proposed that, “thick and angular letters, as opposed to slim and curved, will
communicate the quality of durability” (2007: 21). Van Leeuwen suggested how
abstract shapes such as a Christian cross also delivers a particular symbolic
value (2001). Panofsky asserted that it is impossible to trace the origins of such
symbolism. Nonetheless, Machin more optimistically proclaimed, “it is possible to
trace the origins of the kind of values that become loaded onto a symbol” (2007:
40). It is these values that are responsible for manipulating social signs since
they are not arbitrary but ideologically loaded. Ultimately, this is what social
semiotics is concerned with.
Visual Metaphor
Kress understands visual metaphors as signs, providing “(usually unnoticed)
guides and framings for thinking” (2010: 30). McQuarrie et al. (2013: 9) explain
that a distinctive feature of advertising is its reliance on pictures to persuade.
Semioticians assert pictorial communication in ads to be more receptive to
multiple interpretations than similar messages presented in words. This is due to
the implicit nature of the visual message and the cognitive elaboration they
necessitate (Eco, 1976; Toncar & Munch, 2001).


19
Visual metaphors are considered advantageous for the advertiser because they
inject novelty, thus creating a stimulus for processing the ad (Goodstein 1993).
There remains however lively debate concerning whether any difference exists
between visual or verbal metaphors (McQuarrie et al., 2013: 9). In response,
some researchers have argued how metaphor does not arise at the surface level
of signification (i.e., pictures versus words), but rather at the level of logical
reasoning (Forceville 1996; Hitchon 1997). This understanding draws heavily on
Peircean semiotics, which promotes the idea that “meaning is not passively
absorbed but arises only in the active process of interpretation” (Chandler, 2007).
Van Leeuwen claims, “visual structures realize meanings as linguistic structures
do also, and thereby point to different interpretations of experience and different
forms of social interaction” (2006). Scott has argued for a theory of visual rhetoric
to help researchers frame how meaning is constructed via visual arguments in
advertisements (1994). However, Machin emphasized that if one wishes to
propose that there is a visual language “we need to be precise as to what
qualities language has and how we can draw on these observations to
characterize and understand visual compositions” (2007:1). Exciting scope
therefore remains for this study to investigate the contrasting and interrelating
effects of visual and lexical metaphor presented in the Apple ads, specifically in
terms of how they contribute to the theme of personalization.


20
Signs in Advertising
Barthes argued, “the semiotic study of the persuasive signs used by advertisers
had profound implications for understanding modern cultures” (Beasley & Danesi,
2002: 27). Williamson claims “ads ask us to participate in ideological ways of
seeing ourselves and the world” (2010). In light of this, it is clear why advertisers
consistently rely on a handful of hedonistic themes such as, “happiness,
youthfulness, success, status, luxury, fashion and beauty” (Beasley & Danesi,
2002: 27). Machin has stressed that advertisements typically resonate moral
values of capitalism, where product ranges are related with precisely these kinds
of values. “Companies no longer sell whisky but friendship, no longer shampoo
but hope” (2014: 331). The premise that guides semiotic analysis is that the
“signification systems created by advertisements is often reflective of innate
structures in the sensory emotional and intellectual composition of the human
body and the human psyche” (Beasley and Danesi, 2002: 27). This explains why
the forms of expression which advertising creates are so intrinsically appealing
far and wide (Machin 2014: 331).
Multimodality
“Multimodality is an inter-disciplinary approach drawn from social semiotics”
(Jewitt, 2010). It is accepted that every multimodal ensemble has been
engineered in such a way so that it achieves its purpose (O’Toole, 1994; Kress &
Van Leeuwen, 2006; O'Halloran, 2011). Multimodality attempts to recognize the
initiative for such a design by understanding “communication and representation


21
as more than language” (Jewitt, C, 2014). It strives to makes sense of that which
is taken for granted and achieves this through drawing on semiotic resources by
way of conceptualizing the rationale behind semantically predetermined ingenuity
(Thwaites, et al., 1994: 7, Thwaites & Davis, 2002: 9; Chandler, 2007). Although
multimodality can clarify what modes are used, “it cannot tell us about this
difference in style; it has no means to tell us what that difference might mean”
(Kress et al., 2010: 1). It is therefore the responsibility of social semiotics to
answer questions about the semantic implications that arise from interpreting
culturally and ideologically loaded signs in multimodal phenomena.
Linguistic Metaphor
Michael Reddy’s paper, ‘The Conduit Metaphor’ (1979), reformed traditional
views, which had understood metaphor as a figure of speech representative of
language alone. Lakoff and Johnson’s (1980; 2003) book, ‘Metaphors We Live
By’, amplified Reddy’s earlier vision, revealing fascinating insight into the
pervasiveness of metaphor and the extent to which it “governs thought and
action” (1980: 3). This gave rise to the contemporary theory that “metaphor is
primarily conceptual, conventional, and part of the ordinary system of thought
and language” (Lakoff, 1993). According to Lakoff and Johnson, the most
powerful conceptual metaphors are grounded on human embodiment, emotion,
sensation and physical orientation (Lakoff, 1980). Thereafter, metaphor became
redefined as a “cognitive system” (Turner, 1991) that shapes thoughts and


22
behavior, rather than simply a language phenomenon confined to the realms of
poetry.
Zhang and Gao noted how “advertisers have increasingly used conceptual
metaphor to attract viewers’ attention, convey product information and promote
their products” (2009: 97). Leiss et al., consider metaphor “the very heart of the
basic communicative form used in modern advertising” (1986: 241). According to
McQuarrie et al., it is rare to find adverts that do not convey metaphor in at least
some capacity. “If the picture is straightforward, then the headline may be
metaphorical” (2005: 7). The metaphorical concept inherent within an advert is
usually expressed either pictorially or linguistically, often acting as a ‘‘link
between the domain of the advertised item and other domains’’ (Ungerer, 2000:
321). This is why Kress extends his understanding of transference specifically
relating to attempts at naming and capturing “the essence of the alterations and
remakings of social arrangements and practices” (2010: 6).
Mcquarie et al., declare the employment of metaphor to be advantageous for
advertisers because they “render the consumer more receptive to multiple,
distinct, positive inferences about the advertised brand” (2005: 8). This goes
some way to explaining the pervasiveness of metaphorical language use in
advertising. However, Ward and Gaidis acknowledged how comprehensibility is
an essential aspect in the study of metaphors. "To be effective, a promotional
metaphor must be minimally comprehended by its intended audience" (1990:


23
636). Stern pointed out that a significant proportion of the intended audience
does not always comprehend the intended meaning of the metaphor (1988). This
is because metaphors elicit more cognitive elaboration than literal messages.
Decoding the embedded meanings in Apple adverts will reveal why conceptual
inferences of the linguistic metaphor are fundamental to understanding the
marketed intentions of the brand.
Previous research into the use of metaphor in advertising has been somewhat
limited by exploratory approaches which have focused exclusively on either
linguistic metaphor (Tanaka, 1994) or pictorial metaphor (Forceville, 1996).
Consequently, there remains a restricted amount of literature that has attempted
to study the fusion of linguistic and visual metaphor in multimodal phenomena.
Whilst it remains beneficial to prove the pervasiveness of either conceptual types
of metaphor in advertising, it does little to explain how they operate, or how they
synthesize effectively for the purpose of convincing the reader into adopting an
intended idea (Hermerén, 1999; Fan Yingxia, 2008). Those studies that have
applied relevance theory to analyze metaphors in advertising have generally
concentrated on evaluating their merit. They have “interpreted metaphor as
deriving strong and weak implicatures and not regarded it as mappings across
conceptual domains (e.g. Wu Xiuming, 2007)” (Zhang & Gao, 2009: 97).
Kress et al., acknowledged how some things can be only expressed visually,
others only verbally, “but when something can only be said both visually and


24
verbally the way in which it is said will be different” (2006). It is therefore
necessary to discover the thematic implications that arise when the
amalgamation of total semantic stimulus occurs and what effect this is likely to
have on a consumer’s reading of adverts. It is with this understanding that one is
able to deduce the varying ways through which “ideologically loaded” (Fairclough,
1989; Hines, 1999) signs are coded and how they interact with textual elements.
Personification
Brown offers the concise definition of personification as, “the figure of speech that
bestows human characteristics on inanimate objects” (2011:3), thus representing
the object as a living thing. Recent attention has been directed towards the
employment of this rhetorical device in commercial advertisements (Delbaere, et
al, 2011; Brown, 2011; McQuarrie & Mick, 1996; Toncar & Munch, 2001; Aaker,
1997, Taylor 1999; Williamson, 2010). Lakoff and Johnson’s (2003)
aforementioned research insightfully revealed how “our very understanding of the
world is reliant on figurative thinking” (Durgee et al., 2006) and it is clear that the
advertising industry is undoubtedly aware of this factor. “Dancing coffee beans,
lovelorn mobile phones, amorous chocolate bars, grumpy vacuum cleaners,
malevolent bathroom bacteria, yodeling credit cards and friendly pro-biotic
yogurts” (Brown, 2011) account for some of the familiar various personifications
that frequently transpire. These examples realize the notion that all forms of
personification drawn on anthropomorphism, “the propensity to attribute human
qualities to objects” (Delbaere et al., 2011: 121).


25
Marketing researchers have firmly established that when personification is
embedded in an advert, it conveys “more positive emotions, more positive
attributions of brand personality, and greater brand liking” (Delbaere et al., 2011:
121). Fleck et al. claimed, “personifying a brand through the use of spokespeople
is a strategy that some companies use to humanize their brands” (2014: 84). In
particular, it has been noted that advertisers personify the brand with human like
traits that are especially appealing to the brands target demographic (Aaker,
1997; Fournier, 1998). This allows a brand to both “differentiate itself from others,
whilst enrich its brand-consumer relationship” (Fleck et al., 2014: 85).
Whilst ample studies have investigated personification in adverts as a lucrative
theme of enticement, focus has typically remained on brand association, product
recall and “mental characterization” (Aaker, 1997; Fournier, 1998; Ambroise et
al., 2005; Fleck et al., 2014). This suggests that an emphasis towards
investigating the effects of personification in advertising has outweighed
exploring the varying methods in which the theme of personalization can be
conveyed. This gap in the research provides fertile ground for investigating in
what precise ways personification is conveyed though the signification systems
present in Apple adverts. Asking how rather than why is a more recent and
perhaps relevant question, since it is known that personification is an effective
marketing strategy. The varying modes through which personification can be
conveyed however, has not been so extensively documented.


26
Methodology
Data Collection
In order to conduct a multimodal analysis over fifty Apple adverts were reviewed.
Seven were finally selected to form the primary dataset for the analysis. This was
considered a necessary amount for the analysis to be both comprehensive and
focused. Each advert selected relates to the promotion of a different Apple
product. This ensured that the analysis would be representative of the entire
Apple brand over the previous fifteen years and avoid limiting the conclusions
that could be drawn. Adverts which remain in current distribution were extracted
online through the official Apple website. Expired Apple adverts, dating back to
no earlier than 2001, were obtained via Google searches. A number was
assigned to each advert which corresponded to the chronological order in which
they were originally published. This presented a progressive timeline of Apple
adverts. For the sake of convenience and referral, the analysis and the results
section were presented simultaneously. This enabled the analysis of each advert
to follow respective of the order in which the adverts occur within the analysis.
The relevant literature was accessed through Aston University library, Aston
LibGuides and Google Scholar. Applying this secondary literature (which is
discussed below) supported the foundations of the study by justifying the
inferences drawn from the adverts.


27
Ethics
Due to the absence of human involvement, ethical considerations were not
necessary with regards to the progression of this investigation.
Data limitations
Social semiotics makes certain questions easier to answer about the meaning of
cultural signs. However, it does not in itself provide definite answers on
intellectual dilemmas of meaning. The interpretative nature of social semiotics
and its reliance on intuition therefore cannot be disregarded. Furthermore, I have
personally selected the data for this study. Consequently, the objectivity of the
study has to be considered.
Data Analysis
The chosen social semiotic framework for this study relies on Kress and Van
Leeuwen’s (2001) social semiotic model. It uses the three metafunctions
(ideational, interpersonal, textual) as the starting point for analyzing the
communicative intentions of the visual aspects of the adverts. This anticipates
permitting a systematic analysis of how each semiotic mode is operating within
the adverts and particularly, how these signs convey the theme of
personalization. It extends the semiotic paradigm outlined by Saussure
(signifier/signified) and applies it in a way reminiscent of Ronald Barthes (1977),
who has distinctly studied advertising from the perspective of sign theory.
Essentially, both the denoted and connoted level of meaning is attended to when


28
analyzing the adverts. Additionally, it refers to a wide range of other recently
appraised semioticans including David Machin (2007), Claire Harrison (2003) and
Christopher Norris, (2004) among others, to further strengthen the analysis.
Due to the interpretative nature of semiotics and its need to understand
phenomena in their cultural and social contexts, a wholly qualitative approach
was necessary. Adopting an approach that lends itself exclusively to the
interpretation of meaning-making practices reflects the studies primary objective
to identify and analyze the reoccurring themes present in Apple adverts. Attention
towards semiotic theory acknowledges metaphor, analogy and personification as
significant communicative indications to be considered within the multimodal
analysis. These figurative aspects warrant particular interest given their
emblematical nature and thus, the corresponding communicative implications
that inherently arise from them. These symbolic features are scrutinized
accordingly, with primary intention of studying how Apple employs these
semantic devices to personalize its products. This approach anticipates
permitting conclusive semantic interpretations with regards to both linguistic and
non-linguistic (visual) features that occur within the adverts.
Exclusive linguistic attention is devoted towards neologisms, adjectives and
personal pronouns. These wholly lexical aspects will be investigated in relation to
their lexical denotation and how their usage contributes to portraying Apple
products as personal within the adverts.


29
Results/Analysis
iPod – 2001 Figure 1
The fact that signs-as-metaphors and metaphors-as-knowledge are tools makes
it essential to exercise the highest care in the fashioning of tools.
Brief
This advertising campaign for iPod debuted in 2001. It marked the beginning of
an ongoing continuum of unconventional and highly successful marketing
campaigns delivered by Apple. Previously, Apple adverts had focused on the
aesthetic of its products, producing high-quality photographs by way of exhibiting


30
the craftsmanship of the product. The Silhouette campaign shifted the focus from
urging consumers to purchase the device to asking them to "buy the emotion"
(Segal, 2012).
Colour
Designers at the Poynter Institute have argued how, “we respond to colour in
physiological ways” (1991) because of its propensity to “evoke emotions and
create moods that enhance meaning” (1991). Apple uses colour to connote the
temperament of each silhouette, thereby embellishing their emotive trajectories,
enriched by the captivation of their separate music listening experiences. The
colour is highly saturated to articulate “emotional temperature” (Machin, 2007:
70). This exaggerates the symbolism each colour conveys. Essentially, colour is
used to convey “ideational meaning” (Kress and Van Leeuwen, 2006), exhibiting
an emotional response between the silhouettes and the music they are each
consuming. This personalizes the iPod to each silhouette and is likely to have a
positive effect on the viewer since it establishes a unique emotional connection
between the product and user.
Machin has argued how “colour can denote specific people” (2007: 64). The
silhouettes feature two males and two females. Whilst the colours remain generic
to appeal to the viewer, arguably, they are stereotypically gendered and come to
signify the characteristics of each silhouette. This captures the distilled essence
of each figure and maintains focus on the distinct characteristics of the


31
individuals rather than the intrinsic qualities of the product. Whilst the blue
background reflects the tranquil pose, the green corresponds to the vigorous
disposition. The pink indicates eccentricity, whilst the yellow satisfies
exuberance. Using rich unmodulated colours that correlate appropriately with
each stance amplifies their corresponding personality traits and emotional
responses.
Colour is used as a way of “framing” (Kress and Van Leeuwen, 2006) the
individual silhouettes in the composition. Despite the absence of boarders, the
four contrasting colours demarcate each silhouette within the composition.
Presenting four different poses occupying their own space conveys the notion
that the same product is being repeatedly modified for the person in control of the
iPod based upon their personal music choices.
Composition
According to Harrison, “composition in imagery is the equivalent of syntax in
language” (2003: 55). The silhouettes are centred within each square of the
composition and occupy the most amount of space. Increasing their “salience”
(Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996) depicts them as the most important aspect since
they have “central symbolic value in the composition” (Machin, 2007:130). Apple
personalizes the product by foregrounding the silhouettes, signifying their
emotional expressions as the fundamental essence of the ad.


32
Gesture
The ad relies heavily on the poses of the silhouettes clutching the iPod in an
energetic and animated manner. Barthes considered poses to be a
representative function that carries significant connotation (Machin, 2007: 27).
The pose of each figure is different and signifies the varying types of music they
are each consuming, reflective of their individual personalities. Representing the
silhouettes as immersed in music maintains emphasis on the emotional
empowerment of the product. Thus, the integral message of the ad concerns
itself with the transference of this emotional distribution. Signifying what the
product will deliver rather than how it will work, implicitly asks the consumer to
“buy the emotion” (Segal, 2012) rather than the product.
Vector
Kress and Van Leeuwen understand vectors as “visual verbs” (1996). Two
vectors can be appreciated, both of which determine the actions of the
silhouettes. The hands of the male and female in both the top and bottom
squares align with each other in a way that suggests they could be dancing with
one another (see appendix). Reverberating the emotional connection across the
silhouettes creates a cohesive flow throughout the composition and maintains
emphasis on the people.


33
Modality
Machin defines modality in terms of “how real a representation should be taken to
be” (2007: 46). This is why Van Leeuwen understands modality as a social
semiotic approach to the “question of truth” (2005: 160). However, he highlights
that it is not a matter of asking, “how true is this?” but rather, “as how true is it
represented?” (Van Leeuwen, 2005: 160). The lack of detail establishes a low
modality and generates an ad that is more consistent with fantasy than realism
because it deviates from authenticity. The silhouetted figures inhibit the viewer
from being exposed to any facial expression, whilst the absence of background
detail decontextualizes the situation. Explicit focus therefore remains on the
enthralled trances of the silhouettes and their corresponding distinct colours.
Signifying their emotions whilst concealing their identities and settings represents
the silhouettes as characterized anonymities. Despite the oxymoronic nature of
this evaluation, I argue that such a depiction encourages the viewer to align
themself with the silhouettes more so than a realistic image (non-silhouetted) of
identical poses could possibly render. This is because “the more abstract the
image, the more overt and foregrounded its connotative commutative purpose”
(Machin, 2007: 26). The viewer is therefore invited to envisage having as much
fun with the product.


34
“Get a Mac” Campaign - 2006 Figure 2
Brief
Launched in 2006, the “Get a Mac” campaign gained unprecedented popularity.
In 2007 it won the Grand Effie Award and later in 2010 Adweek declared "Get a
Mac" to be the best advertising campaign of the first decade of the new century.


35
Image
“For Barthes, the elements in a photograph will have their meaning because what
they represent is shared by people in a particular culture” (Machin, 2007: 22). In
Western civilizations a suit signifies formality, conformity and corporate
traditionalism. Apple employs this notion to signify the essence of PC’s, alluding
to both the old fashioned nature of such computers and their respective users.
Meanwhile, the Mac person sports a casual look with an unzipped jacket and
facial hair. Essentially, Apple is comparing boring, unfashionable and out dated
PC’s with casual, unconventional and contemporary Mac’s through focusing on
their respective users. Arguably, their clothing intends to connote their separate
jobs, since one can infer that suits are generally worn to work. The viewer is
therefore directed into visualizing the Mac user as operating within a creative
working environment where he expresses himself using Apple products.
Personifying the computers allows the viewer to “make sense of, or attain
mastery of, uncertainty” (Waitz, et al., 2010). Displaying an image of the Mac
next to a PC would significantly reduce the ideational impact of this advert, since
humans rely heavily on social characteristics to form value judgments. Viewing
something as abstract as the stylishness of a computer in human terms has the
explanatory power of the only sort that makes sense to most people (Lakoff &
Johnson, 2003: 34). According to Aaker (1997) and Fournier (1998), advertisers
typically personify the brand with human like traits that are especially appealing


36
to the target demographic. Representing the Mac as fashionable, powerful and
superlative is likely to enrich the brand-consumer relationship with Apple.
“Pictures implicate even more associations and meaning which could be hardly
expressed in words” (Chandler, 2007). This is because images are effective at
defining the essence of things in ways that may not be anything like a visual
equivalent of language (Dillon, 2006). Consequently, the phrases “I’m a PC” and
“I’m a Mac” “anchor” (Bathes, 1984) the meaning of the image and suffice for the
viewer to immediately infer the prevailing connotations. Ultimately, the visual
signs communicate specific values and therefore, discourses.
Gesture
The human face has been noted as “one of the most powerful resources in visual
imagery because people are ‘hard-wired’ from infancy to study faces and their
expressions” (Harrison, 2003: 53). The PC user expresses a worried and
defensive appearance, illustrated by his opened mouth, raised eyebrows and
arm. Meanwhile, the Mac user connotes confidence and serenity, evidenced by
placing his hands in pockets and keeping a closed mouth, thus not feeling an
urge to “justify” himself and representing the Mac as competent.
Interestingly, both personification and chremamorphism is being conveyed in this
ad. Chremamorphism is the opposite of personification and involves assigning
characteristics of an object to a person. Transferring the essence of the individual


37
computers onto their respective users establishes the communicative
implications of the advert.


38
“Say hello to iPhone” – 2007 Figure 3
iPad – 2010 Figure 4
Brief
The “Say Hello to iPhone” campaign circulated in 2007 and promoted the fifth
generation iPhone. By now, emphasis had shifted back to the aesthetic nature of
the products. However, I argue that the products continue to be represented as
people.


39
Representation of Social Actors
Although it is more common for humans to create image “demands” (Kress &
Van Leeuwen, 1996: 124), “theoretically, an object can create a demand”
(Harrison, 2003). I determine the image of the iPhones to be the semiotic
resource that positions the viewer in this context. Whilst the central iPhone is
“depicted as looking at the viewer” (Machin, 2007: 110), the two either side are
positioned obliquely. The central iPhone therefore makes a “demand” on the
viewer, whilst the remaining iPhones make an “offer” (Kress & Van Leeuwen,
1996: 124).
The obliquely positioned iPhones are metaphorically represented as waiting in
line for their opportunity to be greeted. They offer information and allow the
viewer to evaluate the product and its multiple functions (Machin, 2007: 112).
This factor is further enhanced by the women’s gaze presented within the iPhone
towards the right, which makes no symbolic contact (interaction) with the viewer
and thus, no demand. The pending phone call on the far right supplements the
personified idea of the obliquely angled iPhones waiting for their turn to be
greeted, since one can infer that a pending phone call anticipates an imminent
salutation.
Meanwhile, the central iPhone metaphorically demands that the reader “say
hello”, inviting the viewer to align with the product. This serves an “interpersonal
function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001) by acting upon the viewer. Hartley has


40
shown how looking at the viewer, or the right to do so, in itself suggests power
(1982). This signifies the iPhone as strong and dominant. The close distance of
the image foregrounds the iPhone and further contributes to this sense of
intimacy between the product and the viewer, whereby the viewer is invited into a
relationship with the product. Kress and Van Leeuwen interpret frontal angles as,
“what you see here is part of our world, something we are involved with” (1996:
143). This establishes a connection between the product and user, representing
the iPhone as a sentient being who deserves acknowledgement in a way
evocative of a human.
Text
Dyer mentioned how imperatives are frequent in advertising, “the prospective
consumer is continually exhorted” (Dyer, 1982: 144). The imperative command
acts as a pun, demanding the reader “say hello” to the iPhone, rather than the
supposed recipient. The headline personifies the product,
assigning
characteristics such as “sentience, self-consciousness and solicitude” (Brown,
2011:3). Ultimately, the image and headline work together to form a “coherent
and meaningful whole” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1998: 188). Therefore, in this
case the words “anchor” (Barthes, 1977) the meaning of the image and hence,
realize the demand that the central iPhone communicates.


41
Colour
The colour of the font echoes the colour of the iPhones outer casing. This serves
a “textual function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2002) by grouping the iPhones with
the slogan. Machin claims “advertisements typically use the same colour for the
text as will be found in the accompanying product or photograph” (2007: 67).
Connecting different elements brings harmony to the composition by creating a
more “flowing” and “cohesive layout” (Machin, 2007: 67). In this case, its function
is to establish the connection between the command and the product, urging the
consumer to acknowledge it as if it were a person.
Vector
An eyeliner vector can be appreciated extending from the women’s eyes across
to the man displayed in the newspaper article (see appendix). This further
contributes to the effect of the iPhones represented as human beings, actively
interacting with one another throughout the composition.


42
iPhone 5 – 2012 Figure: 4
Brief
The iPhone 5 campaign circulated in 2007 and promoted the fifth generation
iPhone.
Image
The iPhone that features an image of a person laughing takes precedence over
the remaining iPhones since it is not obscured. Clearly, laughter is a social
response that connotes happiness. Foregrounding this iPhone consolidates the
intended affection the viewer is encouraged to affiliate with the product. The


43
viewer is therefore immersed within this context through being invited to
metaphorically share this emotion.
Colour
Ivry and Robertson demonstrated how the whole is perceived before the parts in
visual imagery (1998). The scattering of bright colours throughout the minimalistic
composition rests on the experiences one shares with dark and light colours
(Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). Machin points out that the same metaphorical
associations can be found in language, where truth, happiness and love are
associated with brightness, whilst deceit, sadness and evil are associated with
darkness (2007: 70). Apple uses bright and cheerful colours to signify positive
connotations. This serves an “ideational function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001),
harmonizing the essence of love and happiness, which vividly transpires
throughout the ad. The viewer is therefore intended to identify these emotions
with the product.
Text and Typography
“iPhone 5” is emboldened, thereby performing an “ideational function” (Kress &
Van Leeuwen, 2001), communicating the products durability and strength.
Simultaneously, it serves an “interpersonal function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen,
2001), guiding the reader’s attention directly to the product name, which in itself
establishes the personalized ethos of the brand. I base this argument on the
hypothesis that Apple coined this neologism (iPhone) in order to signify the


44
products intrinsic customizability for the user (‘i’ meaning, oneself).
The iconic Apple Symbols font is round and curvature, connoting Apple products
as refined and user-friendly. Machin acknowledged how “round typefaces signify
softness, smoothness, fluidity and ease” (2007: 99). These connotations intend to
reflect the slogan “Loving it is easy”. I take the emotive adjective “loving” in this
context to mean both, “using frequently” and “adoring its essence”. That is to say,
when one is affectionate about someone, or in this case something, they want to
be united. The delight that arises from its user-friendliness results in people
“loving it” habitually. The intensifier “so” emphasizes the extent of people who
feel affectionate about its user friendliness.


45
MacBook Pro – 2013 Figure 5
Brief
This is a screenshot taken from the Apple website featuring the MacBook Pro
which launched in 2013.
Text
Using direct address through the personal pronoun “you”, the slogan invites the
reader to gaze into the image of the MacBook in an almost mesmerized way,
implying that the product’s visual desirability increases upon sustained viewing.
The comparative adjective “more beautiful” realizes this inference.


46
Image
The MacBook is positioned at an oblique angle. This creates an image “offer”
(Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996: 124) and invites the viewer to evaluate the
aesthetic nature of the product. Crucially, the oblique angle gives depth to the
composition and works in harmony with the slogan, which encourages the viewer
to look deep into the image. Engaging the viewer in this way creates an intimate
and personal connection between the product and the viewer. Essentially, focus
towards the Apple logo is established by guiding the reader towards this iconic
symbol, which is placed (centrally) at eye level deep within the composition. The
close up image of the MacBook further aligns the aforementioned implications.
Iconographic symbolism
Machin asserts that product logos can come to represent particular ideas and
values. (Machin, 2007:39). Beasley and Danesi interpret the Apple logo as “a
symbolic gesture clearly charged with latent religious connotations...” (Adam and
Eve), “…symbolizing the fact that it, too, provides ‘forbidden’ knowledge to those
who buy and use its products” (2002: 61). I argue that such religious inferences
also connote rebellion and liberty, associations strongly correlated with human
endeavor. Apple’s nonconformist ethos seeks to represent the brand as unique,
eccentric and ultimately, superlative by intentionally striving to deviate its
philosophy away from the conventionalized nature of PC. This allows its users to
rejoice in a communal sense of omnipotence and superiority.


47
Modality
Kress and Van Leeuwen argue that modality is not about expressing absolute
truths but rather about aligning viewers with some truths and distancing them
from others (1996). The complete absence of detail in the background lowers the
modality and performs an “interpersonal function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001),
maintaining exclusive interaction between the product and the viewer. This is
achieved through decontextualizing the situation. Consequently, the “beautiful”
aesthetic of the product remains the explicit focus of the ad. Machin points out
that modality in images is a key resource for “representing things, places, people
and ideas as if they are not quite real but rather as vague notions or fantasies”
(2007: 48).


48
iMac – 2014 Figure 6
Brief
This is a screenshot taken from the Apple website featuring the ‘iMac with Retina
5K display’ which launched in 2014.


49
Brief
This is a screenshot taken from the Apple website. It features the iMac with
Retina 5K display which launched in 2014.
Linguistic Metaphor
The iMac is branded as having a “Retina display”, metaphorically comparing its
screen resolution to the unparalleled competence of a human eye. Shrewdly
attributing it with human characteristics personifies the iMac. Crucially, It
connotes the superlative nature of the product, since no screen resolution can be
perceived more accurately than what is essentially used to view it in the first
place.
In the product description it states, “there’s a very powerful mac behind all those
pixels.” This declarative acts literally in terms of the products technical capacity,
and metaphorically, corresponding to the image of the skier. I expand on this
below.
Image
Horn argues, readers no longer rely solely on written text for comprehension;
“they absorb and process all that they see within a document to create meaning
for themselves” (1999). The low-angle image of the skier, who looks down on and
makes direct eye contact with the viewer, transmits power and dominance
(Hartely, 1982). Machin and Thornborrow demonstrated how “poses and the


50
values they transport are used as a significant part of branding” (2006). The
skier’s arms are drawn wide and the action performed connotes impressive skill
and power. This factor is embellished by the suns glare, which radiates brightly
from behind the skier, further resonating supreme power. These connotations
capture the distilled essence of the product and give the impression of a powerful
sentient being (the skier) operating inside the machine, responsible for delivering
the products astounding performance.
The images displayed within the computer screens below, which are explicitly
referred to as “the rest of the iMac family”, continue to reverberate the theme of
personalization. The iMac on the left is noticeably smaller than the one on the
right. This connotes parent and child, husband and wife, or any other respective
variant of this nature. The image of the female on the left characterizes that
particular iMac, whilst the image on the right signifies family orientation. It
features the interrogative “what to pack?” and displays a collage of clothes,
connoting the essence of a forthcoming family holiday. Crucially, the reader is
invited to “meet” these two iMac’s as if they were a genuine human family. The
declarative which accompanies these two iMac’s states, “there’s an all-in one for
everyone”, further individualizing the product for the prospective user.
Composition
Kress and Van Leeuwen argue that placing elements at the top in a composition
presents this information as “ideal” (1996: 193). This theory is consistent with the


51
metaphorical association that is shared within society between up and down
(Lakoff & Johnson, 2003). Machin explains that ‘high’ suggests power, as in, “Her
Highness”, “upper class” and “top of the class” (Machin, 2007: 145), all of which
indicate power and dominance.
The image of the skier is placed at the top of the composition. This information is
represented as “ideal” (Machin, 2007: 145). It represents the essence of the
information by abstracting the distillation of the products essential qualities,
thereby generalizing and idealizing the concept of power. The skier, who
naturally is in a heightened position due to the low-angle shot, aligns this notion,
thereby bringing harmony to the composition. Machin notes how “the ‘ideal’
normally gets salience in advertisements because they fundamentally sell
fantasies” (2007:145). These fantasies can be understood as “reaffirming
underlying values of a society” (Machin, 2007: 147), whereby the definition of an
ideological concept is offered. In this context, Apple sells the fantasy of “power”,
translating the essence of a powerful human being to the technical capabilities of
the iMac. Apple uses a photograph to capture this essence because of the high
modality that photographs naturally exhibit. This allows the “ideal” (Machin, 2007:
145) to be depicted, “not as what might be, but as what is (that is, the truth)”
(Harrison, 2003: 56). Ultimately, this confirms the notion that the iMac is
undeniably “stunning powerful”. In contrast, the “real” (Machin, 2007:145) is
exposed in the bottom half of the composition. A more distant shot of the
obliquely angled iMacs generates an accurate and complete image of the


52
product. This conveys more factual information and invites the reader to evaluate
the product (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 1996: 193). Essentially, the image at the
bottom realizes the personified connotations signified above, representing the
iMac as “stunningly powerful”.


53
Apple Watch – 24/04/2015 Figure 7


54
Brief
The final ad promotes the forthcoming launch of the Apple Watch. This
screenshot was extracted from the Apple website. Although spread over two
pages, it constitutes one complete ad.
Text
The declarative in the top description states, “Apple Watch represents a new
chapter in the relationship people share with Apple products.” Lakoff and
Johnson note, “metaphors in the conceptual system indicate coherent and
systematic relationships between concepts” (2003: 135). Apple uses the


55
metaphor “LOVE IS A JOURNEY” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003: 44), implying that the
latest Apple product instigates the next phase of the “relationship” people share
with Apple products. This personifies the product, establishing it as a person who
shares a “relationship” with its user. It also verifies the assertion that
“metaphorical concepts are defined not in terms of concrete images, but in terms
of more general categories, like passing” (Lakoff & Johnson, 2003:45). This is
likely to have a positive effect of the reader since a watch is attached to the wrist,
thus the impression of an emotional and perpetual bond between product and
user is established.
The slogan in the bottom section refers to the watch as “An intelligent health and
fitness companion”. Miller has noted how cars are also frequently treated as
companions, “complete with foibles, quirks and distinctive personality traits”
(2001). Personifying the watch as “intelligent” communicates the technical
capability of the product. Representing it as a “companion” amplifies its user
friendliness. In the description it states, “Apple Watch can use what it learns
about the way you move…” The watch itself is depicted as being able to
assimilate information, thus contributing to the idea of the device being an
“intelligent companion”.
Image
The image which is accompanied by the slogan, “A more immediate, intimate
way to connect”, displays two watches that are angled in a way suggestive of


56
engaging in sexual intimacy. The watch on the left is assigned a name (Jody
Akana), thereby characterizing that particular watch. The watch on the right has
its camera activated and hence, a blue light appears on the watches face.
Arguably, this resembles an eye, representing the watch as a sentient being.
According to Kress and Van Leeuwen “when something can only be said both
visually and verbally the way in which it is said will be different” (2006). In this
case, the slogan “anchors” (Barthes, 1977) the prevailing connotation of the
image, personifying the watches as sharing an intimate relationship with one
another. Revealing either the image or the slogan in isolation would fail to
transmit the personified connotation since the visual and textual elements work
together to form a “coherent and meaningful whole” (Kress & Van Leeuwen,
1998: 188).
Composition
The absence of frames establishes a “natural connection” (Machin, 2007: 153)
between the slogan and image in each section. Integrating these compositional
elements realizes the link between the personified slogans and the
corresponding images, thus attributing human characteristics to the watches.


57
Discussion
Does a “Visual Grammar” Exist?
I argue in favour of Kress and Van Leeuwen’s theory that there remain
observable rules and regularities in visual communication as there do in verbal
communication (2006). Colour for instance, although not as well articulated as
language, clearly satisfies the “basic functions of language” (Machin, 2007: 64).
In Figure 1 colour is used to signify the emotive trajectories of the silhouettes in
attempt to individualize their personalities and demarcate their presence within
the composition. In that case, colour serves an “ideational function” (Kress & Van
Leeuwen, 2001), connoting the symbolic characteristics of each silhouette. It also
performs a “textual function” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001), framing the
silhouettes into their separate spaces. This individualizes the iPod to each
consumer. In Figure 3 the positioning of the central iPhone, which makes a
demand on the viewer and the emboldening of the font in iPhone 5 (Figure 4),
both serve “interpersonal functions” (Kress & Van Leeuwen, 2001), drawing the
reader’s attention to the pivotal elements of the adverts. Crucially, in each case
these compositional and typographical choices serve particular semantic
influence on the theme of personalization. Evidently, certain visual features can
be used to signify ideas, classify different types of social interactions as well as
orchestrate these ideas and interactions into coherent and meaningful texts by
way of making them relevant to their social context (Halliday, 1978:112).


58
To ask how explicit an image can be is however a fundamental question if one is
to regard visual communication comprising of codes that work in a similar way to
linguistic grammar. As demonstrated in Figure 3, the central iPhone is
foregrounded and makes symbolic contact with the viewer demanding that the
viewer acknowledge it like a person. Arguably however, this “demand” (Kress &
Van Leeuwen, 2001) largely relies on the imperative command displayed in the
slogan above. Thus, it may be unrealistic to suggest that the meaning of this
image is comprehended entirely on the basis of the visual demand. A more
convincing example is evident in Figure 6 where the iMacs placed in the bottom
half of the composition are obliquely angled, thus making an “offer” (Kress & Van
Leeuwen, 2001) which invites the viewer to evaluate the product. In this respect,
the images in the adverts are operating in much the same way as speech acts by
communicating through mood systems. Just as speech commands are realized
by the imperative mood, an offer can be realized by the indicative mood. This
establishes particular kinds of relationships between the product and the reader,
thus functioning in a similar way to linguistic grammar.
Worth notes that although pictures are effective in depicting what is, they cannot
illustrate “conditionals, counterfactuals, negatives or past-tenses” (Worth, 1981:
178). Neither can they “communicate passive transformations, form
interrogatives or do a host of things that a verbal language is designed to do”
(Machin, 2007: 171). For this reason, images rely heavily on language to
“anchor” (Barthes, 1997) intended meanings and I accept that this was frequently


59
the case in the analysis. It would therefore be naïve to suggest that visual
communication is as eloquently evolved as its verbal counterpart. This factor is
demonstrated in Figure 3 where the caption realizes the symbolic demand the
central iPhone makes on the viewer, insisting that it is acknowledged in a way
evocative of a human. In Figure 7 the watches are depicted engaging in sexual
intimacy. Without the caption in either case, the viewer may struggle to realize
the semantic implications of the ad. This realization explains why Forceville
believes that Kress and Van Leeuwen arrive at their proclaimed existence of a
“visual grammar” (2006) through “contextual knowledge” (1999) rather than as a
result of being visually literate. In Figure’s 3, 5 and 7, Apple establishes the
context through providing textual information and then satisfies the personalized
connotations through visual signs.
In other cases, the visual elements operate by enhancing the linguistic meaning.
That is to say, the visual and textual elements do not so much rely on each other,
but rather the amalgamation of both visual and textual signs amplify the intended
message. This observation is consistent with Van Leeuwen’s proclaimed analogy
of image and text in multimodal discourse functioning in a similar way to that of
instruments in an orchestra (2005). In Figure 6 the image of the skier, which is
“idealized” (Machin, 2007), reinforces and illustrates the message of the textual
information by being metaphorically placed in the “powerful” (high) position. The
image itself connotes supreme power and emphasizes the distilled essence of
the product by functioning in unison with text. In this way, the product is


60
personified as wholly omnipotent with this central theme transpiring through both
visual and linguistic elements of the composition. This theme is particularly
beneficial to Apple since powerful electronic goods are generally considered to
deliver astounding performance, something the targeted customer seeks. The
iMac’s positioned directly below (Figure 6) are referred to as a “family”. The
pictures reverberate this linguistic personification through connoting family
orientated visual signs. Again, the textual and visual signs function in harmony to
coherently communicate the theme of personalization.
Just as verbal communication can explain things that visual communication
cannot, the same is also true in reverse (Dillon, 2006). This is illustrated in Figure
2 where the image signifies the stylishness and competence of Mac’s compared
with unfashionable and outdated PC’s. Apple personifies the computers by
abstracting the distilled essence of both computers and transfers these
associations to their respective (stereotyped) users. This is achieved mainly
through their clothing and performed gestures, which are the result of socially
engineered signs that are agreed upon within Western culture. This has
unparalleled rhetorical force on the viewer to that which words alone would fail to
conjure as efficiently, especially when one is intended to perceive something as
abstract as the stylishness of a computer. Consequently, the viewer identifies the
product in the way Apple intends, subconsciously interpreting that if one
purchases a Mac then they too will be considered “fashionable”. Likewise, in
Figure 1, Apple sells the emotion and personality traits of the silhouettes. Merely


61
representing their enthralled poses suffices to promote the joy of listening to the
iPod. Words alone would struggle to capture this meaning in either of these
cases, especially in an effective and immediate way. Exhibiting the pleasure that
arises from experiencing the iPod sells the “emotion” (Segal, 2012) rather than
the product and consumers are more likely to identify with this than the intrinsic
capabilities of the product.
Dillon (2006) has argued a similar concept, giving reference to a picture of a
circle, claiming that it reveals “circleness” more easily than could be described
with language. On this basis, it may be more reasonable to agree with Elkins who
dismisses the term visual literacy, favouring “visual competencies” (2003).
Readers are proficient in deciphering the meaning from an advertisement
because frequent exposure has familiarized readers how to interpret its content
and significance. However, there remain many kinds of images that readers are
not so compelled to interpret such as “scientific, diagrams and older images”
(Elkins, 2003) and thus, the existence of a visual literacy is significantly impaired.
The Validity of Social Semiotics as an Approach to Ad Discourse
The vast application of its merit has lead to semiotics often being criticized as
“imperialistic” (Chandler, 2007). Its applicability and capacity to study anything
and everything has resulted in it “trespassing on almost every academic
discipline” (Chandler, 2007). This is a problem for Huxley, who states, “our
universities possess no chair of synthesis” (1941: 276). However, Kress and Van


62
Leeuwen have gone as far to say that, “‘Visual literacy’ will begin to be a matter
of survival, especially in the workplace” (2006: 3). Consequently, there is a need
for semiotics to cross over into other disciplines and a call to enrich its theoretical
understanding within each of these respectively. Moreover, social semiotics by
virtue derives its frameworks from an array of disciplines, relying on aspects from
Psychology, Sociology, Anthropology, English Language, Cultural and Media
studies. Therefore, I argue that the aforementioned criticisms are fundamentally
weak.
Leiss et al., note that a major disadvantage of semiotics is “its dependence upon
the skill of the individual analyst” (1990, 214). Whilst I accept that this is a
limitation, it is difficult to bypass given that the qualitative interpretation of
meaning is imperative to its domain. Kress and Van Leeuwen’s (2001)
application of Halliday’s (1978) systemic functional linguistic theory goes some
way to resolving this issue, since it provides a paradigm for analyzing visual signs
in a methodical way. Providing empirical evidence for specific interpretations
evades the common criticism that semiotics is “loosely impressionistic and highly
unsystematic” (Chandler, 2007). Some semioticians have been criticized for
selecting particular examples in favour of the points they wish to make, instead of
“applying semiotic analysis to an extensive random sample” (Chandler, 2007). I
also realize that this somewhat limits the objectivity of my analysis. Nonetheless,
the adverts selected were published over a fifteen-year period. Seven examples


63
sufficiently demonstrates that theme of personalization is consistently conveyed
within Apple advertising and is not representative of a specific or rare specimen.
Hodge and Kress maintain that “semiotics offers the promise of a systematic,
comprehensive and coherent study of communications phenomena as a whole,
not just instances of it” (1988: 1). Chandler also supports this view, it
“foregrounds and problematizes the process of representation” (Chandler, 2007).
Mick agrees, “no discipline concerns itself with representation as strictly as
semiotics does” (1988: 20). The synthesis of visual and textual signification is
becoming rapidly more pervasive in communication (Kress & Van Leeuwen,
2006) and advertising is just one of many mediums in which this observation has
been firmly established. Consequently, there is a need for a theory of application
“with a central concern for meaning-making practices which conventional
academic disciplines treat as peripheral” (Chandler, 2007). Semiotics attends to
this need by awakening passive consumers of meaning and “realizing that
whatever assertions seem to be 'obvious', 'natural', universal, given, permanent
and incontrovertible are generated by the ways in which sign systems operate in
particular discourse communities” (Chandler, 2007).
Are Visual Codes Driven by Metaphor?
Kress argues, “metaphor as frame is one of the major categories of a social
semiotic theory” (2010: 156) and “what is signified in frames can be traced back
to the interest of the maker of the sign” (2010: 157). Lakoff and Johnson argue


64
that personification is an extension of ontological metaphor that “makes sense of
phenomena in the world in human terms” (2003: 34). This allows the viewer to
“attain mastery of uncertainty” (Waitz, et al., 2010), as in the case of Figure 2
where the viewer is intended to interpret the “stylishness” of the Mac through
identifying socially constructed signs of human characteristics. In Figure 6 the
image of the skier metaphorically connotes “power”, illustrated by the low-angle
shot and widely drawn arms. Figure 7 depicts the obliquely angled watches,
evocative of engaging in sexual “intimacy”. Figure 5 connotes “rebellion” and
“freedom” through the Apple logo. In all these instances, visual codes use
conceptual metaphor to manipulate the meaning of the ads. This fundamentally
enables Apple to sell its products as “emotional” (Fig 1), “stylish” (Fig 2),
“sentient” (Fig 3), “loving” (Fig 4 & 7), “beautiful/rebellious” (Fig 5) and “powerful”
(Fig 6), connotations all of which relate to human characteristics. Interestingly,
this discovery is consistent with Lakoff and Johnson’s findings that the most
powerful conceptual metaphors are predicated on “emotion”, “sensation” and
“human embodiment” (2003). Additionally, it justifies the claim that metaphor is
“the very heart of the basic communicative form used in modern advertising”
(Leiss et al., 1986: 241).


65
Conclusion
This study has shown how Apple consistently conveys the theme of
personalization in advertisements published between 2001 and 2015. Applying
the social semiotic framework outlined by Kress and Van Leeuwen (2001), it has
demonstrated that “ideational”, “interpersonal” and “textual” meaning of visual
signs serve particular semantic influence on the theme of personalization in
Apple adverts. It has also revealed how advertising is an intricate form of human
expression and ingenuity, achieved through communicating with ideologically
loaded signs, which are constantly evolving with cultural tides.
Across the adverts, visual signs communicate ideas of “emotion”, “social
fashion”, “sentience”, “love”, “beauty”, “intimacy” “rebellion” and “power”,
characteristics all attributed with human kind. This is achieved through the use of
colour, gesture, iconographic symbolism, vectors, modality, composition,
typography and the representation of social actors. Significantly, the prevailing
connotations that ascend from each of these respective modes derive from
socially and culturally shared ideologies. It has been established that each of
these connoted themes are conveyed through conceptual metaphor. The themes
that frequently transpire all encompass aspirational human characteristics and
operate by glorifying Apple products. Arguably, the aforementioned themes can
be separated into two semantic fields, “affection” and “omnipotence”. I would like
to propose that these two categorized themes are consistent with the
fundamental root of primitive human desires (love and power). It bears no


66
surprise to discover such prevalent themes embedded in advertising, for
Capitalism necessitates consumers to desire materialistic goods. Thus, Apple
uses signs to connote particular discourses that “allow them to define reality in a
particular way” (Machin, 2007. 13).
Different types of social interactions are classified through angle, composition
and gesture which establish particular kinds of relationships between the product
and viewer, most noticeably personifying the products as “loving”, “powerful” and
“sentient creatures” that can interact with their users. Thus, one can deduce that
visual signs do operate through ‘mood systems’. These ideas and interactions
are arranged into coherent and meaningful texts through compositional and
typographical choices, which correlate with the intended message of each advert,
thus making them relevant to their social context.
The employment of linguistic metaphor and personification play an equally
substantive role in establishing the prevailing connotations. Arguably, in few of
the adverts the visual elements rely on the textual information in order to transmit
the intended connotations. Therefore, Kress and Van Leeuwen’s (2006)
proclaimed concept of a “visual literacy” is drastically impeded. This confirms the
notion that visual signs rely on textual information and contextual significance.
Simultaneously, it confirms Barthes’ understanding that words govern the
meaning of the images (Machin, 2014: 327). In other cases, the linguistic
elements amplify the visual aspects. This is consistent with Van Leeuwen’s


67
interpretation of visual and textual elements functioning in unison to establish a
coherent and meaningful text (2005). Thus, I agree with Elkins preferred term
“visual competencies” (2003) over Kress and Van Leeuwen’s “visual literacy”
(2006). Nevertheless, I promote Kress and Van Leeuwen’s call for a need to
enrich the theoretical understanding of a “visual grammar” (2006) and appreciate
that communication is becoming pervasively more multimodal (2006: 3).
Further research could supplement this study by probing whether or not the
theme of personalization can be considered as equally hedonistic as those more
typical themes traditionally affiliated with advertising such as luxury, success or
happiness. A comprehensive validation of this hypothesis would require a more
consumer based approach and probably utilize both quantitative and qualitative
methods. It might even consider a corpus-driven approach to determine the
prevalent themes and linguistic metaphorical patterning present in Apple
advertising. Alice Diegnan’s (2005) work on metaphor and corpus linguistics
could offer support to this advance. Nonetheless, the success of Apple as a
brand, together with the recognition it has received for its marketing impacts,
constitutes fertile ground to at least suggest that such a pervasively conveyed
theme is evidently lucrative. I do not claim to have answered this particular
question, rather I offer insight into what I determine to be a theme unique to
Apple advertising which invites consumers to “love” their electronic products,
understand them in human terms and align with them by forming “relationships”,
all of which result in the product becoming individualized for the user. Prior to


68
Apple’s influence, associating the aforementioned themes with electronic
products was unprecedented. I would like to argue that Apple is unique in
connoting such ideas that typically are expressed with sentient beings.
There remains then exciting scope for original consumer research on how
readers cognitively respond to the signified theme of personalization in Apple
advertisements with regards to enjoyment, recall of messages and inference
drawing. This would solve some of the limitations of this study by evading the
issue of subjectivity. Ultimately, this would determine the validity of the findings
drawn in this analysis with regards to using Kress & Van Leeuwen’s (2001)
model for the interpretation of meaning in multimodal phenomena.


69
Bibliography
Aaker, J. L. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing
Research, Vol: 34, Pages: 347–356.
Akinbode, O. (2012). A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Advertising Language in
Selected Nigerian Mass Media Commercials. Research on Humanities and
Social Sciences, Vol: 2 (8), Pages: 26-30.
Ambroise, L., Ferrandi, J. M., Merunka, D., Vallette-Florence, P., & Barnier, V.
(2005). How Well Does Brand Personality Predict Brand Choice? A
Measurement Scale and Analysis Using Binary Regression Models. Advances in
Consumer Research Asia-Pacific Conference Proceedings, Vol: 6, Pages: 30–
38.
Barnard, M. (1996). Fashion as Communication. London: Routledge
Barthes, R. (1973). Mythologies. London: Paladin.
Barthes, R. (1977). Image Music Text. London: Fontana.
Baudrillard, J. (1998). The Consumer Society: Myths and Structures. London:
Sage.


70
Beasley, R. & Danesi, M. (2002). Persuasive Signs: The Semiotics of
Advertising. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Berger, A. A. (2010). The Objects of Perfection: Semiotics and Consumer
Culture. New York: Palgrave Macmilan.
Brown, S. (2011). It’s Alive on the Inside! A Note on the Prevalence of
Personification. Irish Marketing Review, Vol: 21, Pages: 1-9
Chandler, D. (2007). Semiotics: The Basics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Routledge.
Cook, G. (2001). The Discourse of Advertising. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and Corpus Linguistics, Vol: 6, John Benjamins
Publishing Company
Delbaere, M. McQuarrie, E. M. & Phillips, B. (2011). Personification in
Advertising. Journal of Advertising, Vol: 40 (1), Pages: 121-130.
Dyer, G. (1982). Advertising as Communication. London: Methuen.
Durant, A. & Lambrou, M. (2009). Language and Media. London: Routledge.


71
Durgee, J. F. & Chen, M. (2006). Metaphors, Needs and New Product Ideation,
in R. W. Belk (ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Methods in Marketing, Elgar. E.
Cheltenham, Pages: 291-302.
Eagleton, T. (1991). Ideology: An Introduction. London & New York: Verso.
Eco, U. (1976). A Theory of Semiotics, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Eco, U. (1990), A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Elkins, J. (2003). Visual Studies: A Skeptical Introduction. London: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their Brands: Developing Relationship
Theory in Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol: 24, Pages:
343–373.
Forceville, C. (1996). Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. New York: Routledge.


72
Fleck, N, Michel. G. & Zeitoun, V. (2014). Brand Personification through the Use
of Spokespeople: An Exploratory Study of Ordinary Employees, CEOs, and
Celebrities Featured in Advertising. Psychology and Marketing, Vol: 31 (1),
Pages: 84-92.
Goddard, A. (1998). The Language of Advertising. London & New York:
Routledge.
Goddard, A. (2002). The Language Of Advertising. 2nd ed. London & New York:
Routledge.
Goldman, R. (1992). Reading Ads Socially. London: Routledge.
Goodstein, R. C. (1993). Category-based Applications and Extensions in
Advertising: Motivating More Extensive Ad Processing. Journal of Consumer
Research, Pages: 87-99.
Hartley, J. (1982). Understanding News. London: Routledge.
Hansen, A. & Machin, D. (2013). Media and Communication Research Methods.
Oxford: Palgrave Macmillan.


73
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation
of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London:
Edwarld Arnold.
Harrison, C. (2003). Visual Social Semiotics: Understanding How Still Images
Make Meaning. Technical Communication, Vol: 50 (1), Pages: 46-60.
Hermerén L. (1999). English for Sale: A Study of the Language of Advertising.
Lund: Lund University Press.
Hitchon, J. C. (1997). The Locus of Metaphorical Persuasion: An Empirical Test.
Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol: 74 (1), Pages: 55-68.
Hines, C. (1999). Rebaking the Pie: The WOMAN AS DESSERT Metaphor. In:
Mary, Bucholtz, Liang, A. C., Laurel, A. S. (Eds.), Reinventing Identities: The
Gendered Self in Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press, Pages: 145–
162.
Hodge, R. V. & Kress, G. (1988). Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.


74
Horn, R. (1999). Information Design: Emergence of a New Profession. In
Information Design, ed. R. Jacobson, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, Pages:
15–33.
Huxley, A. (1941). Ends and Means: An Enquiry into the Nature of Ideals and into
the Methods employed for their Realization. London: Chatto & Windus.
Ivry, R. B. & Robertson, L. C. (1998). The Two Sides of Perception. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Jewitt, C. (2010). Multimodal Analysis: Key issues. In: Litosseliti, L (ed),
Research Methods in Linguistics. London: Continuum. Pages: 180-197.
Jewitt, C. (2014). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. 2nd ed.
London: Routledge.
Kress, G. (2009). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary
Communication: Exploring Contemporary Methods of Communication. Oxford:
Routledge.

Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary
Communication. Oxford: Routledge.


75
Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual
Design. London. Routledge.
Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. (1998). Front Pages: (The Critical) Analysis of
Newspaper Layout, in Bell, A. & Garrett, P. eds. Approaches to Media Discourse.
Oxford: Blackwell. Pages: 186-219
Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and
Media of Contemporary Communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. (2002). Colour as a Semiotic Mode: Notes for a
Grammar of Colour. Visual Communication, Vol: 1 (3), Pages: 343–368.
Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual
Design. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge.
Lakoff, G. (1993). The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In: Ortony, A.
Metaphor and Thought. 2nd
ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Pages:
202-251.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. USA: University of
Chicago Press.


76
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live By. 2nd
ed. USA: University
of Chicago Press.
Leiss, W., Kline, S. & Jhally, S. (1986). Social Communication in Advertising.
London: Methuen.
Leiss, W., Stephen, K. & Sut, J. (1990). Social Communication in Advertising:
Persons, Products and Images of Well-Being. (2nd
ed). London: Routledge.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning and
Values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Machin, D. (2007). Introduction to Multimodal Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Machin, D. (2014). Visual communication. Berlin & Boston: Mouton de Gruyter,
Page: 327.
Machin, D. & Thornborrow, J. (2003). Branding and Discourse: The ase of
Cosmopolitan. Discourse and Society, Vol: 14 (4), Pages: 453–471.


77
Machin, D. & Thornborrow, J. (2006). Lifestyle and the Depoliticisation of Agency:
Sex as Power in Women’s Magazines. Social Semiotics, Vol: 16 (1), Pages: 173-
188.
McLuhan, M. & Fiore, Q. (2008). The Medium is the Massage: An Inventory of
Effects. UK: Penguin Classics.

McQuarrie. E. F & Mick. D. G. (1996). Figures of Rhetoric in Advertising
Language. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol: 22, Pages: 424–438.
McQuarrie. E. F & Mick. D. G. (1999). Visual Rhetoric in Advertising: Text
Interpretive, Experimental, and Reader-Response Analyses. Journal of
Consumer Research, Pages: 37–54.
McQuarrie. E. F & Phillips. B. J. (2005). Indirect Persuasion in Advertising: How
Consumers Process Metaphors Presented in Pictures and Words. Journal of
Advertising, Vol: 34 (2), Pages: 7-20.
Mick, D. J., Burroughs, J. E., Hetzel, P. & Yoko Brannen, M. (2004). Pursuing the
Meaning of Meaning in the Commercial World: An International Review of
Marketing and Consumer Research Founded on Semiotics. Semiotica, Vol: 152,
(1), Pages: 1-74.


78
Miller, D. (2001). Car Cultures, Berg. London.
Najafian, M. & Ketabi, S. (2011). The Words behind Images: A Critical Social
Semiotic Approach toward Analyzing Advertising. International Journal of
Linguistics, Vol: 3 (1), Pages: 1-21.
Norris, S. (2004). Analyzing Multimodal Interaction. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Nöth, W. (1990). Handbook of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Ogden, C. K. & Richards, I. A. (1923). The Meaning of Meaning. New York:
Harcourt Brace.
O'Halloran, K. L. & Smith, B. A. (2011). Multimodal Studies: Exploring Issues and
Domains. New York & London: Routledge.
Oswald, L. (2012). Marketing Semiotics: Signs, Strategies, and Brand Value.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
O’Toole, M (1994). The Language of Displayed Art. London: Leicester
University Press.


79
Phillips, B. J. & McQuarrie, E. F. (2003). The Development, Change, and
Transformation of Rhetorical Style in Magazine Advertisements 1954–1999.
Journal of Advertising, Vol: 21 (4), Pages: 1–13.
Punter, D. (2007). Metaphor. Routledge. London.
Reddy, M. (1979). The Conduit Metaphor: A Case of Frame Conflict in our
Language about Language. In Ortony, A. ed., Metaphor and Thought.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Saren, M., Maclaran., P. & Goulding, C., Elliott, R., Shankar, A. & Catterall, M.
(Eds) (2007). Critical Marketing: Defining the Field. Oxford: Elsevier.
Saussure, F. D. ([1916] 1983). Course in General Linguistics (trans. Roy Harris).
London: Duckworth
Schirato, T. (1998). Meaning. In Bouissac. Pages: 396–399.
Scott, L. M. (1994). Images in Advertising: The Need for a Theory of Visual
Rhetoric. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol: 21, Pages: 252-273.
Segal, K. (2012). Insanely Simple: The Obsession That Drives Apple's Success.
USA: Penguin Group.


80
Shannon, C. E. & Weaver. W. (1949). A Mathematical Model of
Communication. Illinois: University of Illinois Press.
Stern, B. B. (1988). Medieval Allegory: Roots of Advertising Strategy for the Mass
Market. Journal of Consumer Research, Vol: 52, Pages: 84-94.
Stern, B. B. (1990). Beauty and Joy in Metaphorical Advertising: the Poetic
Dimension. Association for Consumer Research, Vol: 17, Pages: 71-77.
Stokes, J. (2013). How to do Media and Cultural Studies. London: Sage.
Sturrock, J. (1986). Structuralism. London: Paladin
Tanaka, K. (1994). Advertising Language. A Pragmatic Approach to
Advertisements in Britain and Japan. London: Routledge.
Taylor, R. E. (1999). A Six Segment Message Strategy Wheel. Journal of
Advertising Research, Vol: 39, Pages: 7–18.
Thwaites, T., Warwick, L. D. & Mules, W. (1994). Tools for Cultural
Studies: An Introduction. South Melbourne: Macmillan.


81
Thwaites, T. & Warwick, L. D. (2002). Introducing Cultural and Media Studies: A
Semiotic Approach. (Rev. ed). Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Toncar, M. & Munch, J. (2001). Consumer Responses to Tropes in Print
Advertising. Journal of Advertising, Vol: 30 (1), Pages: 55–65.
Turner, M. (1991). Reading Minds: The Study of English in the Age of Cognitive
Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Twain, M. (2012). A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. London & New
York: Knight's Publishing.
Ungerer, F. (2000). Muted Metaphors and the Activation of the Metonymies
Advertising. In Metaphor and Metonymy at the Crossroads, eds. Barcelona &
Berlin: Greuyter.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introduction to Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.
Vestergaard, T. & Schroder, K. (1985): The Language of Advertising. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Vihma, S. (1995). Products as Representation: A Semiotic and Aesthetic Study of
Design Products. Helsinki: University of Art and Design.


82
Voloshinov, V. N. (1973). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (trans.
Ladislav Matejka & I R Titunik). New York: Seminar Press.
Waitz, A., Epley, N., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2010). Social Cognition Unbound:
Insights into Anthropomorphism and Dehumanization. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, Vol: 19, Pages: 58–62.
Ward, J., & Gaidis, W. (1990). Metaphor in Promotional Communication: A
Review of Research on Metaphor Comprehension and Quality. Advances in
Consumer Research, Goldberg, M., Gorn, G, & Pollay, R, eds., Provo, UT
Association for Consumer Research, Vol: 17, Pages: 636-642.
Williamson, J. (2010). Decoding Advertisements: Ideology and Meaning in
Advertising. London: Marion Boyars.
Worth, S. (1981). Pictures Can’t Say Aint, in Worth, S. & Gross, L. Studying
Visual Communication. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Pages: 85–108.
Xiuming, W. (2007). Interpretation of Metaphors in Advertising Based on Theory
of Relevance. Fujian Normal University Master’s degree Thesis.
Yingxia, F. (2008). Cognitive Approach to Conceptual Metaphors in English
Advertisements. Henan University Master’s degree thesis.


83
Zaltman, G., and Coulter, R. H. (1995). Seeing the Voice of the Customer:
Metaphor-based Advertising Research. Journal of Advertising Research, Pages:
35-51.
Zhang X. & Gao, X. (2009). An Analysis of Conceptual Metaphor in Western
Commercial Advertisements. Asian Social Science. Vol: 5, (12), Pages: 97-104.
http://www.effie.org/, Last Accessed: 24/04/2015
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2014/11/05/apple-microsoft-and-
google-are-worlds-most-valuable-brands/ (Badenhausen, 2014), Last Accessed:
09/04/2015
http://archive.wired.com/gadgets/mac/commentary/cultofmac/2002/12/56677
(Kahney, 2002), Last Accessed: 20/11/2014
http://www.adweek.com/adfreak/apples-get-mac-complete-campaign-130552,
Last Accessed: 24/04/2015
http://courses.washington.edu/hypertxtcgibin/12.228.185.206/html/wordsimages/
wordsimages.hmtl (Dillon, 2006), Last Accessed: 24/04/2015
http://www.poynter.org/ (Poynter Institute, 1999), Last Accessed: 24/04/2015


84
Appendices

Vector lines (Figure 1)


85
Vector line (Figure 3)

Dissertation - Final Ever Version

More Related Content

Similar to Dissertation - Final Ever Version

Dissertation - Final Ever Version