Volume 11 (2) 2019

WOMEN IN BUSINESS MEDIA: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF REPRESENTATIONS OF WOMEN IN FORBES, FORTUNE AND BLOOMBERG BUSINESSWEEK, 2015-2017 | Pages 1-26

Kate Power, Lucy Rak & Marianne Kim

Download Full Text

  • Despite their growing presence within the business sector, women have long been under- and misrepresented in business media, with negative consequences for their entrepreneurial and other work aspirations. Research into the frequency with which women are featured and cited in business media, as well as the dominant discourses in terms of which they are represented, has repeatedly found patriarchal biases that undermine women’s position in the world of business. However, most of these studies are now outdated and many focus only on female entrepreneurs, are non-representative small-scale case studies, or do not subject business media coverage of women to fine-grained linguistic analysis. In this paper, therefore, we document how women (in general) are represented in three top-selling American business magazines (Bloomberg BusinessWeek, Forbes, Fortune) between 2015 and 2017. First, we compare the frequency with which men and women are mentioned across all articles published in this time period (n=2,317), to determine any statistically significant variation Second, using a representative subset of sample articles (n=63), we identify the number of times women are mentioned per article, to gauge the level of prominence accorded to them. Third, we use Hallidayan (Halliday and Matthiessen 2004) transitivity analysis and van Leeuwen’s (1996) representation of social actors framework to document the level and types of behavior ascribed to women, as well as the category labels used to depict them. Lastly, drawing on current business studies scholarship and related grey literature, we situate media portrayals of women within twenty-first century North American business culture. This paper contributes to a growing literature on media representations of powerful women and provides gender equality advocates – including those within both business and business media – with valuable information about how media coverage of women can better reflect and construct women’s position in the business world.

     

    1. ABD and Deloitte (2016). Missing pieces report: The 2016 Board Diversity Census of women and minorities on Fortune 500 Boards. [online]. Available: https://www.catalyst.org/system/files/2016_board_diversity_census_deloitte_abd.pdf. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    2. Achtenagen, L., and F. Welter (2011). ‘Surfing on the ironing board’ The representation of women’s entrepreneurship in German newspapers. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 23(9-10): 763-786.
    3. Adams, R.B., and D. Ferreira (2009). Women in the boardroom and their impact on governance and performance. Journal of Financial Economics 94(2): 291-309.
    4. Ahl, H.J. (2002). The construction of the female entrepreneur as the Other. In B. Czarniawska and H. Hopfl (eds.), Casting the Other: The Production and Maintenance of Inequalities in Work Organisations. London: Routledge. pp. 52-67.
    5. Alvarez, J.L., Mazza, C., and J. Strandgaard Pedersen (2005). The role of mass media in the consumption of management knowledge. Scandinavian Journal of Management 21(2): 127-132.
    6. American Express OPEN. (2016). The 2016 State of Women-owned Businesses Report. [online]. Available: http://www.womenable.com/content/userfiles/ 2016_State_of_Women-Owned_Businesses_Executive_Report.pdf. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    7. Baker, T., Aldrich, H.E., and L. Nina (1997). Invisible entrepreneurs: The neglect of women business owners by mass media and scholarly journals in the USA. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 9(3): 221-238.
    8. Barnes, J., and P. Larrivée (2011). Arlette Laguiller: Does the mainstay of the French political far-left enjoy linguistic parity with her male counterparts? Journal of Pragmatics 43(10): 2501-2508.
    9. Birken, M.-A., and G.P. Cigna (2018). Gender diversity on boards: A cause for multilateral organizations. AIIB Yearbook of International Law. [online]. Available: https://www.aiib.org/en/about-aiib/who-we-are/yearbook/index.html. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    10. Bruni, A., Gherardi, S., and B. Poggio (2004). Entrepreneur‐mentality, gender and the study of women entrepreneurs. Journal of Organizational Change Management 17(3): 256-268.
    11. Buhr, H., and M. Grafström (2007). The making of meaning in the media: The case of corporate social responsibility in The Financial Times 1988-2003. In F. den Hond, F.G.A. de Bakker, and P. Neergaard (eds.), Managing Corporate Social Responsibility in Action: Talking, Doing and Measuring. Aldershot: Ashgate. pp. 15-31.
    12. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2016). 39 percent of managers in 2015 were women. TED: The Economics Daily. [online]. Available: https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2016/39-percent-of-managers-in-2015-were-women.htm. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    13. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2017). Women in the Labor Force: A Databook (Report 1065). [online]. Available: https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/womens-databook/2016/home.htm. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    14. Burke, C., and S.R. Mazzarella (2008). ‘A slightly new shade of lipstick’: Gendered mediation in internet news stories. Women’s Studies in Communication 31(3): 395-418.
    15. Chimba, M., and J. Kitzinger (2010). Bimbo or boffin? Women in science: An analysis of media representations and how female scientists negotiate cultural contradictions. Public Understanding of Science 19(5): 609-624.
    16. Chouliaraki, L., and N. Fairclough (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    17. CWDI (2015). 2015 CWDI Report on women board directors of APEC economies. Globewomen.org. [online]. Available: https://globewomen.org/CWDINet/index.php/ cwdi-report-on-women-board-directors-in-apec-countries. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    18. Darics, E., and V. Koller (2019). Social actors ‘to go’: An analytical toolkit to explore agency in business discourse and communication. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly 82: 214-238.
    19. Deloitte (2014). Global human capital trends 2014: Engaging the 21st-century workforce. [online]. Available: https://www2.deloitte.com/insights/us/en/focus/human-capital-trends/2014.html. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    20. Doane, D. (2005). The myth of CSR: The problem with assuming that companies can do well while also doing good is that markets don’t really work that way. Stanford Social Innovation Review. [online]. Available: https://ssir.org/articles/entry/the_myth _of_csr#. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    21. Eddleston, K.A., Ladge, J.J., Mitteness, C., and L. Balachandra (2016). Do you see what I see? Signaling effects of gender and firm characteristics on financing entrepreneurial ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 40(3): 489-514.
    22. Eikhof, D.R., Summers, J., and S. Carter (2013). ‘Women doing their own thing’: Media representations of female entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 19(5): 547-564.
    23. Entman, R.M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication 43(4): 51-58.
    24. Everitt, J. (2003). Media in the maritimes: Do female candidates face a bias? Atlantis 27(2): 90-98.
    25. Gallagher, M. (2005). Who makes the news? Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) 2005. World Association of Christian Communication. [online]. Available: http://whomakesthenews.org/gmmp/gmmp-reports. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    26. Gallagher, M. (2010). Who makes the news? Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP) 2010. World Association of Christian Communication. [online]. Available: http://whomakesthenews.org/gmmp/gmmp-reports. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    27. Garcia-Blanco, I., and K. Wahl-Jorgensen (2012). The discursive construction of women politicians in the European press. Feminist Media Studies 12(3): 422-441.
    28. Goffman, E. (1974). Frame Analysis. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
    29. Grandy, K. (2014). You’ve come a short way, baby: Gender of information sources in American and Canadian business magazines 1991-92 and 2011-12. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 91(3): 578-589.
    30. Guenther, M. (2011). Magazine publishing in transition: Unique challenges for multi-media platforms. Publishing Research Quarterly 27(4): 327-331.
    31. Gupta, R. (2012, January 4). Has neoliberalism knocked feminism sideways? openDemocracy [online]. Available: https://www.opendemocracy.net/5050/rahila-gupta/has-neoliberalism-knocked-feminism-sideways. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    32. Halliday, M., and C. Matthiessen (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed.). London: Hodder Arnold.
    33. Happer, C., and G. Philo (2013). The role of the media in the construction of public belief and social change. Journal of Social and Political Psychology 1(1): 321-336.
    34. Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
    35. Heilman, M.E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues 57(4): 657-674.
    36. Heimer, K. (2007). U.S. media’s depictions of women candidates undermines electability. In A. Hiber (ed.), Is the United States ready for a minority President? Detroit: Greenhaven Press. [online]. Available: www.now.org/issues/media/070315hillary_media.html. Last accessed 16 February 2015.
    37. Hekman, D.R., Johnson, S.K., Foo, M.-D., and W. Yan (2017). Does diversity-valuing behavior result in diminished performance ratings for non-white and female leaders? Academy of Management Journal 60(2): 771-797.
    38. Herzog, B. (2016). Discourse Analysis as Social Critique: Discursive and Non-Discursive Realities in Critical Social Research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    39. Holmes, J. (1997). Women, language and identity. Journal of Sociolinguistics 1(2): 195-223.
    40. ILO – Bureau for Employers’ Activities (ACT/EMP). (2015). Women in business and management: Gaining momentum. [online]. Available: https://www.ilo.org/global/ publications/books/WCMS_316450/lang–en/index.htm. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    41. Jia, S., Lansdall-Welfare, T., Sudhahar, S., Carter, C., and N. Cristianni (2016). Women are seen more than heard in online newspapers. PLoS ONE 11(2): e0148434.
    42. Kanze, D., Huang, L., Conley, M.A., and E.T. Higgins (2018). We ask men to win and women not to lose: Closing the gender gap in startup funding. Academy of Management Journal 61(2): 586-614.
    43. KhosraviNik, M. (2010). Actor descriptions, action attributions, and argumentation: Towards a systematization of CDA analytical categories in the representation of social groups. Critical Discourse Studies 7(1): 55-72.
    44. Kitzinger, J. (2004). Framing Abuse: Media Influence and Public Understanding of Sexual Violence against Children. London: Pluto Press.
    45. Koller, V. (2004). Businesswomen and war metaphors: ‘Possessive, jealous and pugnacious’? Journal of Sociolinguistics 8(1): 3-22.
    46. Koller, V. (2008). CEOs and ‘working gals’: The textual representation and cognitive conceptualisation of businesswomen in different discourse communities. In K. Harrington, L. Litoselliti, H. Sauntson, and J. Sunderland (eds.), Gender and Language Research Methodologies. Basingstoke: Palgrave. pp. 211-226.
    47. Krefting, L.A. (2002). Re‐presenting women executives: Valorization and devalorization in US business press. Women in Management Review 17(3/4): 104-119.
    48. Lachover, E. (2013). Influential women: Feminist discourse in women’s business magazines – The case of Israel. Communication, Culture & Critique 6: 121-141.
    49. Lafrance, A. (2016, February 17). I analyzed a year of my reporting for gender bias (again). The Atlantic. [online]. Available: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/ 2016/02/gender-diversity-journalism/463023/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    50. Lafrance, A. (2016, March 30). Why do so many digital assistants have feminine names? The Atlantic. [online]. Available: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/03/ why-do-so-many-digital-assistants-have-feminine-names/475884/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    51. Lämsä, A.-M., and T. Tiensuu (2002). Representations of the woman leader in Finnish business media articles. Business Ethics: A European Review 11(4): 363-375.
    52. Lang, R., and I. Rybnikova (2016). Discursive constructions of women managers in German mass media in the gender quota debate 2011-2013. Gender in Management: An International Journal 31(5): 359-373.
    53. Langowitz, N.S., and C. Morgan (2003). Women entrepreneurs: Breaking through the glass barrier. In J.E. Butler (ed.), New Perspectives on Women Entrepreneurs. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing. pp. 101-119.
    54. LeanIn.org and McKinsey & Company. (2015). Women in the workplace 2015. [online]. Available: https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/external-resources/women-in-the-workplace-2015/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    55. Lee, J. (2005). Perception of women managers in Singapore: A media analysis. Asia Pacific Business Review 11(2): 233-250.
    56. Lewis, P. (2006). The quest for invisibility: Female entrepreneurs and the masculine norm of entrepreneurship. Gender, Work & Organization 13(5): 453-469.
    57. Ljunggren, E., and G.A. Alsos (2006). Media expressions of entrepreneurs: Presentations and discourses of male and female entrepreneurs in Norway. In N.M. Carter, C. Henry, B.Ó. Cinnéide, and K. Johnston (eds.), Female Entrepreneurship: Implications for Education, Training and Policy. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. pp. 88-109.
    58. Martin, J.R. (2004). Positive discourse analysis: Power, solidarity and change. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 49: 179-200.
    59. McNair, B., Hiberd, M., and Schlesinger, J. (2003). Mediated Access: Broadcasting and Democratic Participation in the Age of Mediated Politics. Luton: University of Luton Press.
    60. McShane, S.L. (1995). Occupational, gender, and geographic representation of information sources in U.S. and Canadian business magazines. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 72(1): 190-204.
    61. Moerman, M. (1988). Talking Culture: Ethnography and Conversation Analysis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    62. Nonhoff, M. (2017). Discourse analysis as critique. Palgrave Communications 3: article 17074. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/palcomms201774. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    63. O’Neill, D., and H. Savigny (2014). Female politicians in the British press: The exception to the ‘masculine norm’? AJE Journal 3(1): 7-26.
    64. O’Neill, D., Savigny, H., and V. Cann (2016). Women politicians in the UK press: Not seen and not heard? Feminist Media Studies 16(2): 293-307.
    65. Paustian-Underdahl, S.C., Walker, L.S., and D.J. Woehr (2014). Gender and perceptions of leadership effectiveness: A meta-analysis of contextual moderators. Journal of Applied Psychology 99(6): 1129-1145.
    66. Pew Research Center (2015). Women CEOs in Fortune 500 companies 1995-2018. [online]. Available: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/chart/women-ceos-in-fortune-500-companies -1995-2014/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    67. Phillips, S.D., and A.R. Imhoff (1997). Women and career development: A decade of research. Annual Review of Psychology 48: 31-59.
    68. Poggesi, S., Mari, M., and L. De Vita (2016). What’s new in female entrepreneurship research? Answers from the literature. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 12(3): 735-764.
    69. Porter, M.E., and M.R. Kramer (2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review 84(12): 78-92.
    70. Power, K. (2017). ‘Church trailblazer Rev Pat Storey on Weight Watchers, caffeine and how she named her dog after former New York Mayor’: News representations of the first female Anglican Bishop in the UK and Ireland. Irish Journal of Applied Social Studies 16(1): Article 6.
    71. Radu, M., and M.R. Redien-Collot (2008). The social representation of entrepreneurs in the French press: Desirable and feasible models. International Small Business Journal 26(3): 259-298.
    72. Rakow, L., and K. Kranich (1991). Women as sign in television news. Journal of Communication 41(1): 8-23.
    73. Reisigl, M., and R. Wodak (2016). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage. pp. 23-61.
    74. Rodgers, S., and E. Thorson (2003). A socialization perspective on male and female reporting. Journal of Communication 53(4): 658-675.
    75. Ross, K. (2004). Women framed: The gendered turn in mediated politics. In K. Ross and C. M. Byerly (eds.), Women and Media: International Perspectives. Malden: Blackwell. pp. 60-80.
    76. Ross, K. and C. Byerly (eds) (2004). Women and Media: International Perspectives. Oxford: Blackwell.
    77. Ross, K., and C. Carter (2011). Women and news: A long and winding road. Media, Culture & Society 33(8): 1148-1165.
    78. Sheridan, A. (1994). Managers in cartoons: They are still men in the Harvard Business Review. Women in Management Review 9(4): 20-24.
    79. Shor, E., Rijt, A., Ward, C., Askar, S., and S. Skiena (2014). Is there a political bias? A computational analysis of female subjects’ coverage in liberal and conservative newspapers. Social Science Quarterly 95(5): 1213-1229.
    80. Shor, E., van de Rijt, A., Miltsov, A., Kulkarni, V., and S. Skiena (2015). A paper ceiling: Explaining the persistent underrepresentation of women in printed news. American Sociological Review 80(5): 960-984.
    81. Smith, K.B. (1997). When all’s fair: Signs of parity in media coverage of female candidates. Political Communication 14(1): 71-82.
    82. Stern, J. (2017). Alexa, Siri, Cortana: The problem with all-female digital assistants; men and women may prefer female voices for their digital assistants, but it’s about time we had more male options. Wall Street Journal. [online]. Available: https://www.wsj.com/articles/alexa-siri-cortana-the-problem-with-all-female-digital-assistants-1487709068. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    83. Tuchman, G. (1978). The symbolic annihilation of women by the mass media. In G. Tuchman, A. Kaplan Daniels, and J. Benét (eds.), Hearth and Home: Images of Women in the Mass Media. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 3-38.
    84. van Dijk, T.A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society 4: 249-283.
    85. van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors. In C.R. Caldas-Coulthard and M. Coulthard (eds.), Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. pp. 32-71.
    86. van Leeuwen, T. (2018). Moral evaluation in critical discourse analysis. Critical Discourse Studies 15(2): 140-153.
    87. Warhurst, A. (2005). Future roles of business in society: The expanding boundaries of corporate responsibility and a compelling case for partnership. Futures 37(2): 151-168.
    88. Weschler, P. (2015). 58 women CFOs in the Fortune 500: Is this progress? [online]. Available: http://fortune.com/2015/02/24/58-women-cfos-in-the-fortune-500-is-this-progress/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    89. Yang, T., and H.E. Aldrich (2014). Who’s the boss? Explaining gender inequality in entrepreneurial teams. American Sociological Review 79(2): 303-327.
    90. Zarya, V. (2018). Female founders got 2% of venture capital dollars in 2017. Fortune. [online] Available: http://fortune.com/2018/01/31/female-founders-venture-capital-2017/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    91. Zelenko, L. (2018). The hidden newsmakers in finance: Bloomberg insists on more women, diverse sourcing. Bloomberg. [online]. Available: https://www.bloomberg.com/company/ announcements/hidden-newsmakers-finance-bloomberg-insists-women-diverse-sourcing/. Last accessed 11 January 2020.
    92. Zoch, L.M., and J.V. Turk (1998). Women making news: Gender as a variable in source selection and use. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 75(4): 762-775.

“BR…EXIT”. A DIATEXTUAL ANALYSIS OF PUBLIC DISCOURSE ON MIGRANT ITALIAN TALENTS | Pages 27-40

Concetta Papapicco & Guiseppe Mininni

Download Full Text

  • The theoretical and methodological framework of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a powerful resource to face the ideological intricacies of the public debate on a specific aspect of migrant people: ‘brain exit’. The relevance of brain drain (Docquier and Rapoport 2012) has been explored at several levels; however, the aim of our study is to focus on its significance for Discursive Psychology as well. The way in which it is discussed brings into play the interpretative repertories of basic objects in the organization of the culture of a community, such as ‘work’, ‘family’, ‘education’, ‘Self’, ‘nation’. Our study aims to detect the discursive pathways that oppose the ‘professional realization’ to the ‘emotional enhancement’ as referring to the Self, to the families and to the politicians as well as to the whole community. Starting from various sources of ‘dia-textual’ (Manuti and Mininni and 2017) data, our research aims to evaluate which are the difficulties of this displacement, doubts and victories of brain drain. To satisfy this purpose, a Sentiment Analysis and Diatextual Analysis was carried out, assuming that the courageous choice to leave depends on a high motivation of the worker who sets aside his affections for work satisfaction: not by chance, in English in the binomial ‘brain drain’ and ‘drain heart’, the heart is almost moved to the background. Diatextual Approach as a format of Critical Discourse Analysis answers the need to ‘enlarge the paradigm’, starting from the research question about how the speech represented the social goals and how large their area of influence can be.

     

    1. Ben-habib, S. (2002). The Claims of Culture. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    2. Berlin, J. (1993). Poststructuralism, semiotics, and social-epistemic rhetoric: Converging agendas. In T. Enos, and S. Brown (eds.), Defining the New Rhetorics. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. pp. 137-176.
    3. Billig, M. (2005). Banal nationalism. In Nations and Nationalism: A Reader. Edinburgh University Press. 184-196.
    4. Caffi, C. (2009). Pragmatica: sei lezioni. Roma: Carocci.
    5. Carvalho, A. (2008). Media (ted) discourse and society: Rethinking the framework of critical discourse analysis. Journalism Studies 9(2): 161-177.
    6. Chouliaraki, L. and N. Fairclough (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh University Press: Edinburgh. pp. 1-224.
    7. Colucci F.P., and L. Montali (2013). The origins, characteristics and development of critical           psychology in Italy. Annual Review of Critical Psychology 10: 596-620.
    8. Docquier, F., and H. Rapoport (2012). Quantifying the impact of highly skilled emigration on developing countries. In T. Boeri, H. Brücker, F. Docquier and H. Rapaport (eds.), Brain Drain and Brain Gain: The Global Competition to Attract High-Skilled Migrants. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 213-232.
    9. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
    10. Grubel H.G. (1994). The economics of the brain drain. In T. Husent and N. Postlethwaite (eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Education (Vol. 1). Oxford: Pergamon. pp. 554-561.
    11. Manuti, A. and G. Mininni (2017). A rose is more than a rose … the diatextual constitution of subjects and objects. Text & Talk 37(2): 243-263.
    12. Marková, I. (2004). Language and communication in social psychology: Dialogue in the focus group. Bulletin de Psychologie 57: 231-236.
    13. Milio S., Lattanzi, R., Casadio, F., Crosta, N., Raviglione, M., Ricci, P., and F. Scano (2012). Brain Drain, Brain Exchange and Brain Circulation: The Case of Italy Viewed from a Global Perspective. Aspen Institute Italia, Interesse nazionale. Available: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263742608_BRAIN_DRAIN_BRAIN_EXCHANGE_AND_BRAIN_CIRCULATION_THE_CASE_OF_ITALY_VIEWED_FROM_A_GLOBAL_PERSPECTIVE. Last accessed 28 January 2020.
    14. Mininni G. (1997). ‘I think I am a preposition’: A diatextual frame of the dynamic subject. Semiotica 113(1/2): 89-105.
    15. Mininni, G. (1999). Diatexts we mean (and live) by. European Journal for Semiotic Studies 11(4): 609-628.
    16. Mininni G. (2005). Diatexts as a mirror of human complexity. World Futures 61: 163-175.
    17. Mininni, G. (2013). Psicologia culturale discorsiva. Milano: Franco Angeli.
    18. Mininni, G. (2010). The method of dialogue: transaction through interaction. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science 44(1): 23-29.
    19. Mininni G., Scardigno R., and R. Rubino (2008). The gestalt texture of discourse. Gestalt Theory 30(3): 225-232.
    20. Mininni, G., Ghiglione, R., and E. Sales-Wuillemin (1995). The intralocutor’s diatextual frame. Journal of Pragmatics 24: 471-487.
    21. Moscovici, S. (1961). El psicoanálisis, su imagen y su público. Buenos Aires: Huemul Editorial.
    22. Pang, B., and L. Lee (2008). Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 2(1-2): 1-35.
    23. Papapicco, C., Scardigno, R. and G. Mininni (2017). “What’s the meaning of…?” Virtual communities as dialogical cultures in learning Italian. Redefining Community in Intercultural Context 6(1): 321-326.
    24. Potter, J. and M. Wetherall (1987). Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour. London: Sage.
    25. Prensky M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon 9(5): 1-6.
    26. Titscher, S., Meyer, M., Wodak, R., and E. Vetter (2000). Narrative semiotics. In R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis . London: SAGE Publications Ltd. pp. 125-135.

LINGUISTIC-PRAGMATIC MEANS OF FILLING-IN ONTOLOGICAL LACUNAS IN BLOG TEXTS OF POST-MAIDAN UKRAINE| Pages 41-65

Yaroslava Sazonova

Download Full Text

  • The article takes a linguistic-pragmatic approach using Proximization Theory (PT) to analyze threat deconstruction in a Ukrainian humorous blog. The aim is to show how threat deconstruction in a Ukrainian blogger’s texts runs parallel to the reconstruction of national identity. The blog was written at the time of the war in the East of Ukraine (2014-16) that caused consequential shifts in the Ukrainians’ self-perception and their perception of the Russian Federation. The notion of an ontological lacuna is introduced to account for these changes and transformations in national identity. Simultaneous processes in the deconstruction of threat and the construction of a new sense of threat under war-time conditions are analyzed as proximization operations. The purpose is to reveal how threat consolidates and motivates people for resistance. In both cases, the basic pragmatic strategy is the delegitimization of the threatening actor and the legitimization of the threatened one. The focus is on linguistic devices that change the perlocutionary effect, such as humor, semantic and dialect shifts, and obscene lexis. A set of characteristic axiological features emerged that show the shift in the construction of the Ukraine-Russia relationship from friend to foe. 

    1. Baldi, B., and L. Franco (2015). (De)legitimization strategies in the ‘Austere Prose’ of Palmiro Togliatti. Quaderni di Linguistica e Studi Orientali / Working Papers in Linguistics and Oriental Studies 1: 139-158.
    2. Barlow, A. (2007). The Rise of the Blogosphere. New York: Praeger.
    3. Berger, P. L. (1997), Redeeming Laughter: The Comic Dimension of Human Experience. Berlin / New York: Walter de Gruyter.
    4. Cap, P. (2008). Towards the proximization model of the analysis of legitimization in political discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 40(1): 17-41.
    5. Cap, P. (2013). Proximization: The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    6. Саp, Р. (2017a). The Language of Fear: Communicating Threat in Public Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
    7. Cap, P. (2017b). Studying ideological worldviews in political discourse space: Critical-cognitive advances in the analysis of conflict and coercion. Journal of Pragmatics 108: 17-27.
    8. Chilton, P. (2011). Deictic space theory (DST): The fundamental theory and its applications. Paper presented at the 42nd Poznań Linguistic Meeting, Poznań, 1-3 May 2011.
    9. Chilton, P. (2014). Language, Space and Mind: the Conceptual Geometry of Linguistic Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    10. Did Svyryd. (2014-2016). Blogs. [online]. Available: https://forum.durdom.in.ua. Last accessed 18 November 2018.
    11. Dmytruck, А. (2014). We shall never become brothers. Facebook.com. [online]. Available: https://www.facebook.com/knellera/posts/290782174430944. Last accessed 18 November 2018.
    12. Foucault, M. (1977). Language, Counter-Memory, Practice. New York, NY: Cornell University Press.
    13. Foucault, M. (1999). Madness and Civilization. London: Routledge.
    14. Hageseth, C. (1988). A Laughing Place: The Art and Psychology of Positive Humour in Love and Adversity. Fort Collins, CO: Berwick.
    15. Kaal, B. (2017). Worldview and Social Practice: a Discourse-Space Approach to Political Text Analysis. Unpublished PhD Thesis. Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
    16. Karpenko, О. (2014). 5 Ukrainian bloggger-virtisos in Surzhyk. [In Ukrainian]. Available: https://ain.ua/2014/11/15/5-ukrainskix-blogerov-virtuozno-vladeyushhix-surzhikom. Last accessed 18 November 2018.
    17. Keren, M. (2006). Blogosphere: The New Political Arena. N.Y.: Lexington Books.
    18. Kidruck, М. (2015). Не братні [Not-brotherly]. Kharkiv: The Club of Family Pastime.
    19. Kopytowska, M., Grabowski, L., and J. Woźniak (2017). Mobilizing against the other: Cyberhate, refugee crisis and proximization. In M. Kopytowska (ed.), Contemporary Discourses of Hate and Radicalism across Space and Genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 57-98.
    20. Lefcourt, H.M. (2001). The humor solution. In C.R. Snyder (ed.), Coping with Stress: Effective people and processes. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 68-92.
    21. Mackay, R. (2015). Multimodal legitimation: Selling Scottish independence. Discourse & Society 2(3): 323-348.
    22. Nahimova, E. (2011). Ideologeme: Stalin in modern mass communication. Политическая лингвистика 2 (36): 152-156.
    23. Reyes, A. (2011). Strategies of legitimization in political discourse: from words to actions. Discourse & Society 22(6): 781-807.
    24. Ringmar, E. (2007). A Blogger’s Manifesto: Free Speech and Censorship in the Age of the Internet. London: Anthem Press.
    25. Sørensen, M. J. (2016). Humour in Political Activism: Creative Nonviolent Resistance. Palgrave Macmillan.
    26. Tileagă, C. (2007). Ideologies of moral exclusion: A critical discursive reframing of depersonalization, delegitimization and dehumanization. British Journal of Social Psychology 46: 717-737.
    27. Velykyi tlumachnyi slovnyk ukrainskoi movy [Big Ukrainian Dictionary] (2005). Електронна бібліотека “Україніка”. [In Ukrainian] Available: http://irbis-nbuv.gov.ua/cgibin/ua/ elib.exe?I21DBN=UKRLIB&P21DBN=UKRLIB&S21STN=1&S21REF=10&S21FMT=fullwebr&C21COM=S&S21CNR=20&S21P01=0&S21P02=0&S21P03=ID=&S21STR=UKR0000989. Last accessed 18 November 2018.
    28. Yefremova, Т. (2000). Modern Russian Dictionary. [In Russian]. Available: https:// dic.academic.ru/dic.nsf/efremova/136432/%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%88. Last accessed 18 November 2018.

CO-CREATION DOMESTICATED: HOW MUNICIPALITY EMPLOYEES RECONTEXTUALIZE AND OPERATIONALIZE PRINCIPLES OF CO-CREATION IN THE PURSUIT OF GREEN TRANSITION | Pages 66-83

Anders Horsbøl

 Download Full Text

  • Notions of co-creation and co-production have recently gained importance within several governance areas, suggesting new relations between public authorities and citizens. However, whereas the overall principles of co-creation are relatively well established, the ways in which these principles are realized (or not) in specific fields of practices remain to be studied. This does not at least apply to initiatives towards green transition and climate change mitigation, to which this article is devoted. The current article presents a case study of a 3-year long green transition project, based on a co-operation between four municipalities or municipality associated actors in Denmark and Sweden. The case provides an opportunity to study how ideas and principles of co-creation as a general policy paradigm are domesticated when they meet the local experiences of a municipality initiated green transition project. To put the study of domestication at work in a discourse approach, the notions of recontextualization and operationalization are employed (Fairclough 2005). Empirically, the article analyzes representations of the co-creation process made by municipality employees, who met in a series of workshops in order to exchange experiences and develop a common framework.

  • To be announced

TRANSLATING THE LEAP PROGRAMME IN GHANA: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE STUDY OF POWER AND GENDERED DISCOURSES | Page 84-124

Dennis Puorideme

 Download Full Text

  • Previous studies of conditional cash transfer (CCT) programmes employed an ethnographic approach to investigate the gendered impacts of these programmes on women in different contexts and found that these programmes reinforce gender inequality and burden women. This paper investigates a CCT programme by focusing on the intersecting gendered practices of the LEAP CCT programme authorities in Ghana alongside the gendered practices of the programme community focal persons (males and females) in the specific context of the Asante matrilineal society. The paper uses an ethnographic-based critical discourse study methodology inspired by Foucault’s notions of discourse and power and Fairclough’s approach to critical discourse studies. Thus, it draws on modality and interactional control features to investigate the accounts of social actors in the domains of the programme and the specific local community. The analysis demonstrates that the LEAP CCT programme reproduces unequal gender power relations in Asante matrilineal society and that women community focal persons in the Asante matrilineal society reproduce and assert unequal gender relations in the CCT programme within Asante society. In addition, it reveals that the reproduction and assertion of unequal gender relations in the translation of the CCT programme excludes the voices and articulations of men in specific contexts.

    1. Armah, A.K. (1970). Fragments. Boston MA: Houghton Mifflin.
    2. Barrientos, A. (2014). Social protection. In R. Currie-Alder, B. Kanbur, D.M. Malone, and R. Medhora (eds.), International Development: Ideas, Experience, and Prospects. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 188-203.
    3. Bonilla, J., Zarzur, R.C., Handa, S., Nowlin, C., Peterman, A., Ring, H., and D. Seidenfeld (2017). Cash for women’s empowerment? A mxed-methods evaluation of the government of Zambia’s child grant program. World Development 95: 55-72.
    4. Bradshaw, S. (2008). From structural adjustment to social adjustment: A gendered analysis of conditional cash transfer programmes in Mexico and Nicaragua. Global Social Policy 8(2): 188-207.
    5. Bradshaw, S. and A.Q. Víquez (2008). Women beneficiaries or women bearing the cost? A gendered analysis of the Red de Protección Social in Nicaragua. Development and Change 39(5): 823-844.
    6. Clark, G. (1999). Negotiating Asante family survival in Kumasi, Ghana. Africa 69(01): 66-86.
    7. Cookson, T.P. (2016). Working for inclusion? Conditional cash transfers, rural women, and the reproduction of inequality. Antipode 48(5): 1187-1205.
    8. Corboz, J. (2013). Third-way neoliberalism and conditional cash transfers: The paradoxes of empowerment, participation and self-help among poor Uruguayan women. The Australian Journal of Anthropology 24(1): 64-80.
    9. de Brauw, A., Gilligan, D.O., Hoddinott, J., and S. Roy (2014). The impact of Bolsa Família on women’s decision-making power. World Development 59: 487-504.
    10. Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publication.
    11. Death, C. (2013). Governmentality at the limits of the international: African politics and Foucauldian theory. Review of International Studies 39(3): 763-787.
    12. Devereux, S. (2002). Can social safety nets reduce chronic poverty? Development Policy Review 20(5): 657-675.
    13. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    14. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
    15. Fairclough, N. (2015). Language and Power (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
    16. Farah Quijano, M.A. (2009). Social policy for poor rural people in Colombia: Reinforcing traditional gender roles and identities? Social Policy & Administration 43(4): 397-408.
    17. Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. (C. Gordon, ed.). New York: Pantheon Books.
    18. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry 8(4): 777-795.
    19. Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.
    20. Foucault, M. (2002a). Archaeology of Knowledge. London: Routledge.
    21. Foucault, M. (2002b). Governmentality. In J.D. Faubion (ed.), Power: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954-1984 . London: Penguin. pp. 201-222.
    22. Foucault, M. (2002c). The subject and power. In J. D. Faubion (ed.), Power: Essential works of Foucault, 1954-1984. London: Penguin. pp. 326-348.
    23. Foucault, M. (2007). Security, Territory, Population : Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977-78. (M. Senellart, ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    24. Gee, J.P. (2014). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
    25. Gil-García, Ó.F. (2016). Gender equality, community divisions, and autonomy: The Prospera conditional cash transfer program in Chiapas, Mexico. Current Sociology 64(3): 447-469.
    26. Holmes, R., and N. Jones (2013). Gender and Social Protection in the Developing World: Beyond Mothers and Safety Nets. London: Zed Books.
    27. Kidd, S. (2017). Social exclusion and access to social protection schemes. Journal of Development Effectiveness 9(2): 212-244.
    28. Krzyżanowski, M. (2011). Ethnography and critical discourse analysis: Towards a problem-oriented research dialogue. Critical Discourse Studies 8(4): 231-238.
    29. Krzyzanowski, M. (2017). Ethnography and critical discourse studies. In J. Flowerdew, and J.E. Richardson (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies. London: Routledge. pp. 179-194.
    30. McCaskie, T.C. (1981). State and society, marriage and adultery: Some considerations towards a social history of pre-colonial Asante. The Journal of African History 22(4): 477-494.
    31. McCaskie, T.C. (2002). State and Society in Pre-Colonial Asante. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    32. Miller, P., and N. Rose (2008). Governing the Present: Administering Economic, Social and Personal Life. Cambridge: Polity.
    33. Molyneux, M. (2006). Mothers at the service of the new poverty agenda: Progresa/oportunidades, Mexico’s conditional transfer programme. Social Policy and Administration 40(4): 425-449.
    34. Nagels, N. (2016). The social investment perspective, conditional cash transfer programmes and the welfare mix: Peru and Bolivia. Social Policy and Society 15(03): 479-493.
    35. Nukunya, G.K. (2016). Tradition and Change in Ghana: An Introduction to Sociology (Revised edition). Accra: Woeli Publishing Services.
    36. Puorideme, D. (2018). Social Protection and Gender at the Intersection of Discourses and Governmentality: A Critical Ethnographic Study of the LEAP Cash Transfer Programme in Ghana. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Aalborg Universitet. Det Humanistiske Fakultet. Ph.D.-Serien.
    37. Puorideme, D. (2019). How men and women negotiate sociocultural relations in Asante matrilineage (abusua): An ethnographic-based discourse study. Journal of Multicultural Discourses 14(3): 272-290.
    38. Scarlato, M., d’Agostino, G., and F. Capparucci (2016). Evaluating CCTs from a gender perspective: The impact of Chile Solidario on women’s employment prospect. Journal of International Development 28(2): 177-197.
    39. Smart, G. (2007). Ethnographic-based discourse analysis: Uses, issues and prospects. In V. Bhatia, J. Flowerdew, and R.H. Jones (eds.), Advances in Discourse Studies (1st ed). London: Routledge. pp. 56-66.
    40. Smith, D.E. (2005). Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. New York: Altamira.
    41. van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LANGUAGE IDEOLOGY WITHIN SHIFTING POLITICAL IDEOLOGY: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE STUDY OF TAIWAN’S PLANS FOR INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION | Page 125-144

Chien Ju Ting

 Download Full Text

  • Taiwan has 16 officially recognised Indigenous languages and all of them are endangered. Legislative efforts have been made to preserve these languages, but the results have not been fruitful. While it is often taken for granted that Indigenous language revitalisation policies are meant to promote Indigenous languages, this paper argues that other political agendas embedded in the policies may have obscured the good intentions for language revitalisation and thus resulted in the inefficacy of the policies. This paper employs a Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) framework to investigate how two successive Taiwanese governments with contrasting political positions (the DPP and the KMT) legitimise their intention for Indigenous language revitalisation. Two consecutive ‘6-Year Plans for Indigenous Language Revitalisation’, each prepared under the different government in power, were examined and compared. I draw on four legitimisation strategies applied by other CDS scholars to investigate the government’s justifications for Indigenous language revitalisation. In spite of the similar language ideology with regard to language revitalisation, the Plans reflected the particular political positionings of each government. In other words, the term ‘language revitalisation’ is recontextualised by different political powers to address opaque political agendas.

     

    1. Austin, P., and J. Sallabank (2014). Endangered Languages: Beliefs and Ideologies in Language Documentation and Revitalisation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    2. Bradley, D. (2010). South-East Asia, Southern China and Taiwan (China). In C. Moseley (ed.), Atlas of the World’s Languages in Danger of Disappearing (3rd ed.). Paris: UNESCO. pp. 64-73.
    3. Chang, H. (1996). yuan zhu min mu yu jiao xue huo shuang yu jiao yu ? [Bilingualism or mother-tongue education ?] Aboriginal Periodic, Taiwan 4: 34-42.
    4. Chao, S.-C. (2014). The critical discourse analysis of Taiwan Indigenous Language Education Policy. Journal of Curriculum Studies 9 (2): 53-78.
    5. Coulthard, M., Johnson, A., Wright, D., Johnson, A., and D. Wright (2016). The language of the law. In M. Coulthard, A. Johnson, D. Wright, A. Johnson, and D. Wright (eds.), An Introduction to Forensic Linguistics: Language in Evidence. New York: Routledge. pp. 35-53.
    6. Dupré, J.-F. (2016). Legislating language in Taiwan: from equality to development to status quo. Language Policy 15(4): 415-432.
    7. Dupré, J.-F. (2017). Culture Politics and Linguistic Recognition in Taiwan. New York: Routledge.
    8. Fairclough, N. (2001). Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods in Critical Discourse Analysis (3rd ed.). London: Sage. pp. 121-138.
    9. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social research. London: Routledge.
    10. Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
    11. Fairclough, N. (2016). A dialectical-relational approach to critical discourse analysis in social research. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Studies. London: Sage. pp. 86-108.
    12. Grin, F. (2003). Language Policy Evaluation and the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    13. Hadjidemetriou, C. (2014). Fluidity in language beliefs: The beliefs of the Kormakiti Maronite Arabic speakers of Cyprus towards their Language. In P.K. Austin and J. Sallabank (eds.), Endangered Languages: Beliefs and Ideologies in Language Documentation and Revitalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 53-75.
    14. Irvine, J., and S. Gal (2000). Language ideology and linguistic differentiation. In P. Kroskrity (ed.), Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Politics, and Identities. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press. pp. 35-83.
    15. Li, P.J. (2008). The great diversity of Formosan languages. Academia Sinica 9(3): 523-546.
    16. McCarty, T.L. (2013). A ‘rightful place’ in the world of languages: Rethinking discourses of dis-ability in indigenous language planning and policy. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 12: 179-183.
    17. Reyes, A. (2011). Strategies of legitimization in political discourse: From words to actions. Discourse & Society 22(6): 781-807.
    18. Ricento, T. (2000). Ideology, Policies and Language Policies: Focus on English. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    19. Ruíz, R. (1984). Orientations in language planning. NABE Journal 8(2): 15-34.
    20. Shohamy, E.G. (2006). Language Policy: Hidden Agendas and New Approaches. New York : Routledge.
    21. Tiun, H. (2013). tai wan yu yan zheng ce bian qian fen xi: yu yan ren quan de guan dian [The analysis of the changes in Taiwan’s language policy : from a human rights perspecitve] Periodical of Tai-Tung university, Taiwan 3(1):45-82.
    22. Tollefson, J.W. (1991). Planning Language, Planning Inequality: Language Policy in the Community. London: Longman.
    23. van Dijk, T.A. (1996). Discourse, power and access. In C. Caldas-Coulthard and M. Coulthard (eds.), Texts and Practices : Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. pp. 84-106.
    24. van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    25. Wang, Y. (2011). The Semantic, Discourse and Pragmatic Analysis of the Mandarin Causative Contraction Rang with Pedagogical Application (MA). Taipei, National Normal University.
    26. Wodak, R., and M. Meyer (2016). Critical discourse studies: History, agenda, theory and methodology. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds.), Method of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage. pp. 1-22.
    27. Woolard, K. (1998). Introduction: Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In B. Schieffelin, K. Woolard, and P. Kroskrity (eds.), Language Ideology: Practice and Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 3-47.
    28. Woolard, K., and B. Schieffelin (1994). Language Ideology. AnnLL Rev. Anthropol 23: 55-82.
NUCLEARISM: MEDIA DISCOURSE, IMAGE-SCHEMATA, AND THE COLD WAR | Page 145-168

Celeste Moreno Palmero

 Download Full Text

  • Nuclear ideology, or nuclearism, was for many years an intrinsic part of American identity. Atomic bombs incited fear, but also awe and admiration. People lived their lives conditioned by these dualities, feeling anxiety about the chances of an all-out nuclear war, but also being proud of the greatest American achievement. This paper presents a multidisciplinary approach to the study of nuclear discourse and its impact on the audience and their behavior. Using theories of CDA along with Cognitive Linguistics and Evolutionary Psychology, the goal of this paper is to analyze news media in order to understand the role it may have played in the framing and categorization of nuclear affairs within the internal mental structure of the American public. I focused this study on top newspapers and a particular linguistic strategy: metaphor-related words that triggered an image schema. The paper looks at production but also at reception to demarcate the possible outcomes of ideological discourse on the public’s behavior. In order to look at reception with a complete understanding of the mechanisms that may have elicited different responses, this work employs theories of evolutionary psychology to prove whether certain discursive strategies could have had the power to activate attitudes towards nuclear affairs.

     

    1. Barsalou, L. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavior and Brain Sciences 22: 577-609.
    2. Barsalou, L. (2003). Abstraction in perceptual symbol systems. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 358(1435): 1177-1187.
    3. Boer, C. de (1977). The polls: Nuclear energy. The Public Opinion Quarterly 41(3): 402-411.
    4. Boyer, P. (1985). By the Bomb’s Early Light: American Thought and Culture at the Dawn of the Atomic Age. New York: Pantheon Books.
    5. Cap, P. (2013). Proximization theory and critical discourse studies: A promising connection? International Review of Pragmatics 5: 293-317.
    6. Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Houndmills and New York: Palgrave MacMillan.
    7. Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and Rhetoric: the Persuasive Power of Metaphor. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York: Palgrave Macmillan
    8. Chilton, P. (ed.) (1985). Language and the Nuclear Arms Debate. London: Frances Printers.
    9. Chilton, P. (1996). Security Metaphors: Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common House. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.
    10. Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
    11. Cosmides, L. and J. Tooby (1994). Origins of domain specificity: the evolution of functional organization. In L. Hirschfeld and S. Gelmans (eds.), Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 85-116.
    12. Cosmides, L., and J. Tooby (2000). Evolutionary psychology and the emotions. In M. Lewis and M.J. Haviland-Jones (eds.), Handbook of Emotions. New York: Guildford Press. pp. 91-115.
    13. Craig C. and S. Radchenko (2008). The Atomic Bomb and the Origins of the Cold War. New Haven: Yale University Press.
    14. Davison, P.W. (1958). The public opinion process. The Public Opinion Quarterly 22(2): 91-106.
    15. Derrida, J. (1984). No apocalypse, not now (full speed ahead, seven missiles, seven missives). Diacritics 14(2): 20-31.
    16. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. London: Longman.
    17. Fairclough, N. (1995). Media Discourse. London, New York: E. Arnold.
    18. Franklin, H.B. (1988). War Stars: The Superweapon and the American Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    19. Gaddis, J.L. (2005). The Cold War: a New History. London: Penguin Books Ltd.
    20. Gallup, A. (1999). The Gallup Poll Cumulative Index: Public Opinion 1935-1997. Wilmington: Scholarly resources Inc.
    21. Gallup, G.H. (1972). The Gallup Poll, 1935-1977. New York: Random House Inc.
    22. Gallup, G.H. (1978). The Gallup Poll, 1976-1977. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources Inc.
    23. Gallup, G.H. (1981). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1980. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources Inc.
    24. Gallup, G.H. (1984). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1983. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources Inc.
    25. Gallup, G.H. (1986). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1985. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources Inc.
    26. Gallup, G.H. (1987). The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1986. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources Inc.
    27. Gamson, W.A. and A. Modigliani (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: a constructionist approach. The American Journal of Sociology 95(1): 1-37.
    28. Gangestad, S.W. (2010). Exploring the evolutionary foundation of culture. In M. Schaller, A. Norenzayan, S.J.Heine, T. Yamagishi, and T. Kameda (eds.), Evolution, Culture, and the Human Mind. New York: Psychology Press. pp. 93-108.
    29. Grady, J. (1997). Foundation of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. Ann Arbor: UMI.
    30. Graham, T., and B. Kramer (1986). The Polls: ABM and Star Wars: attitudes toward nuclear defense, 1945-1985. The Public Opinion Quarterly 50(1):125-134.
    31. Hart, C. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. London: Palgrave Macmillan
    32. Hart, C.        (2014). Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London; New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
    33. Hart, C. and D. Lukes (2007) Cognitive Linguistics in Critical Discourse Analysis. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
    34. Hogan J., and T.J. Smith III (1991). Polling on the issues: public opinion and the nuclear freeze. The Public Opinion Quarterly 5(4): 534-569.
    35. Johnson, J. (1987). The Body in the Mind: the Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    36. Keltner, D. and J. Haidt (2003). Approaching awe, a moral, spiritual, and aesthetic emotion. Cognition & Emotion 17(2): 297-314.
    37. Keltner, D., Haidt, J., and M.N. Shiota (2006). Social functionalism and the evolution of emotions. In M. Schaller, J.A. Simpson, and D.T. Kenrick (eds.), Evolution and Social Psychology. New York: Psychology Press. pp. 115-142.
    38. Kövecses, Z. (1986). Metaphors of Anger, Pride, and Love: a Lexical Approach to the Structure of Concepts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    39. Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    40. Kövecses, Z. (2005). Metaphor in Culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    41. Kövecses, Z. (2006). Language, Mind, and Culture: a Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    42. Kövecses, Z. (2014). Where Metaphors Come From. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    43. Moreno Palmero, C. (2014). Under the Cloud of Doom: A Cognitive-Critical Analysis of the US Media Representation of the Atomic Age. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid.
    44. Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    45. Musolff, A. (2014). Metaphor in the discourse-historical approach. In C. Hart and P. Cap (eds.), Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies. London: Bloomsbury. pp. 45-66.
    46. Musolff, A. (2016). Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury Publishin.
    47. Lakoff, G. (1979). The contemporary theory of metaphors. In A. Ortony (ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    48. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    49. Lakoff, G. (1991). The metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. Peace Research 23: 25-32.
    50. Lakoff, G. (2006). Whose Freedom? New York: Picador.
    51. Lakoff, G., and G. Johnson (1980a). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    52. Lakoff, G., and G. Johnson (1980b). Conceptual metaphor in everyday language. The Journal of Philosophy 77(8): 453-486.
    53. Lakoff, G., and G. Johnson (2003). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    54. Lerner S., and D. Keltner (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 81(1): 146-159.
    55. Lifton, R. (1979). The Broken Connection. Washington: American Psychiatric Press.
    56. Lifton R. and G. Mitchell (1995). Hiroshima in America: Fifty Years of Denial. New York: Putnam’s Sons.
    57. Linenthal, E.D. (1989). Symbolic Defense: the Cultural Significance of the Strategic Defense Initiative. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
    58. Maalej, Z. (2007). Doing critical discourse analysis with the contemporary theory of metaphor: Towards a discourse model of metaphor. In C. Hart and D. Lukes (eds.), Cognitive Linguistics in Critical Discourse Analysis. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 132-158
    59. Neuberg, S.L., and C.A. Cottrell (2006). Evolutionary bases of prejudices. In M. Schaller, J.A. Simpson, and D.T. Kenrick (eds.), Evolution and Social Psychology. New York: Psychology Press. pp. 163-188.
    60. Norenzayan, A., Schaller, M., and S.J. Heine (2006). Evolution and culture. In M. Schaller, J.A. Simpson, and D.T. Kenrick (eds.), Evolution and Social Psychology. New York: Psychology Press. pp. 343-366.
    61. O’Halloran, K. (2003). Critical Discourse Analysis and Language Cognition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    62. Powell, N.J. (1951). Anatomy of Public Opinion. New York: Prentice-Hall.
    63. Pragglejaz Group (2007). MIP: a method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1):1-39.
    64. Pratt, J.W. (1927). The origin of “Manifest Destiny”. The American Historical Review 32(4): 795-798.
    65. Reisigl, M. (2017). The discourse-historical approach. In J. Flowerdew, and J.E. Richardson (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies. Abingdon: Routledge. pp. 44-59.
    66. Reisigl, M., and R. Wodak (2001). Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Anti-Semitism. London: Routledge.
    67. Ritchie, D.L. (2003). “ARGUMENT IS WAR”—Or is it a game of chess? Multiple meanings in the analysis of implicit metaphors. Metaphor and Symbol 18(2): 125-146.
    68. Ritchie, D.L. (2006). Context and Connection in Metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    69. Ritchie, D.L. (2009). Relevance and Simulation in Metaphor. Metaphor and Symbol 24(4): 246-262.
    70. Semino, E. (2008). Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    71. Schaller, M., Norenzayan, A., Heine, S.J., Yamagishi, T., and T. Kameda (eds.) (2010). Evolution, Culture, and the Human Mind. New York: Psychology Press.
    72. Schaller, M., and D.R. Murray (2010). Infectious diseases and the evolution of cross-cultural differences. In M. Schaller, A. Norenzayan, S.J. Heine, T. Yamagishi, and T. Kameda (eds.), Evolution, Culture, and the Human Mind. New York: Psychology Press. pp. 243-256.
    73. Schaller, M., Park, J.H., and J. Faulkner (2003a). Prehistoric dangers and contemporary prejudices. European Review Of Social Psychology 14: 105-137.
    74. Schaller, M., Park, J.H., and J. Faulkner (2003b). Fear of the dark: interactive effects of beliefs about danger and ambient darkness on ethnic stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 29: 637-649.
    75. Shariff, A.F., Norenzayan, A., and J. Henrich (2010). The birth of High Gods: How cultural evolution of supernatural policing influenced the emergent of complex, cooperative human societies, paving the way for civilization. In M. Schaller, A. Norenzayan, S.J. Heine, T. Yamagishi, and T. Kameda (eds.), Evolution, Culture, and the Human Mind. New York: Psychology Press. pp. 119-136.
    76. Smith, T.W. (1983). American attitudes toward the Soviet Union and communism. The Public Opinion Quarterly 47(2): 277-292.
    77. Smith, T.W. (1988). A report: nuclear anxiety. The Public Opinion Quarterly 52(4): 557-575.
    78. Steen, J.G., Dorst, A.G, Herrmann, J.B., Kaal, A.A., Krennmayr, T., and T. Pasma (2010). A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: from MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
    79. Talbot, M. (2007). Media Discourse. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd.
    80. Tooby, J. and L. Cosmides (1989). Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture, part ii. case study: a computational theory of social exchange. Ethology & Sociobiology 10: 51-97.
    81. Tooby, J. and L. Cosmides (1990). The past explains the present: emotional adaptations and the structure of ancestral environments. Ethology and Sociobiology 11: 375-424.
    82. Tooby, J. and L. Cosmides (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, and J. Tooby (eds.), The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture. New York: Oxford University Press.
    83. van Dijk, T.A. (1988). News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    84. van Dijk, T.A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society 4(2): 249-283.
    85. van Dijk, T.A. (1995). Ideological discourse analysis. In E. Ventola and A. Solin (eds.), Interdisciplinary Approaches to Discourse Analysis. Helsinki: University of Helsinki. pp. 135-161.
    86. van Dijk, T.A. (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE
    87. van Dijk, T.A. (2000). Ideology and Discourse: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Barcelona: Open University.
    88. van Dijk, T.A. (2005). Contextual knowledge management in discourse production. In R. Wodak, and P. Chilton (eds.), A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. pp. 71-100.
    89. van Dijk, T.A. (2006). Discourse context and cognition. Discourse Studies 8: 159-177.
    90. van Dijk, T.A. (2009a). Society and Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    91. van Dijk, T.A. (2009b). Critical discourse studies; A sociocognitive approach. In R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. pp. 62-85.
    92. van Dijk, T.A. (2012). Discourse and knowledge. In J.P. Gee, and M. Handford (eds.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge (2012). pp. 587-603.
    93. van Kleef, G., E. Van Doorn, M. Heerdink, and L. Koning (2011). Emotion is for influence. European Review of Social Psychology 22(1): 114-163
    94. Weart, S.R. (1988). Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    95. Weart, S.R. (2012). The Rise of Nuclear Fear. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    96. Weber, M. (1905). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. New York: Scribner.
    97. Wodak, R (2015). Critical discourse analysis, discourse-historical approach. In K. Tracy, C. Ilie, and T. Sandel (eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction (1st ed.). London: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Available: http://www.research.lancs.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/critical-discourse-analysis-discoursehistorical-approach(422ef7d8-af98-404e-8ca5-d3da61c81bac)/export.html. Last accessed 20 Jan 2020.
THE BEGINNING OF ‘THE AGE OF AUSTERITY’: A CRITICAL STYLISTIC ANALYSIS OF DAVID CAMERSON’S 2009 SPRING CONFERENCE SPEECH | Page 169-186

Matthew Evans & Brian Walker

 Download Full Text

  • This paper investigates David Cameron’s use of the word austerity in his keynote speech (as leader of the opposition) at the 2009 Conservative Party spring conference. It builds on previous critical stylistic studies that demonstrate how word forms can take on particular sociopolitical meanings in media and political discourses that are subtly different from the everyday usage of the same word. Such wordforms, which we refer to as sociopolitical keywords, can function as a kind of shorthand for a whole ideological stance (see, for example, Evans and Jeffries 2015; Evans and Schuller 2015; Jeffries and Walker 2018).

    Austerity has strong connections with 1940s and ’50s Britain, when the consumption of food and clothing was regulated and reduced via rationing. During the 1940s, austerity was frequently used in parliamentary discourse in the House of Commons (Jeffries and Walker 2019). It then re-emerged during the build-up to the 2010 general election when David Cameron and George Osborne (respectively the Conservative leader and shadow Chancellor at that time) repeatedly used the word, possibly in an attempt to evoke past days of supposed national unity. Their veneration of austerity asserted the ideology that public spending cuts, rather than additional public spending, were the solution for the 2008 financial crisis. Those who disagreed with this ideology found themselves in the position of having to argue against a nebulous idea, with little clarity as to what exactly austerity meant.

    The paper will outline the methodology for the systematic analysis of a complete text, report on linguistic patterns in the data, and finish by drawing conclusions about the status of austerity as a socio-political keyword.

     

    1. BBC (2015). Thousands attend anti-austerity rallies across UK. BBC.co.uk. [online]. Available: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33210014. Last accessed 10 January 2020.
    2. Beard, A. (2000). Language of Politics. London: Routledge.
    3. Brady, B. (2009). Cameron: This will be the new age of austerity. Independent. [online]. Available: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/cameron-this-will-be-the-new-age-of-austerity-1674374.html. Last accessed 10 January 2020.
    4. Davies, M. (2012). A new approach to opposition in discourse: the role of syntactic frames in the triggering of noncanonical oppositions. Journal of English Linguistics 40(1): 41-73.
    5. Evans, M., and L. Jeffries (2015). The rise of ‘choice’ as an absolute ‘good’: a study of British manifestos. Journal of Language and Politics 14(6): 751-777.
    6. Evans, M., and S. Schuller (2015). Representing ‘terrorism’: the radicalisation of the May 2013 Woolwich attack in British press reportage. Journal of Language Aggression and   Conflict 3(1): 128-150.
    7. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power (2nd ed.). Harrow: Longman.
    8. Fowler, R. (1991). Language in the News. London: Routledge.
    9. Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole, and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics (vol 3). New York: Academic Press. pp. 41-58.
    10. Halliday, M.A.K. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edition). London: Arnold.
    11. Jeffries, L. (2007). Textual Construction of the Female Body: A Critical Discourse Approach. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    12. Jeffries, L. (2010a). Critical Stylistics: The Power of English. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
    13. Jeffries, L. (2010b). Opposition in Discourse: The Construction of Oppositional Meaning. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    14. Jeffries, L. (2014). Critical stylistics. In M. Burke (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Stylistics. London: Routledge. pp. 408-420.
    15. Jeffries, L., and M. Evans (2015). ‘The rise of choice as an absolute ‘good’: A study of British manifestos, 1900-2010’. Language and Politics 14(6): 751-777.
    16. Jeffries, L., and B. Walker (2012). Keywords in the press: A critical corpus-assisted analysis of ideology in the Blair years (1998-2007). English Text Construction 5 (2): 208-229.
    17. Jeffries, L., and B. Walker (2017). Keywords in the Press: The New Labour Years. London: Bloomsbury.
    18. Jeffries, L., and B. Walker (2019). Austerity in the Commons: A corpus critical analysis of austerity and its surrounding grammatical context in Hansard (1803- 2015). In K. Power, T. Ali, and E. Lebduškovápp (eds.), Discourse Analysis and Austerity: Critical Studies from Economics and Linguistics. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. pp. 53-79.
    19. Jeffries, L., and B. Walker (forthcoming). We are NOT all in this together: a corpus assisted critical stylistics analysis of austerity in print news media 2009-2010 and 2016-2017. In M. Toolan, and E.M. Gomez-Jimenez (eds.), The Discursive Construction of Economic Inequality: CADS Approaches to the British Public Discourse. London: Bloomsbury.
    20. Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    21. Mautner, G. (2007). Mining large corpora for social information: the case of ‘elderly’. Language in Society 36(1): 51-72.
    22. mySociety (2013). David Cameron: The age of austerity. mySociety.org. [online]. Available: conservative-speeches.sayit.mysociety.org/speech/601367. Last accessed 10 January 2020.
    23. Pautz, H. (2018). Think tanks, Tories and the austerity discourse coalition. Policy and Society 37(2): 155-169
    24. Powell, K. (2017). Brexit positions: neoliberalism, austerity and immigration—the (im)possibilities? of political revolution. Dialect Anthropol 41: 225-240.
    25. Stierli, M., Shorrocks, A., Davies, J.B., Lluberas, R., and A. Koutsoukis (2014). Global Wealth Report 2014. Credit Suisse AG Research Institute. [online]. Available: https://economics.uwo.ca/people/davies_docs/credit-suisse-global-wealth-report-2014.pdf. Last accessed 10 January 2020.
    26. Stubbs, M. (1996). Text and Corpus Analysis. Blackwell Ed. Oxford.
    27. Summers, D. (2009). David Cameron warns of ‘new age of austerity’. The Guardian. [online]. available:https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2009/apr/26/david-cameron-conservative-economic-policy1. Last accesses 10 January 2020.
    28. Tepe-Belfrage, D., and S. Wallin (2016). Austerity and the hidden costs of recovery: Inequality and insecurity in the UK households. British Politics 11: 389-395.
    29. Williams R. (1976 [1983]). Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society. London: Fontana.
LGBT* PEOPLE IN THE SPEECHES OF ITALIAN AND BRITISH PMs: A CORPUS-ASSISTED CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS | Page 187-212

Carmen Serena Santonocito

 Download Full Text

  • The present study aims to investigate current trends in the representation of LGBT* people within the speeches of British and Italian PMs. Considered the formulaic nature of PMs’ institutional interventions and their social resonance, the objective is to investigate how LGBT* people are discursively presented in the institutional discourse of two traditionally androcentric and patriarchal contexts, with an eye on similarities and differences in the two discursive productions. Starting from a multi-disciplinary approach which strengthens up in the framework of Corpus-Assisted Critical Discourse Studies, the linguistic choices and the discursive strategies used to convey a given representation of LGBT* people as social actors are uncovered. Subsequently, the study develops into a contrastive analysis focused on revealing emerging commonalities and differences between the two cases with the end of delivering a productive output where further discussion could be raised.

     

    1. Abbamonte, L. (2018). ‘Black Lives Matter’: Cross-Media Resonance and the Iconic Turn of Language. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    2. Agius, S. et al. (2011). Human Rights and Gender Identity: Best Practice Catalogue. [online]. Available: https://www.tgeu.org/sites/default/files/best_practice_catalogue_human_ rights_gender_identity.pdf. Last accessed: 30 December 2019.
    3. Anthony, L. (2014). AntConc (3.4.4). [Computer Software]. Tokyo: Waseda University. Available: http://www.laurenceanthony.net/. Last accessed: 30 December 2019.
    4. Bachmann, I. (2011). Civil partnership – gay marriage in all but name: a corpus-driven analysis of discourses of same-sex relationships in the UK Parliament. Corpora 6(1): 77-105.
    5. Baker, P. (2004). “Unnatural acts”: Discourses of homosexuality within the House of Lords debates on gay male law reform. Sociolinguistics 8(1): 88-106.
    6. Baker, P. (2005). Public Discourses of Gay Men. New York: Routledge.
    7. Baker, P. (2006). Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London. New York: Continuum.
    8. Baker, P. (2008). Sexed Texts: Language, Gender and Sexuality. London: Equinox.
    9. Baker, P. (2014) “Bad wigs and screaming mimis”: Using corpus-assisted techniques to carry out critical discourse analysis of the representation of trans people in the British press. In C. Hart, and P. Cap (eds.), Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies. London: Bloomsbury. pp. 211-236.
    10. Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyżanowski, M., McEnery, T. and R. Wodak (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press. Discourse and Society 19(3): 273-306.
    11. Baraldi, M. (2008). Family vs solidarity: recent epiphanies of the Italian reductionist anomaly in the debate on de facto couples. Utrecht Law Review 4(2): 175-193.
    12. Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge.
    13. Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that Matter: on the Discursive Limits of Sex. London: Routledge.
    14. Campbell-Kibler, K., Podesva, R.J., Roberts, S.J., and A. Wong (eds.) (2002). Language and Sexuality: Contesting Meaning in Theory and Practice. Stanford California: CSLI.
    15. Davies, M. (2015). Corpora: An introduction. In D. Biber, and R. Reppen (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. pp. 11-31.
    16. Della Pelle, C., Cerratti, F., Di Giovanni, P., Cipollone, F., and G. Cicolini (2018). Attitudes towards and knowledge about lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender patients among Italian nurses: An observational study. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 00(0): 1-8.
    17. Foucault, M. (1976). The History of Sexuality: An Introduction. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
    18. FRA (2018). Fundamental Rights Report 2018. European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights. [online]. Available: https://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/fra-2018-fundamental-rights-report-2018_en.pdf. Last accessed: 19 January 2020.
    19. GLAAD (2017). Glossary of Terms – Transgender. Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. [online]. Available: http://www.glaad.org/reference/transgender. Last accessed: 30 December 2019.
    20. Glabasova, D., Brezina, V. and T. McEnery (2017). Collocations in corpus-based language learning research: Identifying, comparing, and interpreting the evidence. Language Learning 67(1): 155-179.
    21. Governo Italiano. (n.d.). Interventi del Presidente del Consiglio. [online]. Available: http://www.governo.it/Presidente/Interventi/index.asp. Last accessed: December 2016.
    22. GOV UK. (n.d.). Prime Minister’s Office, 10 Downing Street. GOV.UK. [online]. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/prime-ministers-office-10-downing-street. Last accessed: December 2016.
    23. Gray, J. (2016). Language and non-normative sexual identities. In S. Preece (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity. New York: Routledge. pp. 225 -240.
    24. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
    25. HRWF (2013). LGBT People, the Religions and Human Rights in Europe. Human Rights without Frontiers International. [online]. Available: http://www.hrwf.net/images/reports /2014/2013lgbtreligion.pdf. Last accessed: 30 December 2018.
    26. Huntson, S. (2010). How can a corpus be used to explore patterns? In A. O’Keeffe, and M. McCarthy (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. London: Routledge. pp. 152-166.
    27. ILGA Europe (2018). Annual Review of Human Rights Situation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex People in Europe. International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Trans & Intersex Association. [online]. Available: https://www.ilga-europe.org/sites/default/files/ 2018/full_annual_review.pdf. Last accessed: 30 December 2018.
    28. ILGA-RIWI (2017). October 2017: Minorities Report 2017: attitudes to sexual and gender minorities around the world. ILGA_RIWI Global Attitudes Survey. [online]. Available: https://ilga.org/ilga-riwi-global-attitudes-survey. Last accessed: 19 January 2020.
    29. Jones, L. (2018). “I’m not proud, I’m just gay”: Lesbian and gay youths’ discursive negotiation of otherness. Journal of Sociolinguistics 22(1): 55-76.
    30. KhosraviNik, M. (2010). Actor descriptions, action attributions, and argumentation: towards a systematization of CDA analytical categories in the representation of social groups. Critical Discourse Studies 7(1): 55-72.
    31. Kitzinger, C. and S. Wilkinson (2004). The Re-branding of marriage: Why we got married instead of registering a civil partnership. Feminism & Psychology 14(1): 127-150.
    32. Lakoff, G. (2008). The Political Mind: Why you Can’t Understand 21st-Century Politics with an 18th-Century Brain. New York: Viking.
    33. Lingiardi, V., Nardelli, N., Ioverno, S., Falanga, S., Di Chiacchio, C., Tanzilli, A., and R. Baiocco (2015). Homonegativity in Italy: cultural issues, personality characteristics, and demographic correlates with negative attitudes toward lesbians and gay men. Sexuality Research and Social Policy 13(2): 95-108.
    34. Livia, A., and K. Hall (eds.). (1997). Queerly Phrased: Language, Gender and Sexuality. Oxford: OUP.
    35. Mancina, C., and N. Vassallo (2016). Unioni civili? Un dialogo sulla legge approvata dal Parlamento Italiano. Iride 29(79): 551-562.
    36. Marchi, A., and C. Taylor (2009). ‘If on a winter night two researchers’: a challenge to assumptions of soundness of interpretation. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 3(1): 1-20.
    37. Martin, P.Y. (2006). Practicing gender at work: further thoughts on reflexivity. Gender, Work and Organization 13(3): 254-276.
    38. McDermott, E., Roen, K., and J. Scourfield (2008). Avoiding shame: young LGBT people, homophobia and self-destructive behaviours. Culture, Health & Sexuality 10(8): 815-829.
    39. Milani, T. (2013). Are ‘queers’ really ‘queer’? Language, identity and same-sex desire in a South African online community. Discourse & Society 25(5): 615-633.
    40. Motschenbacher, H. (2010). Language, Gender and Sexual Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    41. Oxford English Dictionary. (2019). Oxford Reference. [online]. Available: http://www. oxfordreference.com.ezproxy.lancs.ac.uk/view/10.1093/acref/9780199571123.001.0001/m_en_gb0994827?rskey=sPsgf0&result=96823. Last accessed: 1 September 2019.
    42. Partington, A. (2010). Modern diachronic corpus-assisted discourse studies (MD-CADS) on UK newspapers: An overview of the project. Corpora 5(2): 83-108.
    43. Rainbow Europe. (2019). Country Ranking. Rainbow-Europe.org. [online]. Available: https://rainbow-europe.org/country-ranking#eu. Last accessed: 01 January 2020.
    44. Rivera Santana, C., Vélez A., Nicole M., Benozzo, A., De La Rosa, C., and S. Gemignani (2014). Creative (critical) discourse analysis of Tiziano Ferro and Ricky Martin ‘coming out’. Qualitative Inquiry 20(2): 183-192.
    45. Schröter, M., and C. Taylor (eds.) (2018). Exploring Silence and Absence in Discourse: Empirical Approaches. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    46. Sperber, D., and D. Wilson (1997). Remarks on relevance theory and the social sciences. Multilingua 16: 145-51.
    47. Stubbs, M. (1995). Collocations and semantic profiles: On the cause of the trouble with quantitative studies. Functions of Language 2(1): 23-55.
    48. Sunderland, J. (2004). Gendered Discourses. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
    49. Teo, P. (2000). Racism in the news: a critical discourse analysis of news reporting in two Australian newspapers. Discourse and Society 11(1): 7-49.
    50. Treccani (2019). Vocabolario. Treccani. [online]. Available: http://www.treccani.it/ vocabolario. Last accessed: 1 January 2019.
    51. van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse, context and cognition. Discourse Studies 8(1): 159-177. 
    52. van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors. In C.R. Caldas-Coulthard, and M. Coulthard (eds.), Texts and Practices. Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. pp. 32- 70.
    53. Vigo, F. (2015). And what about same sex marriages? A corpus-based analysis of lexical choices and social attitudes. In G. Balirano, and M.C. Nisco (eds.), Languaging Diversity: Identities, Genres, Discourses. Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. pp. 197-210.
    54. Weiss, G., and R. Wodak (2003). Introduction: Theory, Interdisciplinarity and Critical Discourse Analysis. In G. Weiss, and R. Wodak (eds.), Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 1-34.
    55. Williams, G. (2002). In search of representativity in specialised corpora: Categorisation through collocation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7(1): 43-64.
    56. Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In: R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. pp. 63-94.
    57. Wodak, R. (2009). Critical discourse analysis: history, agenda, theory, and methodology. In R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. pp. 1-33.
    58. Zanola, E. (2014). The sociological research on LGBT population in Italy. Italian Sociological Review 4(3): 383-399.
    59. Zottola, A. (2018). Transgender identity labels in the British press. A corpus-based discourse analysis. Journal of Language and Sexuality 7(2): 237-262.
CORE VALUES IN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: TOOLS FOR OPENNESS AND DEMOCRACY? | Page 213-234

Catharina Nyström Höög

 Download Full Text

  • This study presents core values at public authorities in Sweden and discusses them in relation to the legal foundation for the public administration. A corpus-based approach is applied in order to overview the texts where the core values are presented, and to promote an understanding of how ambiguous core value words might be understood, paying particular attention to the high frequent core value openness. Results show that public authorities tend to emphasize the principle of efficiency and service in their assignment, and often choose core values related to that principle, such as helpful, reliable or goal oriented. The principle free formation of speech, on the other hand, a privilege confirmed in the Swedish constitution, is not present among the chosen core value words. The word openness primarily refers to a personal quality or a workplace atmosphere and is both promoted and restricted in the texts. Only in a few instances do openness refer to flow of information, and in those instances, it is restricted. The constitutional right for a public servant to voice his or her opinion freely is thus not emphasized in this type of policy texts.

     

    1. Alvesson M. (2006). Tomhetens triumf. Om grandiositet, illusionsnummer och nollsummespel. Stockholm: Atlas.
    2. Alvesson M. (2015). Värdegrunder ett surrogat för verkliga förbättringar. Dagens Nyheter, 3rd of April, 2015.
    3. Alvesson M. and H. Willmott (2002). Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies 39(5): 619-644.
    4. Anthony, L. (2014). AntConc (3.4.4). [Computer Software]. Tokyo: Waseda University. Available: http://www.antlab.sci.waseda.ac.jp. Last accessed 30 December 2019.
    5. Att säkerställa en god statsförvaltning. Värdegrundsdelegationens slutrapport (2016). Stockholm: Ministry of Finance. Available: https://www.regeringen.se/ informationsmaterial/2016/12/att-sakerstalla-en-god-statsforvaltning/. Last accessed 16 January 2020.
    6. Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., KhosraviNik, M., Krzyzanowski, M., McEnery, T., and R. Wodak (2008). A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK Press. Discourse & Society 19(3): 273-306.
    7. Bhatia, V.K. (2015). Critical genre analysis: Theoretical preliminaries. Hermes – Journal of Language and Communication in Business 54: 9-20.
    8. Bhatia, V.K. (2017). Critical Genre Analysis: Investigating Interdiscursive Performance in Professional Practice. London & New York: Routledge.
    9. Björkvall, A. (2018). Critical genre analysis of management texts in the public sector. In D. Wojahn, C. Seiler Brylla, and G. Westberg (eds.), Kritiska text- och diskursstudier. Huddinge: Södertörns högskola. pp. 57-79.
    10. Brereton M., and M. Temple (1999). The new public service ethos: An ethical environment for governance. Public Administration 77(3): 455-474.
    11. Cameron, D. (2000). Good to Talk? Living and Working in a Communication Culture. London: Sage.
    12. Carr, F. (1999). The public service ethos: Decline and renewal? Public Policy and Administration 14(4): 1-16.
    13. Christensen, L.T. (2016). Autocommunication Theory. In C.E. Carroll (ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Corporate Reputation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. pp. 55-58.
    14. Clark, C. (2007). A war of words: A linguistic analysis of BBC embedded reports during the Iraq conflict. In N. Fairclough, G. Cortese and P. Ardizzone (eds.), Discourse and Contemporary Social Change. Bern: Peter Lang. pp. 119-140.
    15. Clegg, S.R. (2011). Under reconstruction: Modern bureaucracies. In S. Clegg, M. Harris and H. Höpfl (eds.), Managing Modernity: Beyond Bureaucracy? Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 202-229.
    16. Den gemensamma värdegrunden för de statsanställda – grundläggande rättsliga principer (2013). Stockholm: The State Office. Available: https://www.regeringen.se/ informationsmaterial/2013/10/s2013.011/. Last accessed 16 January 2020.
    17. Diefenbach, T. (2009). New public management in public sector organizations: The dark sides of managerialistic ‘enlightenment’. Public Administration 87(4): 892-909.
    18. Fairclough, N. (1993). Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The universities. Discourse & Society 4(2): 133-168.
    19. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
    20. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Text Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
    21. Gibson, J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw, and J. Brandsford (eds.), Perceiving, Acting and Knowing: Toward and Ecological Psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. pp. 62-82.
    22. Hagren Idevall, K. (2016). Språk och rasism. Privilegiering och diskriminering i offentlig, medierad interaktion. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.
    23. Hall, P. (2012). Managementsamhället. Organisationspolitisk makt i svensk offentlig förvaltning. Malmö: Liber.
    24. Hunston, S. (2004). Counting the uncountable: Problems of identifying evaluation in a text and in a corpus. In A. Partington, J. Morley, and L. Haarman (eds.), Corpora and Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang. pp. 157-189.
    25. Hunston, S. (2009). Semantic prosody revisited. In R. Moon (ed.), Words, Grammar, Text: Revisiting the Works of John Sinclair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 85-103.
    26. Kernaghan, K. (2003). Integrating values into public service: The values statement as centerpiece. Public Administration Review 63(6): 711-719.
    27. Koller, V. (2011) ‘Hard-working, team-oriented individuals’: Construction professional identities in corporate mission statements. In J. Angouri and M. Marra (eds.), Constructing Identities at Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 103-126.
    28. Kress G. (2010). Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
    29. Lawton A., and A. Doig (2006). Researching ethics for public service organizations: The view from Europe. Public integrity 8(1): 11-33.
    30. Ledin P., and D. Machin (2015). A discourse-design approach to multimodality: The visual communication of neoliberal management discourse. Social Semiotics 26(1): 1-18.
    31. Lerøy Sataøen, H. (2015). Higher education as object for corporate and nation branding: Between equality and flagships. Journal for Higher Education Policy and Management 37(6): 702-717.
    32. Leibring Svedjedal, C. (2016). Den trovärdiga, kunniga och öppna myndigheten. En kritisk analys av värdegrundstexters ideologiska förankring och ideationella struktur. Unpublished master’s thesis. Uppsala University, Sweden.
    33. Machin D. (2016). The need for a social and affordance-driven multimodal critical discourse studies. Discourse & Society 27(3): 322-334.
    34. Machin D., and T. van Leeuwen (2007). Global Media Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
    35. Maesschalk, J. (2004). The impact of new public management reforms on public servants’ ethics: Towards a theory. Public Administration 82(2): 465-489.
    36. Mautner, G. (2005). The entrepreneurial university. A discursive profile of a higher education buzzword. Critical Discourse Studies 2(2): 95-120.
    37. Mautner, G. (2016). Checks and balances: How corpus linguistics can contribute to CDA. In R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage. pp. 154-179.
    38. McEnery, T., and A. Hardie (2012). Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    39. Miller, C.R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 151-167.
    40. Mulderrig, J. (2011). The grammar of governance. Critical Discourse Studies 8(1): 45-68.
    41. Mulderrig, J. (2012). The hegemony of inclusion: A corpus-based critical discourse analysis of deixis in education policy. Discourse & Society 23(6): 701-728.
    42. Nyström Höög, C. (2017). Texts at work. The construction of an ideal workplace in ‘platforms of values’. In K. Broś and G. Kowalski (eds.), Discourse Studies – Ways and Crossroads. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. pp. 231-245.
    43. Nyström Höög, C. and A. Björkvall (2018). Keeping the discussion among civil servants alive. Scandinavian Journal of Public Administration 22(3): 17-38.
    44. Partington, A. (2004). “Utterly content in each other’s company”: semantic prosody and semantic preference. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1): 131-156.
    45. Partington, A. (2014). Mind the gaps. The role of corpus linguistics in researching absences. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19(1): 118-146.
    46. Popper, K. (1980). Det öppna samhället och dess fiender. Del 1: Platon. (A. Casson, trans.) Stockholm: Akademilitteratur.
    47. Reed, M.I. (2011). The post-bureaucratic organization and the control revolution. In S. Clegg, M. Harris and H. Höpfl (eds.), Managing Modernity: Beyond Bureaucracy? Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 230-256.
    48. Rehnberg, H-S. (2014). Organisationer berättar. Narrativitet som resurs i strategisk kommunikation. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.
    49. Retriever Mediearkivet. Retriever.se [online]. Available: https://www.retriever.se/product/ mediearkivet/. Last accessed 8 January 2019.
    50. Salminen A., and V. Mänttysalo (2013). Exploring the public service ethos. Public Integrity 15(2): 167-186.
    51. Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation. New York: Harper & Row.
    52. SFS 2009:600. (2009). Language Act. Stockholm: Ministry of Culture.
    53. SOU 2008:118. (2008). Styra och ställa – förslag till en effektivare statsförvaltning. Stockholm: Ministry of Finance.
    54. Swales, J.M., and P.S. Rogers (1995). Discourse and the projection of corporate culture: the Mission Statement. Discourse & Society 6(2): 223-242.
    55. The Constitution of Sweden. The Fundamental Laws and the Riksdag Act. (2016). Stockholm: The Swedish Parliament. Available: https://www.riksdagen.se/globalassets/ 07.-dokument–lagar/the-constitution-of-sweden-160628.pdf. Last accessed 16 January 2020.
    56. Thurlow, C., and A. Jaworski (2010). Tourism Discourse: Language and Global Mobility. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    57. Vaara, E., Sorsa, V., and P. Pälli (2010). On the force potential of strategy texts: A critical discourse analysis of a strategic text and its power effects in a city organization. Organization 17(6): 685-702.
    58. Van der Wal, Z., de Graaf, G., and K. Lastuizen (2008). What’s valued most? Similarities and differences between the organizational values of the public and private sector. Public Administration 86(2): 465-482.
    59. Wang, G. (2018). A corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis of news reporting on China’s air pollution in the official Chinese English language press. Discourse & Communication 12(6): 645-662.
    60. Wæraas, A. (2010). Communicating identity. The use of core value statements in regulative institutions. Administration & Society 42(5): 526-549.
    61. Wæraas, A., and H. Lerøy Sataøen (2018). What we stand for: reputation platforms in Scandinavian higher education. In T. Christensen, Å. Gornitzka and F. Ramirez (eds.), Universities as Agencies: Reputation and Professionalization. London: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 155-181.
    62. Wodak, R., and M. Meyer (2001 [2016]). Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage
    63. Åkerstrøm Andersen, N., and A.W. Born (2012). Kærlighed og omstilling. Italesættelsen af den offentligt ansatte. Fredriksberg: Nyt fra Samfundsvidenskaberne.

 

BOOK REVIEW | Page 235-238

Theo Van Leeuwen

 Download Full Text

 

Way, L.C.S. (2018). Popular Music and Multimodal Critical Discourse Studies – Ideology, Control and Resistance in Turkey Since 2002. London: Bloomsbury. 216 pages; ISBN: 9781350016446; £85.50 (hbk), £26.09 (ppb); £ 25.04 (e-book).

    1. Graakjaer, N.J. (2012). Dance in the store: On the use and production of music in Abercrombie & Fitch. Critical Discourse Studies 9(4): 393-406.
    2. Laclau, E. (2005). On Populist Reason. London: Verso.
    3. Leone, M. (2012). My schoolmate: Protest music in present-day Iran. Critical Discourse Studies 9(4): 347-362
    4. Machin, D. and Richardson, J.E. (2012). Discourses of unity and purpose in the sounds of fascist music: A multimodal approach. Critical Discourse Studies 9(4): 329-345.
    5. Way, L. and McKerrell, S. (eds.) (2017). Music as Multimodal Discourse: Media, Power and Protest. London: Bloomsbury.