1887
image of Constructing threat through quotes and historical analogies in the Czech and the US “Ukraine Discourse”
  • ISSN 1569-2159
  • E-ISSN 1569-9862
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Conflicts and their discursive representations involve, apart from the spacio-temporal dimension, also the socio-ideological and axiological positions. These prompt the desired emotional response from the audience in a form of authorization for the intended action. All these dimensions are mainly construed by presenting series of assertions by creating the dichotomy self-other and by triggering implicatures that contribute to the preferred interpretations of the presented representations. This paper aims to examine the role of quotes and historical analogies triggered by quotes in discourse, concretely, it focuses on the way the Ukrainian conflict is proximized in the US and the Czech political discourse, namely in the parliamentary debates and governmental statements (November 2013–December 2014). The theoretical framework applied is the proximization approach ( ) which is complemented by the studies that explore the pragmatic functions of quoting in discourse.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.18002.ber
2019-11-06
2019-11-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Antos, Gerd
    2017 “Fake News. Warum wir auf sie reinfallen. Oder: ‘Ich mach euch die Welt so wie mir gefällt’” Der Sprachdienst17 (1):1–20.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bednarek, Monika
    2006 “Epistemological positioning and evidentiality in English news discourse: A text-driven approach.” Text and Talk26 (6): 635–660. 10.1515/TEXT.2006.027
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.027 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bell, Allan
    1991The language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Boyd-Barrett, Oliver
    2017 “Ukraine, Mainstream Media and Conflict Propaganda.” Journalism Studies18 (8):1016–1034. 10.1080/1461670X.2015.1099461
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2015.1099461 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bublitz, Wolfram
    2015 “Introducing Quoting as a Ubiguitous Meta-communicative Act.” InThe Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then, edited byJenny Arendholz, Wolfram Bublitz and Monika Kirner-Ludwig, 1–26. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110427561‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-002 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bublitz, Wolfram, and Christian Hoffmann
    2011 “‘Three Men Using our Toilet all Day Withour Flushing – This May be the Worst Sentences I’ve Ever Read’: Quoting CMC.” InAnglistentag Saarbrücken 2010. Proceedings, edited byJoachim Frenk and Lena Steveker, 433–477. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cap, Piotr
    ed. 2005Pragmatics Today. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2006Legitimization in Political Discourse: A Cross-disciplinary Perspective on the Modern US War Rhetoric. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2008 “Towards the proximization model of the analysis of legitimization in political discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics40 (1):17–41. 10.1016/j.pragma.2007.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2010 “Axiological Aspects of Proximization”. Journal of Pragmatics42 (2): 392–407. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2013Proximization: The pragmatics of symbolic distance crossing. Philadelphia/Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/pbns.232
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.232 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2014 “Applying cognitive pragmatics to Critical Discourse Studies: A proximization analysis of three public space discourses.” Journal of Pragmatics70: 16–30. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.05.008 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2015 “Crossing Symbolic Distanes in Politcal Discourse Space.” Critical Discourse Studies12 (3):313–329. 10.1080/17405904.2015.1013481
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2015.1013481 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2017The Language of Fear: Communicating Threat in Public Discourse. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑59731‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59731-1 [Google Scholar]
  15. Chilton, Paul
    2004Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203561218
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203561218 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2014Language, Space and Mind. The Conceptual Geomentry of Linguistic Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511845703
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511845703 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2017 “Toward a neuro-cognitive model of socio-political discourse, and an application to the populist discourse of Donald Trump.” Langage et societé 2017/2 (160–161): 237–249. 10.3917/ls.160.0237
    https://doi.org/10.3917/ls.160.0237 [Google Scholar]
  18. Clark, Herbert H., and Richard J. Gerring
    1990 “Quotations as Demonstrations.” Language66 (4): 764–805. 10.2307/414729
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414729 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cvrček, Václav, and Masako Fidler
    2019 “More than Keywords: Discourse Prominence Analysis of the Russian Web Portal-Sputnik Czech Republic.” InPolitical discourse in Central, Eastern and Balkan Europe, edited byMartina Berrocal and Aleksandra Salamurovič, 93–117. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.84.05cvr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.84.05cvr [Google Scholar]
  20. Gerber, Theodore P., and Jane Zavisca
    2016 “Does Russian Propaganda Work?” The Washington Quarterly39 (2):79–98. 10.1080/0163660X.2016.1204398
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0163660X.2016.1204398 [Google Scholar]
  21. Haran, Oleksiy, and Petro Burkovskiy
    2017 “Ukraine’s Foreign Policy and the Role of the West.” InEastern Voices. Europe’s East Faces an Unsettled West, edited byDaniel S. Hamilton and Stefen Meister, 51–76. Washington, DC: Center for Transatlantic Relations.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kopytowska, Monika
    2015a “Covering Conflict: Between Universality and Cultural Specificity in News Discourse, Genre and Journalistic Styles.” International Review of Pragmatics7: 309–339. 10.1163/18773109‑00702007
    https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-00702007 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2015b “Mediating Identity, Ideology and Values in the Public Sphere: Towards a New Model of (Constructed) Social Reality.” Lodz Papers in Pragmatics11 (2): 133–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Kopytowska, Monika, and Lukasz Grabowski
    2017 “European security under threat: mediating the crisis and constructing the other.” InNational Identity and Europe in Times of Crisis: Doing and Undoing Europe, edited byChristian Karner and Monika Kopytowska, 83–108. Bingley: Emerald Publishing. 10.1108/978‑1‑78714‑513‑920171005
    https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78714-513-920171005 [Google Scholar]
  25. Landert, Daniela
    2015 “Reportable Facts and a Personal Touch: The Functions of Direct Quotes in Online News.” InThe Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then, edited byJenny Arendholz, Wolfram Bublitz and Monika Kirner-Ludwig, 29–52. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110427561‑003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-003 [Google Scholar]
  26. North Atlantic Treaty
  27. Piazza, Roberta
    2002 “The pragmatics of conducive questions in academic disourse.” Journal of Pragmatics34 (5): 509–227. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(01)00038‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00038-8 [Google Scholar]
  28. Reyes, Antonio
    2011Voice in Political Discourse. Castro, Chávez, Bush and their Strategic Use of Language. London/New York: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Rock, Stephen R.
    2000Appeasement in International Politics. Lexington, KY: The University Press of Kentucky.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Sakwa, Richard
    2015Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands. London: I.B. Tauris.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Severinson Eklundh, Kerstin
    2010 “To Quote or not to Quote: Setting the Context for Computer-Mediated Dialogues.” [email protected]7 (article 5).
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Stenwall, Maija
    2008 “On emotions and the journalistic ideals of factuality and objectivity -Tool for analysis.” Journal of Pragmatics40 (9):1569–1586. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.017 [Google Scholar]
  33. Tannen, Deborah, and Cynthia Wallat
    1987 “Interactive Frames and Knowledge Scheams in Interaction: Examples from a Medical Examination/Interview.” Social Psychology Quarterly50 (2):206–216. 10.2307/2786752
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2786752 [Google Scholar]
  34. Tesař, Jan
    2014Mnichovský komplex. Jeho příčiny a důsledky. Praha: Prostor.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Tulmets, Elsa
    2018 “The West, the East and the Rest”. The Foreign Politicy orientations of Central Eastern European Countries.” InThe Routledge Handbook of East European Politics, edited byAdam Fagan and Petr Kopecký, 295–306. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Ullmann, Stefanie
    2019 “Epistemic Stancetaking and Speaker Objectificaton in a Spatio-Cognitive Discourse World.” Journal of Language and PoliticsAvailable athttps://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.17038.ull
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Webber, Mark
    2017 “NATO Enlargement an the Post-Communist.” InThe Routledge Handbook of East European Politics, edited byAdam Fagan and Petr Kopecký, 346–357. London/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315687681‑27
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315687681-27 [Google Scholar]
  38. Wieczorek, Anna Ewa
    2008 “Proximisation, Common Ground and Assertion-Based Patterns for Legitimisation in Political Discourse.” Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines2 (1): 31–48.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. 2013Clusivity: A New Approach to Association and Dissociation in Political Discourse. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Wilson, Andrew
    2014Ukraine Crisis. What it means for the West. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. 2018 “Explaining Ukraine.” InThe Routledge Handbook of East European Politics, edited byAdam Fagan and Petr Kopecký, 39–52. London/New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Zaorálek, Lubomír
    2014 Crisis around Ukraine. InOtázky Václava Moravce [Questions of Václav Moravec], edited byVáclav Moravec. Website of Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs: https://www.mzv.cz/jnp/cz/o_ministerstvu/archivy/clanky_a_projevy_ministru/clanky_a_projevy_ministra_zaoralka_2014/x2014_03_02_krize_kolem_ukrajiny.html: Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.18002.ber
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.18002.ber
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error