1887
image of US-China trade negotiation discourses in the press
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article studies trade negotiation discourses during the US-China tariff truce, aiming at investigating the difference of ideologies of the U.S. and China journalists towards trade negotiation. Through integration of theories and methods of corpus linguistics and critical discourse studies and the use of the corpus linguistic software, the study finds that U.S. reports to some extent make itself appear as a victim of the trade, and hope to end unfair trade practices and reduce the chronic trade deficit, while China press focuses more on the harm of raising tariffs not just to each other but the global economy, through communication and dialogue rather than unilateral measures to peacefully resolve trade tensions. Perceived differences in culture have an important influence in the theoretical formation of the differences. The article concludes that the discourse patterns of the coverage imply a rising China and a new level of equilibrium in international politics.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.20062.li
2021-06-15
2021-09-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aluthman, Ebtisam Saleh
    2018 A Corpus-assisted Critical Discourse Analysis of the Discursive Representation of Immigration in the EU Referendum Debate. Arab World English Journal9(4):19–38. doi:  10.24093/awej/vol9no4.2
    https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol9no4.2 [Google Scholar]
  2. Augoustinos, Martha, Crabb, Shona, and Shepherd, Richard
    2010 “Genetically Modified Food in the News: Media Representations of the GM Debate in the UK.” Public Understanding of Science19(1): 98–114. doi:  10.1177/0963662508088669
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662508088669 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baker, Paul, Gabrielatos, Costas, Khosravinik, Majid, Krzyzanowski, Michal, McEnery, Tony and Wodak, Ruth
    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 Society19: 273–306. doi:  10.1177/0957926508088962
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962 [Google Scholar]
  4. Chen, Lily
    2007 “Negatives and Positives in the Language of Politics: Attitudes Towards Authority in the British and Chinese Press.” Journal of Language and Politics6(3):475–501. doi:  10.1075/jlp.6.3.12che
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.6.3.12che [Google Scholar]
  5. Cheng, Winnie, and Lam, Phoneix
    2013 “Western Perceptions of Hong Kong Ten Years on: A Corpus-Driven Critical Discourse Study.” Applied Linguistics34(2):173–190. doi:  10.1093/applin/ams038
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams038 [Google Scholar]
  6. Di, Dongsheng, Luft, Gal, and Zhong, Dian
    2019 “Why Did Trump Launch a Trade War? A Political Economy Explanation from the Perspective of Financial Constraints.” Economic and Political Studies-eps7(2):203–216. doi:  10.1080/20954816.2019.1595327
    https://doi.org/10.1080/20954816.2019.1595327 [Google Scholar]
  7. Efe, Ibrahim, and Ozer, Omer
    2015 “A Corpus-Based Discourse Analysis of the Vision and Mission Statements of Universities in Turkey.” Higher Education Research & Development34(6):1110–1122. doi:  10.1080/07294360.2015.1070127
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1070127 [Google Scholar]
  8. Fairclough, Norman
    1985 “Critical and Descriptive Goals in Discourse Analysis.” Journal of Pragmatics9(6): 739–763. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(85)90002‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(85)90002-5 [Google Scholar]
  9. 1993 “Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public Discourse: The Universities.” Discourse & Society, 4(2):133–168. doi:  10.1177/0957926593004002002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002002 [Google Scholar]
  10. 1995Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2001Language and Power. New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fairclough, Norman, and Wodak, Ruth
    1997 “Critical Discourse Analysis.” InDiscourse as Social Interaction, ed. byvan Dijk, Teun A., 258–284. London & Thousand Oaks: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fang, Yew-Jin
    2001 “Reporting the Same Events? A Critical Analysis of Chinese Print News Media Texts.” Discourse & Society12(5):585–613. doi:  10.1177/0957926501012005002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012005002 [Google Scholar]
  14. Flowerdew, John
    1997 “Competing public discourses in transitional Hong Kong.” Journal of Pragmatics28(4): 533–553. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00033‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00033-7 [Google Scholar]
  15. Freake, Rachelle, Gentil, Guillaume, and Sheyholislami, Jaffer
    2011 “A Bilingual Corpus-Assisted Discourse Study of the Construction of Nationhood and Belonging in Quebec.” Discourse & Society22(1): 21–47. doi:  10.1177/0957926510382842
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926510382842 [Google Scholar]
  16. Fouilleux, Eve
    2004 “CAP Reforms and Multilateral Trade Negotiations: Another View on Discourse Efficiency.” West European Politics27(2): 235–255. doi:  10.1080/0140238042000214892
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0140238042000214892 [Google Scholar]
  17. Grue, Jan
    2009 “Critical Discourse Analysis, Topoi and Mystification: Disability Policy Documents from a Noregian NGO.” Discourse Studies11(3): 305–328. doi:  10.1177/1461445609102446
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609102446 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hou, Zhide
    2016 “A Corpus-Driven Analysis of Media Representations of the Chinese Dream.” International Journal of English Linguistics6(1):142–149. doi:  10.5539/ijel.v6n1p142
    https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v6n1p142 [Google Scholar]
  19. Itakura, Ken
    2020 “Evaluating the Impact of the U.S.-China Trade War.” Asian Economic Policy Review15(1): 77–93. doi:  10.1111/aepr.12286
    https://doi.org/10.1111/aepr.12286 [Google Scholar]
  20. Jamieson, Kathleen Hall, and Campbell, Karlyn Kohrs
    1992The Interplay of Influence: News, Advertising, Politics and the Mass Media. Belmont CA: Wadsworth.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kuo, Sai-hua, and Nakamura, Mari
    2005 “Translation or Transformation? A Case Study of Language and Ideology in the Taiwanese Press.” Discourse and Society16(3): 393–417. doi:  10.1177/0957926505051172
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926505051172 [Google Scholar]
  22. Marston, Greg
    2000 “Metaphor, Morality and Myth: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Public Housing Policy in Queensland.” Critical Social Policy20(3): 349–373. doi:  10.1177/026101830002000305
    https://doi.org/10.1177/026101830002000305 [Google Scholar]
  23. Matu, Peter, and Lubbe, Johannes
    2007 “Investigating Language and Ideology: A Presentation of the Ideological Square and Transitivity in the Editorials of Three Kenyan Newspapers.” Journal of Language and Politics6(3):401–418. doi:  10.1075/jlp.6.3.07mat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.6.3.07mat [Google Scholar]
  24. Mautner, Gerlinde
    2007 “Mining Large Corpora for Social Information: The Case of Elderly.” Language in Society36(1): 51–72. doi:  10.1017/S0047404507070030
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404507070030 [Google Scholar]
  25. O’Regan, Veronica, and Riordan, Elaine
    2018 “Comparing the Representation of Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Migrants in the Irish and UK Press.” Journal of Language and Politics17(6):744–768. doi:  10.1075/jlp.17043.ore
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17043.ore [Google Scholar]
  26. Priest, Susanna Hornig
    2006 “The Public Opinion Climate for Gene Technologies in Canada and the United States: Competing Voices, Contrasting Frames.” Public Understanding of Science15(1):55–71. doi:  10.1177/0963662506052889
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506052889 [Google Scholar]
  27. Rowe, Gene, Horlick-Jones, Tom, Walls, John, and Pidgeon, Nick
    2005 “Difficulties in Evaluating Public Engagement Initiatives: Reflections on an Evaluation of the UK GM Nation? Public Debate About Transgenic Crops.” Public Understanding of Science14(4): 331–352. doi:  10.1177/0963662505056611
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662505056611 [Google Scholar]
  28. Scott, Mike
    2019WordSmith Tools Version 7.0. UK: Lexical Analysis Software Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Sinclair, John
    1991Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Stubbs, Michael
    1994 “Grammar, Text, and Ideology: Computer-Assisted Methods in the Linguistics of Representation.” Applied Linguistics15(2): 201–223. doi:  10.1093/applin/15.2.201
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/15.2.201 [Google Scholar]
  31. Tarasheva, Elena
    2011 “The Place of Eastern European Researchers in International Discourse: Critical Discourse Analysis Applied to Corpora from Specialized Journals.” Discourse & Society22(2): 190–208. doi:  10.1177/0957926510392129
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926510392129 [Google Scholar]
  32. Taylor, Sandra
    2004 “Researching Educational Policy and Change in ‘New Times’: Using Critical Discourse Analysis.” Journal of Education Policy19(4): 433–451. doi:  10.1080/0268093042000227483
    https://doi.org/10.1080/0268093042000227483 [Google Scholar]
  33. Teo, Peter
    2000 “Racism in the News: A Critical Discourse Analysis of News Reporting in Two Australian Newspapers.” Discourse & Society11(1):7–49. doi:  10.1177/0957926500011001002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926500011001002 [Google Scholar]
  34. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1995 “Aims of Critical Discourse Analysis.” Japanese Discourse1 (1), 17–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 2008Discourse and Power. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑07299‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-07299-3 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2015a Critical Discourse Analysis (new version). InHandbook of Discourse AnalysisSecond Edition, ed. byTannen, Deborah, Hamilton, Heidi, and Schiffrin, Deborah. vol.1, 466–485. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2015b Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach (new version). InMethods of Critical Discourse AnalysisThird Edition, ed. byRuth Wodak & Michael Meyer, 62–85. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Wang, Yan
    2019 “Power of Discourse in Free Trade Agreement Negotiation.” Leiden Journal of International Law32(3): 437–455. doi:  10.1017/S0922156519000207
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156519000207 [Google Scholar]
  39. Wilkinson, Rorden
    2009 “Language, Power and Multilateral Trade Negotiations.” Review of International Political Economy16(4): 597–619. doi:  10.1080/09692290802587734
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290802587734 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.20062.li
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.20062.li
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