1887
image of Framing the political conflict discourse in Chinese media
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Individuals perceive the real world via interpretive schema, and actively classify and interpret their life experiences into what are defined as frames, to make sense of the world around them. Why certain frames are chosen can be explored from the cognitive and communicative perspective. In this light, this study explores how the Chinese news media frame the coverage on Sino-US trade dispute, discursively legitimizing their ideological stance and action. The case study demonstrates that Chinese media exploit multifarious frames to construct the Chinese national identity, which correspondingly and strategically highlight such frames (Cooperation, Health, Journey) as conform to culture value or render the audience empathy. It is suggested to construct political conflict discourse via strategic choices of appropriate social, moral or cultural frames to reframe the dispute. Chinese media can also deploy agenda-setting to enhance political communication.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.21005.zhu
2022-03-14
2022-05-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Cacciatore, Michael A., Dietram A. Scheufele, and Shanto Iyengar
    2016 “The End of Framing as we Know it … and the Future of Media Effects.” Mass Communication and Society19 (1): 7–23. 10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2015.1068811 [Google Scholar]
  2. Chen, Jiyong
    2018 “The Background, Causes, Essence and Chinese Countermeasures of the Sino-US Trade War.” Journal of Wuhan University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Ed)71 (5): 72–81. 10.14086/j.cnki.wujss.2018.05.008
    https://doi.org/10.14086/j.cnki.wujss.2018.05.008 [Google Scholar]
  3. Ding, Jianxin, and Wenjing Shen
    2013 “Marginal Discourse Analysis: Some Basic Theoretical Issue.” Foreign Languages and Foreign Language Teaching (4):17–21. CitetononCRdoi:10.13458/j.cnki.flatt.003929
    https://doi.org/Cite to nonCR doi: 10.13458/j.cnki.flatt.003929 [Google Scholar]
  4. Entman, Robert
    1993 “Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication43(4): 51–58. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1993.tb01304.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x [Google Scholar]
  5. Fatma, Ayesha, and Nalin Bharti
    2019 “Perception vs. Reality: Understanding the US-China trade war.” Transnational Corporations Review11 (4): 270–278. 10.1080/19186444.2019.1682409
    https://doi.org/10.1080/19186444.2019.1682409 [Google Scholar]
  6. Fairclough, Norman
    1989Language and Power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 1992Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 1995Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Fairclough, Isabela and Norman Fairclough
    2012Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Ferree, Marx, William Gamson, Jürgen Gerhards, and Dieter Rucht
    2002Shaping Abortion Discourse: Democracy and the Public Sphere in Germany and the United States. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511613685
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613685 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fillmore, Charles
    1985 “Frames and the Semantics of Understanding.” Quaderni di Semantica [Semantics Notebook] 6 (2) : 222–254. www.icsi.berkeley.edu/pubs/ai/framesand85.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fillmore, Charles, Christopher Johnson, and Mariam R. L. Petruck
    2003 “Background to FrameNet.” International Journal of Lexicography16 (3): 235–250. 10.1093/ijl/16.3.235
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/16.3.235 [Google Scholar]
  13. Fowler, Roger
    1991Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Gamson, William, and Andre Modigliani
    1987 “The Changing Culture of Affirmative Action.” InResearch in Political SociologyVol.3, ed. byRichard Braungart, 137–177. Greenwich: JAI Press Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gitlin, Todd
    1980The Whole World is Watching: Mass Media in the Making & Unmaking of the New Left. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Goffman, Erving
    1974Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Iqbal, Badar, Nida Rahman, and Jonathan Eliminian
    2019 “The Future of Global Trade in the Presence of the Sino-US Trade War.” Economic and Political Studies7 (2): 217–231. 10.1080/20954816.2019.1595324
    https://doi.org/10.1080/20954816.2019.1595324 [Google Scholar]
  18. Iyengar, Shanto, and Adam Simon
    1993 “News Coverage of the Gulf Crisis and Public Opinion: A Study of Agenda-setting, Priming and Framing.” Communication Research20 (3): 365–383. 10.1177/009365093020003002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/009365093020003002 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky
    1981 “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science211: 453–458. 10.1126/science.7455683
    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7455683 [Google Scholar]
  20. 1984 “Choices, Values, and Frames.” American Psychologist39 (4): 341–350. 10.1037/0003‑066X.39.4.341
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341 [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim, Sei-Hill, Dietram A. Scheufele, and James Shanahan
    2002 “Think About it this Way: Attribute Agenda-setting Function of the Press and the Public’s Evaluation of a Local Issue.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly79 (1): 7–25. 10.1177/107769900207900102
    https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900207900102 [Google Scholar]
  22. Krzyżanowski, Michał
    2010The Discursive Construction of European Identities: A Multi-level Approach to Discourse and Identity in the Transforming European Union. Frankfurt, Main: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lakoff, George
    2004Don’t Think of an Elephant! Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. Hartford: Chelsea Green Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2006Whose Freedom: The Battle over America’s Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 2008The Political Mind: Why You Can’t Understand 21st Century Politics With an 18th Century Brain. New York: Viking.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Langacker, Ronald. W.
    1987Foundations of Cognitive Grammar Vol. I: Theoretical Pre- requisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. McQuail, Denis
    2005Mass Communication Theory (5th ed.). London, UK: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Mikheev, Vasily, and Sergey Lukonin
    2019 “China–USA: Multiple Vector of “Trade War”.” Mirovaia ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia [Modern Economic Stability] 63(5): 57–66. 10.20542/0131‑2227‑2019‑63‑5‑57‑66
    https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2019-63-5-57-66 [Google Scholar]
  29. Price, Vincent, David Tewksbury, and Elizabeth Powers
    1997 “Switching Trains of Thought: The Impact of News Frames on Readers’ Cognitive Responses.” Communication Research24 (5): 481–506. 10.1177/009365097024005002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/009365097024005002 [Google Scholar]
  30. Richardson, John
    2007Analysing Newspapers: An Approach from Critical Discourse Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑0‑230‑20968‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-20968-8 [Google Scholar]
  31. Steen, Gerard J., Aletta G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna A. Kaal, Tina Krennmayr, and Trintje Pasma
    2010A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.14
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.14 [Google Scholar]
  32. Van Dijk, Teun A.
    1988News as Discourse. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 1991Racism and the Press. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Vani, Archana
    2020 “Who Will Win from the Trade War? Analysis of the US–China Trade War from a Micro Perspective.” China Economic Journal13 (3): 376–393. 10.1080/17538963.2020.1785073
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17538963.2020.1785073 [Google Scholar]
  35. Werth, Paul
    1999Text Worlds: Representing Conceptual Space in Discourse. Harlow: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Wodak, Ruth
    2009aThe Discourse of Politics in Action. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. 2009b “Language and Politics.” InEnglish Language: Description, Variation and Context, ed. byJonathan J. Culpeper, Francis Katamba, Paul Kerswill, Ruth Wodak and Tony McEnery, 713–734. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑07789‑9_35
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-07789-9_35 [Google Scholar]
  38. Zhao, Suisheng
    2019 “Engagement on the Defensive: From the Mismatched Grand Bargain to the Emerging US-China Rivalry.” Journal of Contemporary China28 : 501–518. 10.1080/10670564.2018.1562730
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2018.1562730 [Google Scholar]
  39. Zhang, Chunman, and Xiaoyu Pu
    2019 “Introduction: Can America and China Escape the Thucydides Trap?” Journal of Chinese Political Science24 (1):1–9. 10.1007/s11366‑019‑09609‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-019-09609-y [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.21005.zhu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.21005.zhu
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