IMAGE-SCHEMATIC STRUCTURING OF REALITY IN POLITICAL SPEECHES ON THE COVID-19 OUTBREAK
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46827/ejlll.v4i3.223Keywords:
discourse, cognition, embodiment of mind, image schema, modal verbsAbstract
The paper is concerned with analysis of Donald Trump and Angela Merkel’s speeches to their respective nations on the occasion of the COVID-19 outbreak. Within the integrated cognitive-critical approach to discourse analysis framework the paper focuses on the interplay between the cognitive mechanisms and discursive structures that make up meanings in a genre of political discourse. Assuming that specific actions and measures are to be communicated so as to deal with the threat presented by the coronavirus, analysis of the cognitive dimension of language use focuses on the underlying force (linguistically articulated by way of modal verbs) and containment image schemas considered as indicative of the ways the speakers conceive of the power vested in them. The political dimension analysis focuses on pronominal forms as discourse structures establishing relationships with addressees. The results point to D. Trump’s self-representation of the protector of nation unlike A. Merkel’s encouragement of solidarity empowered by knowledge-based joint actions and behaviour.
References
Altheide D I, 2009. Terror Post 9/11 and the Media, New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.
Chilton P, Schaffner C, 1997. Discourse and Politics. Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction 2: 206-230.
Chilton P, 2004. Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
Chilton P, 2017. Toward a Neuro-Cognitive Model of Socio-Political Discourse, and an Application to the Populist Discourse of Donald Trump. Éditions de la Maison des sciences de l’homme 2: 237-249.
Fairclough N, 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman Group Limited.
Fowler R, 1996. On Critical Linguistics. Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis: 3-15. London and New York: Routledge
Hart C, 2005. Analyzing Political Discourse: Toward a Cognitive Approach. Critical Discourse Studies 2 (2): 189-194.
Hart C, 2010. Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan.
Johnson M, 1987. The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff G, Johnson M, 1980. Metaphors We Live by. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff G, Johnson M, 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
Lakoff G, 2004. Don’t Think of an Elephant! Chelsea: Green Publishing Company.
Quirk R, Greenbaum S, 1987 A University Grammar of English. Longman Group UK Limited.
Sweetser E, 1982. Root and Epistemic Modals: Causality in Two Worlds. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: 484-507.
Van Dijk TA, Kintsch W, 1983. Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Van Dijk TA, 1989. Structures of Discourse and Structures of Power. Communication Yearbook 12: 18-59. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Van Dijk TA, 1997. What is Political Discourse Analysis. Political Linguistics: 11-52.
Wodak R, 2015. The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. Los Angeles/London/New Delhi/Singapore/Washington DC: SAGE.
Wodak R, 2001. What CDA Is About: A Summary of Its History, Important Concepts and Developments. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis: 1-14. SAGE.
