|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
105761
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2011.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Concerns about climate change and energy security have been major arguments used to justify the recent return of nuclear power as a serious electricity generation option in various parts of the world. This article examines the recent public discussion in Finland, France, and the UK - three countries currently in the process of constructing or planning new nuclear power stations. To place the public discussion on nuclear power within the relationship between policy discourses and contexts, the article addresses three interrelated themes: the justifications and discursive strategies employed by nuclear advocates and critics, the similarities and differences in debates between the three countries, and the interaction between the country-specific state orientations and the argumentation concerning nuclear power. Drawing from documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews, the article identifies and analyses key discursive strategies and their use in the context of the respective state orientations: 'technology-and-industry-know-best' in Finland, 'government-knows-best' in France, and 'markets-know-best' in the UK. The nuclear debates illustrate subtle ongoing transformations in these orientations, notably in the ways in which the relations between markets, the state, and civil society are portrayed in the nuclear debates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
188027
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This paper linguistically investigates terrorist discursive strategies designed to manipulate recipients’ minds into accepting, even embracing, certain ideologies. Though extensive research has been done on manipulative discourse used by journalists and politicians, examining the same discourse used by terrorists received comparatively scant attention. Under Critical Discourse Analysis, we employ a framework of analysis of ISIS discursive tools of manipulation, drawing on Reisigl and Wodak’s (2009) and Wodak’s (2011) discursive strategies, qualitatively and quantitatively analyzing (17) ISIS statements released between 2014 and 2016. We explore the discursive tools ISIS has characteristically used to manipulate its audience and legitimate and defend its actions. The aim is that once terrorist narrative is dissected from a different approach, such effort will be helpful in creating counter-narratives meant to reduce terrorism and vitiate its arguments. Emphasis will be laid on covert vs. overt manipulation, metaphorical dehumanization and metonymic depersonalization. We find that the data contained manipulative tools such as Captatio benevolentiae and volitive modality that are employed to project a positive image about ISIS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|