Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:33:44.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

9 - Cognitive Linguistic and Experimental Methods in Critical Discourse Studies

from Part II - Perspectives and Modes of Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 September 2020

Anna De Fina
Affiliation:
Georgetown University, Washington DC
Alexandra Georgakopoulou
Affiliation:
King's College London
Get access

Summary

This chapter outlines an approach to critical discourse studies (CDS) based in cognitive linguistics. The approach (CL-CDS) investigates the conceptual representations associated with particular linguistic forms and considers the ideological and (de)legitimating functions that such representations may serve when cued in specific discursive contexts. A number of conceptual operations are identified as significant in this process of meaning-construction, including schematization, point of view and metaphor. Drawing on examples from various discourses, including media discourses of migration and political protest, I show how these conceptual processes are indexed in texts and consider the ideological and (de)legitimating potentials of the representations they yield, e.g. in inference, affect and attitude toward social actions. These qualitative analyses, grounded in cognitive linguistic theory, although psychologically plausible, remain empirically unverified. In this chapter, therefore, I further suggest that CDS and CL-CDS in particular can benefit from the incorporation of experimental methods as a form of triangulation. The chapter presents the methods and results from recent experimental studies in CL-CDS and discusses their implications for CDS more generally.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Further Reading

This book provides an introduction to corpus-assisted critical metaphor analysis with applications to a range of discursive contexts including politics, economics and religion.

This book discusses a range of discursive strategies and linguistic features from a critical cognitive linguistic perspective with example analyses of discourses of national security, war and immigration.

This book provides an introduction to cognitive linguistic critical discourse studies with chapters on structural configuration, identification, framing and positioning. A range of contemporary discourses are analyzed including discourses of riots, strikes and protest, discourses of austerity, discourses of military intervention and discourses of immigration.

This book provides an introduction to multimodality and considers, from a social semiotic perspective, the functions of different parameters, including point of view, in visual and multimodal texts.

Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

References

Baker, P. (2006). Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Cap, P. (2006). Legitimisation in Political Discourse. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Cap, P. (2008). Towards a Proximisation Model of the Analysis of Legitimisation in Political Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 40(1): 1741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Casasanto, D. (2009). Embodiment of Abstract Concepts: Good and Bad in Right- and Left-Handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology 138(3): 351–67.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2006). Britain as a Container: Immigration Metaphors in the 2005 Election Campaign. Discourse & Society 17(6): 563–82.Google Scholar
Charteris-Black, J. (2017). Fire Metaphors: Discourses of Awe and Authority. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Chilton, P. (1996). Security Metaphors: Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common House. New York, Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chilton, P. and Ilyin, M. (1993). Metaphor in Political Discourse: The Case of the “Common European House.” Discourse & Society 4(1): 731.Google Scholar
Croft, W. and Cruse, A. (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El Refaie, E. (2001). Metaphors We Discriminate By: Naturalised Themes in Austrian Newspaper Articles about Asylum Seekers. Journal of Sociolinguistics 5(3): 352–71.Google Scholar
El Refaie, E. (2003). Understanding Visual Metaphor: The Example of Newspaper Cartoons. Visual Communication 2(1): 7596.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1982). Frame Semantics. In Linguistics Society of Korea (ed.) Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin Publishing Co. 111–37.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1985). Frames and the Semantics of Understanding. Quaderni di Semantica 6: 222–54.Google Scholar
Fridolfsson, C. (2008). Political Protest and Metaphor. In Carve, T. and Pikalo, J. (eds.) Political Language and Metaphor: Interpreting and Changing the World. London: Routledge. 132–48.Google Scholar
Fuoli, M. and Hart, C. (2018). Trust-Building Strategies in Corporate Discourse: An Experimental Study. Discourse & Society. doi.org/10.1177/0957926518770264.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Marquez, M., Mittleberg, I., Coulson, S. and Spivey, M. (eds.) (2007). Methods in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, C. (2011). Critical Discourse Studies in Context and Cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, C. (2013a). Event-Construal in Press Reports of Violence in Political Protests: A Cognitive Linguistic Approach to CDA. Journal of Language and Politics 12(3): 400–23. Pre-proof version. Manuscript accepted for publication in Applied Linguistics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, C. (2013b). Constructing Contexts through Grammar: Cognitive Models and Conceptualisation in British Newspaper Reports of Political Protests. In Flowerdew, J. (ed.) Discourse and Contexts. London: Continuum. 159–84.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2016). Viewpoint in Linguistic Discourse: Space and Evaluation in News Reports of Political Protests. Critical Discourse Studies 12(3): 238–60.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2017). Metaphor and Intertextuality in Media Framings of the (1984–85) British Miners’ Strike: A Multimodal Analysis. Discourse & Communication 11(1): 330.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2018a). Metaphor and the (1984–5) British Miners’ Strike: A Multimodal Analysis. In Hart, C. and Kelsey, D. (eds.) Discourses of Disorder: Representations of Riots, Strikes and Protests in the Media. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 133–53.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2018b). Event-Frames Affect Blame Assignment and Perception of Aggression in Discourse on Political Protests: An Experimental Case Study in Critical Discourse Analysis. Applied Linguistics 39(3): 400–21.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2018c). “Riots Engulfed the City”: An Experimental Study Investigating the Legitimating Effects of Fire Metaphors in Discourses of Disorder. Discourse & Society 29(3): 279–98.Google Scholar
Hart, C. (2019). Spatial Properties of ACTION Verb Semantics: Experimental Evidence for Image Schema Orientation in Transitive vs. Reciprocal Verbs and Its Implications for Ideology. In Hart, C. (ed.) Cognitive Linguistic Approaches to Text and Discourse: From Poetics to Politics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hart, C. and Cap, P. (eds.) (2014). Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Hart, C. and Fuoli, M. (2020). Objectification strategies outperform subjectification strategies in military interventionist discourses. Journal of Pragmatics 162: 1728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawkins, S. (2014). Teargas, Flags and Harlem Shake: Images of and for Revolution in Tunisia and the Dialectics of the Local in the Global. In Werbner, P., Webb, M. and Spellman-Poots, K. (eds.) Global Protest: The Arab Spring and Beyond. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 3152.Google Scholar
Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination and Reason. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Koller, V. (2004). Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse: A Critical Cognitive Study. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Koller, V. (2005). Critical Discourse Analysis and Social Cognition: Evidence from Business Media Discourse. Discourse & Society 16(2): 199224.Google Scholar
Koller, V., Hardie, A., Rayson, P. and Semino, E. (2008). Using a Semantic Annotation Tool for the Analysis of Metaphor in Discourse. metaphorik.de 15: 141–60.Google Scholar
Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Landau, M. J., Sullivan, D. and Greenberg, J. (2009). Evidence that Self-Relevant Motives and Metaphoric Framing Interact to Influence Political and Social Attitudes. Psychological Science 20(11): 1421–6.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. II: Descriptive Application. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2002). Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar, 2nd ed. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Machin, D. (2007). An Introduction to Multimodal Analysis. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M. (2004). The Foundations of Mind: Origins of Conceptual Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Marín Arrese, J. (2011). Effective vs. Epistemic Stance and Subjectivity in Political Discourse: Legitimising Strategies and Mystification of Responsibility. In Hart, C. (ed.) Critical Discourse Studies in Context and Cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 193224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A. (2003). Ideological Functions of Metaphor: The Conceptual Metaphors of Health and Illness in Public Discourse. In Dirven, R., Frank, R. M. and Pütz, M. (eds.) Cognitive Models in Language and Thought: Ideology, Metaphors and Meanings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 327–52.Google Scholar
Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musolff, A. (2007). What Role Do Metaphors Play in Racial Prejudice? The Function of Antisemitic Imagery in Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Patterns of Prejudice 41(1): 2143.Google Scholar
Musolff, A. (2016). Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
O’Halloran, K. (2003). Critical Discourse Analysis and Language Cognition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Robins, S. and Mayer, R. E. (2000). The Metaphor Framing Effect: Metaphorical Reasoning about Text-Based Dilemmas. Discourse Processes 30(1): 5786.Google Scholar
Santa Ana, O. (2002). Brown Tide Rising: Metaphors of Latinos in Contemporary American Public Discourse. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Semino, E., Hardie, A., Koller, V. and Rayson, P. (2005). A Computer-Assisted Approach to the Analysis of Metaphor Variation across Genres. In Barnden, J., Lee, M., Littlemore, J., Moon, R., Philip, G. and Wallington, A. (eds.) Corpus-Based Approaches to Figurative Language. Birmingham: University of Birmingham School of Computer Science. 145–53.Google Scholar
Stubbs, M. (1997). Whorf’s Children: Critical Comments on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). In Ryan, A. and Wray, A. (eds.) Evolving Models of Language. Clevedon: British Association for Applied Linguistics. 100–16.Google Scholar
Subtirelu, N. C. and Gopavaram, S. R. (2016). Crowdsourcing Critical Discourse Analysis: Using Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to Explore Readers’ Uptake of Comments about Language on RateMyProfessors.com. CADAAD 8(1): 3857.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Thibodeau, P. H and Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning. PLoS ONE 6(2): e16782. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Traugott, E. (1995). Subjectification in grammaticalisation. In Stein, D. and Wright, S. (eds.), Subjectivity and Subjectivisation: Linguistic Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3154.Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society 4(2): 249–83.Google Scholar
Walsh, P. (1990). Imagery as a Heuristic in the Comprehension of Metaphorical Analogies: Representation, Reasoning, Analogy and Decision-Making. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Widdowson, H. G. (2004). Text, Context, Pretext: Critical Issues in Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. (2016). Critical Discourse Studies: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology. In Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (eds.) Methods in Critical Discourse Studies. London: Sage. 122.Google Scholar
Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (eds.) (2016). Methods in Critical Discourse Studies. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×