Contrastive Analysis of Discursive Constructions in Terrorist Attack Reports between Chinese and British Newspapers: Case Study of Reports on Beijing and Barcelona Terrorist Attacks

IF 0.7 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Hui Qi, F. Ye
{"title":"Contrastive Analysis of Discursive Constructions in Terrorist Attack Reports between Chinese and British Newspapers: Case Study of Reports on Beijing and Barcelona Terrorist Attacks","authors":"Hui Qi, F. Ye","doi":"10.1080/09296174.2019.1595901","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Chinese and British mainstream English newspaper’s reports on two terrorist attacks, Beijing 10 · 28 event in 2013 and Barcelona 8 · 17 event in 2017 were used as data. Corpus approaches and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) were combined to compare the discursive constructions of terrorist attacks between Chinese and British presses. The findings demonstrate that the western media set the double standards when reporting terrorist events in China and Spain. Although with the same standard, China not only seeks to reveal the true nature of Beijing terrorist attack but also weaves a network of ideological allies. The differences in discursive constructions in Beijing terrorist attack exhibit the different ideologies between China and western countries and reveal the predominance of western countries in controlling the discourse power in the world.","PeriodicalId":45514,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Quantitative Linguistics","volume":"27 1","pages":"361 - 378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/09296174.2019.1595901","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Quantitative Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2019.1595901","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

ABSTRACT Chinese and British mainstream English newspaper’s reports on two terrorist attacks, Beijing 10 · 28 event in 2013 and Barcelona 8 · 17 event in 2017 were used as data. Corpus approaches and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) were combined to compare the discursive constructions of terrorist attacks between Chinese and British presses. The findings demonstrate that the western media set the double standards when reporting terrorist events in China and Spain. Although with the same standard, China not only seeks to reveal the true nature of Beijing terrorist attack but also weaves a network of ideological allies. The differences in discursive constructions in Beijing terrorist attack exhibit the different ideologies between China and western countries and reveal the predominance of western countries in controlling the discourse power in the world.
中英报纸恐怖袭击报道话语结构的对比分析——以北京和巴塞罗那恐怖袭击报道为例
摘要中英主流英文报纸对2013年北京10·28恐怖袭击事件和2017年巴塞罗那8·17恐怖袭击事件的报道作为数据。将语料库方法和批评语篇分析相结合,对中英报刊恐怖袭击的话语结构进行了比较。研究结果表明,西方媒体在报道中国和西班牙的恐怖事件时设置了双重标准。尽管标准相同,但中国不仅试图揭示北京恐怖袭击的真实性质,而且编织了一个意识形态盟友网络。北京恐怖袭击话语结构的差异,体现了中国与西方意识形态的差异,揭示了西方国家在控制世界话语权方面的主导地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
7.10%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The Journal of Quantitative Linguistics is an international forum for the publication and discussion of research on the quantitative characteristics of language and text in an exact mathematical form. This approach, which is of growing interest, opens up important and exciting theoretical perspectives, as well as solutions for a wide range of practical problems such as machine learning or statistical parsing, by introducing into linguistics the methods and models of advanced scientific disciplines such as the natural sciences, economics, and psychology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信