{"title":"圣战的二元论","authors":"K. Patterson","doi":"10.1075/jlac.00075.pat","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This paper explores how metaphors are employed in jihadist magazines to promote a dichotomist worldview of ‘us’\n versus ‘them’, ‘good’ versus ‘bad’, ‘east’ versus ‘west’ and ‘right’ versus ‘wrong’. It argues that juxtapositions in both\n language and thought help writers to reaffirm and/or challenge certain paradigms. The approach uses critical metaphor analysis\n (Charteris-Black 2004) to investigate qualitative evidence of conceptual metaphors,\n focusing on the domains life is a seed, conflict is a relationship between predator and prey, and faith is light/lack\n of faith is darkness. Dichotomous language in these domains (e.g., ‘seed’ versus ‘weed’; ‘sheep’ versus ‘wolves’; the\n ‘spark of Jihad’ versus the ‘shadow’ of Western governments) helps to position extremist groups on the right side of a number of\n paradigms. The use of binary metaphors also permits simultaneously conflicting conceptualisations; for instance, jihadists are\n both innocent victims and merciless defenders of their faith, depending on with whom or what they are juxtaposed. The research\n concludes that the use of binary metaphors serves to underscore entrenched paradigms of ‘good’ versus ‘bad’, thus allowing the\n writers to frame their discourse in a way that justifies and promotes their extremist agenda.","PeriodicalId":324436,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dualisms in Jihad\",\"authors\":\"K. Patterson\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/jlac.00075.pat\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n This paper explores how metaphors are employed in jihadist magazines to promote a dichotomist worldview of ‘us’\\n versus ‘them’, ‘good’ versus ‘bad’, ‘east’ versus ‘west’ and ‘right’ versus ‘wrong’. It argues that juxtapositions in both\\n language and thought help writers to reaffirm and/or challenge certain paradigms. The approach uses critical metaphor analysis\\n (Charteris-Black 2004) to investigate qualitative evidence of conceptual metaphors,\\n focusing on the domains life is a seed, conflict is a relationship between predator and prey, and faith is light/lack\\n of faith is darkness. Dichotomous language in these domains (e.g., ‘seed’ versus ‘weed’; ‘sheep’ versus ‘wolves’; the\\n ‘spark of Jihad’ versus the ‘shadow’ of Western governments) helps to position extremist groups on the right side of a number of\\n paradigms. The use of binary metaphors also permits simultaneously conflicting conceptualisations; for instance, jihadists are\\n both innocent victims and merciless defenders of their faith, depending on with whom or what they are juxtaposed. The research\\n concludes that the use of binary metaphors serves to underscore entrenched paradigms of ‘good’ versus ‘bad’, thus allowing the\\n writers to frame their discourse in a way that justifies and promotes their extremist agenda.\",\"PeriodicalId\":324436,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00075.pat\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00075.pat","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper explores how metaphors are employed in jihadist magazines to promote a dichotomist worldview of ‘us’
versus ‘them’, ‘good’ versus ‘bad’, ‘east’ versus ‘west’ and ‘right’ versus ‘wrong’. It argues that juxtapositions in both
language and thought help writers to reaffirm and/or challenge certain paradigms. The approach uses critical metaphor analysis
(Charteris-Black 2004) to investigate qualitative evidence of conceptual metaphors,
focusing on the domains life is a seed, conflict is a relationship between predator and prey, and faith is light/lack
of faith is darkness. Dichotomous language in these domains (e.g., ‘seed’ versus ‘weed’; ‘sheep’ versus ‘wolves’; the
‘spark of Jihad’ versus the ‘shadow’ of Western governments) helps to position extremist groups on the right side of a number of
paradigms. The use of binary metaphors also permits simultaneously conflicting conceptualisations; for instance, jihadists are
both innocent victims and merciless defenders of their faith, depending on with whom or what they are juxtaposed. The research
concludes that the use of binary metaphors serves to underscore entrenched paradigms of ‘good’ versus ‘bad’, thus allowing the
writers to frame their discourse in a way that justifies and promotes their extremist agenda.