新闻中的归化合法化:机制、技术与语言手段

M. Chadiuk
{"title":"新闻中的归化合法化:机制、技术与语言手段","authors":"M. Chadiuk","doi":"10.17721/apultp.2023.46.128-146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes techniques and linguistic means of legitimation by naturalization in the news. It summarizes definitions of naturalization used in scientific works and classifies them into three groups: (1) representation of actions as something typical or \"inevitable result of natural characteristics\"; (2) omission of an alternative perspective, which makes mentioned one look like common sense; (3) treating naturalization and normalization as synonyms. The research also explains how different academics modify these definitions. Additionally, two main approaches to the relationship between legitimation and naturalization are singled out. Drawing on T. van Leeuwen's monograph (2008), influential for many studies of CDA, this research analyzes naturalization techniques in the popular news articles (during June 2020 – May 2021) published on the 25 most visited Ukrainian media. We suggest that naturalization should include not only evaluation, as T. van Leeuwen believes, but also theoretical rationalization. That's because naturalization by explanation, definition, and prediction, which constitute theoretical rationalization, and evaluation have a common basis for legitimation; the difference is only in the chosen linguistic means. The study proves that T. van Leeuwen's framework needs to be clarified since speakers can also use the purpose, abstraction, and analogy for legitimation by naturalization. Besides, the specificity of naturalization – it justifies action by representing the latter as usual and natural, not through relating it with values – enables its unique role in legitimation. Its linguistic means do not have positive or negative connotations, and by using them, speakers try to present their negative acts as neutral and ordinary. This attribute facilitates applying naturalization in response to criticism from the public or opponents. Analyzed data enables us to assert that naturalization is used for this purpose much more often than to justify something new. The research also singles out linguistic means of legitimation by naturalization.","PeriodicalId":34830,"journal":{"name":"Aktual''ni problemi ukrains''koi lingvistiki teoriia i praktika","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legitimation by naturalization in the news: mechanism, techniques and linguistic means\",\"authors\":\"M. Chadiuk\",\"doi\":\"10.17721/apultp.2023.46.128-146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article analyzes techniques and linguistic means of legitimation by naturalization in the news. It summarizes definitions of naturalization used in scientific works and classifies them into three groups: (1) representation of actions as something typical or \\\"inevitable result of natural characteristics\\\"; (2) omission of an alternative perspective, which makes mentioned one look like common sense; (3) treating naturalization and normalization as synonyms. The research also explains how different academics modify these definitions. Additionally, two main approaches to the relationship between legitimation and naturalization are singled out. Drawing on T. van Leeuwen's monograph (2008), influential for many studies of CDA, this research analyzes naturalization techniques in the popular news articles (during June 2020 – May 2021) published on the 25 most visited Ukrainian media. We suggest that naturalization should include not only evaluation, as T. van Leeuwen believes, but also theoretical rationalization. That's because naturalization by explanation, definition, and prediction, which constitute theoretical rationalization, and evaluation have a common basis for legitimation; the difference is only in the chosen linguistic means. The study proves that T. van Leeuwen's framework needs to be clarified since speakers can also use the purpose, abstraction, and analogy for legitimation by naturalization. Besides, the specificity of naturalization – it justifies action by representing the latter as usual and natural, not through relating it with values – enables its unique role in legitimation. Its linguistic means do not have positive or negative connotations, and by using them, speakers try to present their negative acts as neutral and ordinary. This attribute facilitates applying naturalization in response to criticism from the public or opponents. Analyzed data enables us to assert that naturalization is used for this purpose much more often than to justify something new. The research also singles out linguistic means of legitimation by naturalization.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34830,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aktual''ni problemi ukrains''koi lingvistiki teoriia i praktika\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aktual''ni problemi ukrains''koi lingvistiki teoriia i praktika\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17721/apultp.2023.46.128-146\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aktual''ni problemi ukrains''koi lingvistiki teoriia i praktika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17721/apultp.2023.46.128-146","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章分析了新闻中归化合法化的手法和语言手段。它总结了科学著作中使用的归化定义,并将其分为三类:(1)将行为表征为典型的或“自然特征的必然结果”;(2)遗漏了另一种观点,这使得所提到的观点看起来像是常识;(3)将归化与规格化等同对待。该研究还解释了不同的学者如何修改这些定义。此外,还提出了两种主要的方法来研究合法化和归化之间的关系。T. van Leeuwen的专著(2008年)对CDA的许多研究都有影响,本研究分析了在25家访问量最大的乌克兰媒体上发表的流行新闻文章(2020年6月至2021年5月)中的入籍技术。我们建议归化不仅要包括评价(如T. van Leeuwen所认为的),还要包括理论合理化。这是因为解释、定义和预测的归化构成了理论上的合理化,而评价的归化具有共同的正当性基础;区别只是在选择的语言手段上。研究证明,T. van Leeuwen的框架需要澄清,因为说话者也可以使用目的、抽象和类比来通过归化来合法化。此外,归化的特殊性- -它通过将后者表示为通常和自然的行为来证明其正当性,而不是通过将其与价值联系起来- -使其在合法化方面发挥独特作用。它的语言手段没有积极或消极的内涵,说话者通过使用这些语言手段,试图把自己的消极行为表现得中性和普通。这一属性有助于在面对公众或反对者的批评时申请入籍。经过分析的数据使我们能够断言,入籍是为了这个目的,而不是为了证明新事物的合理性。该研究还指出了归化合法化的语言手段。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Legitimation by naturalization in the news: mechanism, techniques and linguistic means
The article analyzes techniques and linguistic means of legitimation by naturalization in the news. It summarizes definitions of naturalization used in scientific works and classifies them into three groups: (1) representation of actions as something typical or "inevitable result of natural characteristics"; (2) omission of an alternative perspective, which makes mentioned one look like common sense; (3) treating naturalization and normalization as synonyms. The research also explains how different academics modify these definitions. Additionally, two main approaches to the relationship between legitimation and naturalization are singled out. Drawing on T. van Leeuwen's monograph (2008), influential for many studies of CDA, this research analyzes naturalization techniques in the popular news articles (during June 2020 – May 2021) published on the 25 most visited Ukrainian media. We suggest that naturalization should include not only evaluation, as T. van Leeuwen believes, but also theoretical rationalization. That's because naturalization by explanation, definition, and prediction, which constitute theoretical rationalization, and evaluation have a common basis for legitimation; the difference is only in the chosen linguistic means. The study proves that T. van Leeuwen's framework needs to be clarified since speakers can also use the purpose, abstraction, and analogy for legitimation by naturalization. Besides, the specificity of naturalization – it justifies action by representing the latter as usual and natural, not through relating it with values – enables its unique role in legitimation. Its linguistic means do not have positive or negative connotations, and by using them, speakers try to present their negative acts as neutral and ordinary. This attribute facilitates applying naturalization in response to criticism from the public or opponents. Analyzed data enables us to assert that naturalization is used for this purpose much more often than to justify something new. The research also singles out linguistic means of legitimation by naturalization.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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