This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ies used by the American media to debase the Oriental were not developed solely for the purpose of denigrating one specific group of people.
Quite to the contrary, it is a frame persistently used in enemy vilification. It
is the enemy which is the variable, the strategies are by default.
41 On the rhetoric of emotional control in American discourse see Lutz (1996).
On the use of categorisation and the dichotomous series in the media construction
of self and other see Fowler (1996).
42 190 Chapter IV A similar process, that is one of employing the same construal but
with shifting perspective, can be noticed in the use of the Glory of War
Myth in combination with WAR IS A THEATRE metaphor. In the Trybuna
Ludu reporting of the British fleet setting off to the Falklands, and in the
British coverage of the Soviet arrival in Teremez from Afghanistan, the
same tones of scorn could be discerned. Evidently, the Glory of War Myth
requires an emotional attachment to the nation’s specific identity-building
narratives and symbols. For outsiders, who could not have developed any
emotional link with the foreign nation-constructing codes, the Myth,
stripped of its emotional power, seems odd if not downright ridiculous.
The shift in perspectivizing that I propose here is not the same
process as frame-shifting in discourse as described in Coulson (2001).
The major discrepancy here is that the addressees of the mass media construal of the events are two different groups of recipients for the two different perspectives. The readers of Trybuna Ludu and the readers of The
Times of the 1980s do not inhabit the same discourse space. In 2001,
though, the situation changed so that to a greater extent the evaluation and
the framing of the events in both discourse spaces coincided.
Cases of the Coulsonian frame-shifting could also be observed in
my data. First, when the supporters and the critics of the military solution
of the Falklands crisis both used the same metaphorical frame WAR IS
BUSINESS, but they employed a different perspective, i.e. the supporters
emphasised the glorious nature of sacrificing one’s life for one’s country,
while the critics avoided the Glory of War Myth and construed war as a
calamity. Next, Mrs Thatcher effectively used frame shifting in the discourse on the American air raids on Libya, when she reframed herself as a
bulldog rather than a poodle of Mr Reagan, and suggested her own framing of the situation (‘dancing to the tune of our choosing’).
The conceptual metaphors underlying some of the expressions in
the analysed articles performed several functions. First, they were used as
framing devices structuring entire texts (THE FALKLANDS WAR IS A THEATRE, AMERICAN AIR RAIDS ON LIBYA ARE A DISPUTE, THE USA IS THE
WORLD SHERIFF, AMERICAN AIR RAIDS ON LIBYA ARE TEACHING A LESSON
TO THE LIBYANS, AMERICA IS A FORTRESS, NAJIBULLAH’S REGIME IS A
PORCUPINE, WAR ON TERROR IS A HUNT FOR BIN LADEN). In this way conceptual metaphors contributed to the discourse cohesion and often also
View Full Document