This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: g places and capturing them; when necessary it also involves elimination in the case of their attempt to break
free of the American hunt, even outside the Afghan borders. Independently of the results of the operation in this country, the hunt for
terrorists cannot stop there. This entails spreading the anti-terrorist
war, even if limited, on other countries. Undoubtedly, it will be a
special forces war’.
(WAR IS A HUNT, THE ENEMY IS AN ANIMAL conceptual metaphors)
In this excerpt, the enemy, Al Qaeda terrorists, is rhetorically degraded to
the level of animals, a common stylistic means in a propagandist vilification of the enemy.
2.9.2. Other rhetorical strategies
Unlike in one of the texts of the 1980s, in 2001 the journalists do not believe that they have an unrestricted access to information, or that ‘the
television picture does not lie’. Urszula Piwowar-Lesman in her article
“Dawkowanie informacji” [‘Dosing information’] criticizes American
journalists for co-operating with the American government and the military and not striving for unvarnished news. She construes a dichotomy between the Western, biased journalists and the Al-Jazeera television channel, which through this juxtaposition seems to be a more impartial source. A qualitative analysis of war news 181 2.10. The Times on the war on terror
The corpus of articles analysed in this section comes from The Times Archive online, the key words Afghanistan and terrorism were searched for
in the same period as that delineated for Trybuna Ludu, i.e. Oct. 1st 2001
– Dec. 21st 2001. From several hundred articles submitted as a result of
the search, 124 were selected as most pertinent to the war on terror conducted in Afghanistan. The choice was based on the content of the summaries provided for each article.
2.10.1. Paragraph-structuring metaphors
Of the analysed articles, two were built around one conceptual metaphor.
The first was a feature article by Simon Jenkins classified as opinion and a
commentary under the title “Real hawks would not dispatch the bombers”
published on Oct. 03rd 2001. The structuring conceptual metaphor POLITICIANS ARE HAWKS OR DOVES was activated already in the title. Real is the
key word here, as Jenkins defines the term in accord with his own political
vision, contesting the usual association of hawks with aggression and
speed. He juxtaposes hawks with the defeatists, who only later are dubbed
as doves-in-khaki. Musolff (p.c.) sees a two-fold distinction here: one between doves and doves-in-khaki and another between hawks and real
hawks. This differentiation allows the author to contrast real doves, i.e. outspoken pacifists with the doves-in-khaki, i.e. cowardly military men, who
bomb Iraq but refrain from a land operation. The real hawks in opposition
to so-so hawks and the doves-in-khaki would invade Iraq. The metaphor,
POLITICIANS ARE HAWKS OR DOVES, elaborated in paragraphs two and three
(see below), is then employed as a discourse-structuring device.
(116) Since that man, Osama bin Laden, is last reported to be hid...
View Full Document