在对美国无人机袭击的表述中保持或克服距离感

John Oddo, Cameron Mozafari, Alexandra Kirsch
{"title":"在对美国无人机袭击的表述中保持或克服距离感","authors":"John Oddo, Cameron Mozafari, Alexandra Kirsch","doi":"10.1177/09579265241230339","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines how U.S. news reports sustain or overcome distance between domestic audiences and the victims of U.S. drone strikes overseas. More specifically, we explain how language is used to construe distance in two different news stories about the same drone strike, enacting different political and affective relationships between Americans and the Pakistani victims of U.S. war. Drawing on theories of cognitive linguistics, we analyze how distance is negotiated in three overlapping areas of conceptualization: specificity, time, and narrative perspective. We show how lexical and grammatical choices can make victims of drone strikes appear remote, indistinct, and uninteresting – or indeed how they can make victims and their suffering appear close, clear, and dramatic. Simultaneously, we show that minimalist reporting on distant suffering is not natural or inevitable. Despite the obstacles they face, it is possible for journalists to convey what actually happens to the distant victims of U.S. violence.","PeriodicalId":432402,"journal":{"name":"Discourse & Society","volume":"80 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sustaining or overcoming distance in representations of U.S. drone strikes\",\"authors\":\"John Oddo, Cameron Mozafari, Alexandra Kirsch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09579265241230339\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article examines how U.S. news reports sustain or overcome distance between domestic audiences and the victims of U.S. drone strikes overseas. More specifically, we explain how language is used to construe distance in two different news stories about the same drone strike, enacting different political and affective relationships between Americans and the Pakistani victims of U.S. war. Drawing on theories of cognitive linguistics, we analyze how distance is negotiated in three overlapping areas of conceptualization: specificity, time, and narrative perspective. We show how lexical and grammatical choices can make victims of drone strikes appear remote, indistinct, and uninteresting – or indeed how they can make victims and their suffering appear close, clear, and dramatic. Simultaneously, we show that minimalist reporting on distant suffering is not natural or inevitable. Despite the obstacles they face, it is possible for journalists to convey what actually happens to the distant victims of U.S. violence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":432402,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discourse & Society\",\"volume\":\"80 14\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discourse & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265241230339\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265241230339","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

本文探讨了美国新闻报道如何维持或克服国内受众与美国无人机海外袭击受害者之间的距离。更具体地说,我们解释了在关于同一次无人机袭击的两则不同的新闻报道中,语言是如何被用来解释距离的,从而在美国人和美国战争的巴基斯坦受害者之间建立起不同的政治和情感关系。借鉴认知语言学的理论,我们分析了距离是如何在三个重叠的概念化领域进行协商的:具体性、时间和叙事视角。我们展示了词汇和语法的选择是如何使无人机袭击的受害者显得遥远、模糊和无趣的,或者是如何使受害者和他们的痛苦显得亲近、清晰和戏剧化的。同时,我们还表明,对遥远苦难的极少报道并非自然或不可避免。尽管面临重重障碍,记者仍有可能传达美国暴力事件中远方受害者的真实遭遇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Sustaining or overcoming distance in representations of U.S. drone strikes
This article examines how U.S. news reports sustain or overcome distance between domestic audiences and the victims of U.S. drone strikes overseas. More specifically, we explain how language is used to construe distance in two different news stories about the same drone strike, enacting different political and affective relationships between Americans and the Pakistani victims of U.S. war. Drawing on theories of cognitive linguistics, we analyze how distance is negotiated in three overlapping areas of conceptualization: specificity, time, and narrative perspective. We show how lexical and grammatical choices can make victims of drone strikes appear remote, indistinct, and uninteresting – or indeed how they can make victims and their suffering appear close, clear, and dramatic. Simultaneously, we show that minimalist reporting on distant suffering is not natural or inevitable. Despite the obstacles they face, it is possible for journalists to convey what actually happens to the distant victims of U.S. violence.
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
期刊最新文献
To change or not to change: Transformations of ecological metaphors in Chinese government microblogs Book review: Tara Coltman-Patel, (Mis)Representing Weight and Obesity in the British Press: Fear, Divisiveness, Shame and Stigma Decoding intentions in evaluations: A discursive study of disputants’ discourses in Chinese family mediation Living with contradictions: A corpus-assisted analysis of grown-up left-behind children discourses in Zhihu Appified surveillance: TripAdvisor as a site for entextualized surveillant assemblage
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1