在线白人民族主义论坛中破碎的群体内身份(重新)谈判

Amy Booth
{"title":"在线白人民族主义论坛中破碎的群体内身份(重新)谈判","authors":"Amy Booth","doi":"10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study investigates the construction and (re)negotiation of the identity boundaries in the context of a white nationalist online forum. Using over three million words of data, a corpus linguistic approach is combined with elements of critical discourse analysis, namely social actor (van Leeuwen, 1996) and transitivity (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) analyses, to examine the positioning of social actors in relation to one another. The data shows that, despite an assumption amongst some scholars of a united and ideologically coherent in-group of extremists, forum members often disagree on the nature and boundaries of both their racial (white) and ideological (white nationalist) identities. This calls into question the value of the `in-group' concept as we currently understand it. Instead, the `in-group' in the far-right context should be seen as slippery and unfixed, comprising multiple overlapping but distinct identities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72254,"journal":{"name":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Fractured in-group identity (re)negotiation in an online white nationalist forum\",\"authors\":\"Amy Booth\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.acorp.2023.100062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This study investigates the construction and (re)negotiation of the identity boundaries in the context of a white nationalist online forum. Using over three million words of data, a corpus linguistic approach is combined with elements of critical discourse analysis, namely social actor (van Leeuwen, 1996) and transitivity (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) analyses, to examine the positioning of social actors in relation to one another. The data shows that, despite an assumption amongst some scholars of a united and ideologically coherent in-group of extremists, forum members often disagree on the nature and boundaries of both their racial (white) and ideological (white nationalist) identities. This calls into question the value of the `in-group' concept as we currently understand it. Instead, the `in-group' in the far-right context should be seen as slippery and unfixed, comprising multiple overlapping but distinct identities.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72254,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Corpus Linguistics\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Corpus Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799123000229\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Corpus Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666799123000229","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

本研究以白人民族主义网络论坛为背景,探讨身份边界的建构与(再)协商。使用超过300万字的数据,语料库语言学方法与批判性话语分析的要素相结合,即社会行动者(van Leeuwen, 1996)和及物性(Halliday和Matthiessen, 2004)分析,以检查社会行动者彼此之间的定位。数据显示,尽管一些学者假设极端分子是一个团结一致、意识形态一致的团体,但论坛成员往往对他们的种族(白人)和意识形态(白人民族主义者)身份的性质和界限持不同意见。这就对我们目前所理解的“群体内”概念的价值提出了质疑。相反,极右翼背景下的“内部群体”应该被视为不稳定和不固定的,包括多个重叠但不同的身份。
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
Fractured in-group identity (re)negotiation in an online white nationalist forum

This study investigates the construction and (re)negotiation of the identity boundaries in the context of a white nationalist online forum. Using over three million words of data, a corpus linguistic approach is combined with elements of critical discourse analysis, namely social actor (van Leeuwen, 1996) and transitivity (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2004) analyses, to examine the positioning of social actors in relation to one another. The data shows that, despite an assumption amongst some scholars of a united and ideologically coherent in-group of extremists, forum members often disagree on the nature and boundaries of both their racial (white) and ideological (white nationalist) identities. This calls into question the value of the `in-group' concept as we currently understand it. Instead, the `in-group' in the far-right context should be seen as slippery and unfixed, comprising multiple overlapping but distinct identities.

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
Applied Corpus Linguistics
Applied Corpus Linguistics Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
70 days
期刊最新文献
Breach of pacta sunt servanda: A corpus-assisted analysis of newspaper discourse on the AUKUS agreement Identifying ChatGPT-generated texts in EFL students’ writing: Through comparative analysis of linguistic fingerprints English podcasts for schoolchildren and their vocabulary demands Capturing chronological variation in L2 speech through lexical measurements and regression analysis Investigating spoken classroom interactions in linguistically heterogeneous learning groups – An interdisciplinary approach to process video-based data in second language acquisition classrooms
×
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