中美报纸的气候变化责任框架:语料库辅助语篇研究

Ming-duo Liu, Jingyi Huang
{"title":"中美报纸的气候变化责任框架:语料库辅助语篇研究","authors":"Ming-duo Liu, Jingyi Huang","doi":"10.1177/14648849231187453","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study conducts a corpus-assisted discourse study of framing responsibilities for climate change in China Daily (CD) and The New York Times (NYT). Based on the distinction between causal and treatment responsibilities, it focuses on the framing of human and non-human causal responsibilities as well as developed and developing countries’ causal and treatment responsibilities for climate change in the two newspapers. The findings suggest that CD tends to show consensus on the human causes of climate change while NYT is inclined to problematize human causes for climate change. While both newspapers favor treatment over causal responsibilities, CD prefers to underline developed countries’ historical causal responsibilities for climate change and urges developed countries to take more treatment responsibilities for climate change, whereas NYT prefers to underscore developing countries’ current causal responsibilities for climate change and their shared treatment responsibilities for climate change.","PeriodicalId":74027,"journal":{"name":"Journalism (London, England)","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framing responsibilities for climate change in Chinese and American newspapers: A corpus-assisted discourse study\",\"authors\":\"Ming-duo Liu, Jingyi Huang\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14648849231187453\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study conducts a corpus-assisted discourse study of framing responsibilities for climate change in China Daily (CD) and The New York Times (NYT). Based on the distinction between causal and treatment responsibilities, it focuses on the framing of human and non-human causal responsibilities as well as developed and developing countries’ causal and treatment responsibilities for climate change in the two newspapers. The findings suggest that CD tends to show consensus on the human causes of climate change while NYT is inclined to problematize human causes for climate change. While both newspapers favor treatment over causal responsibilities, CD prefers to underline developed countries’ historical causal responsibilities for climate change and urges developed countries to take more treatment responsibilities for climate change, whereas NYT prefers to underscore developing countries’ current causal responsibilities for climate change and their shared treatment responsibilities for climate change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":74027,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journalism (London, England)\",\"volume\":\"74 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journalism (London, England)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231187453\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journalism (London, England)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231187453","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本研究对《中国日报》和《纽约时报》的气候变化责任框架进行了语料库辅助话语研究。在区分因果责任和处理责任的基础上,重点讨论了人类和非人类因果责任的框架,以及发达国家和发展中国家在两份报纸中对气候变化的因果责任和处理责任。研究结果表明,《裁谈会》倾向于对气候变化的人类原因表现出共识,而《纽约时报》则倾向于将气候变化的人类原因问题化。两家报纸都倾向于治疗责任而不是因果责任,但《CD》更倾向于强调发达国家对气候变化的历史因果责任,并敦促发达国家对气候变化承担更多的治疗责任,而《纽约时报》更倾向于强调发展中国家当前对气候变化的因果责任和共同的气候变化治疗责任。
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
Framing responsibilities for climate change in Chinese and American newspapers: A corpus-assisted discourse study
This study conducts a corpus-assisted discourse study of framing responsibilities for climate change in China Daily (CD) and The New York Times (NYT). Based on the distinction between causal and treatment responsibilities, it focuses on the framing of human and non-human causal responsibilities as well as developed and developing countries’ causal and treatment responsibilities for climate change in the two newspapers. The findings suggest that CD tends to show consensus on the human causes of climate change while NYT is inclined to problematize human causes for climate change. While both newspapers favor treatment over causal responsibilities, CD prefers to underline developed countries’ historical causal responsibilities for climate change and urges developed countries to take more treatment responsibilities for climate change, whereas NYT prefers to underscore developing countries’ current causal responsibilities for climate change and their shared treatment responsibilities for climate change.
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
Shifting the protest paradigm? Legitimizing and humanizing protest coverage lead to more positive attitudes toward protest, mixed results on news credibility “Remember that?” A temporal perspective on how audiences make sense of the news China’s metaphorically “othered” image in The New York Times (1949-2020) Prehistory of journalism studies: Discovering the Brazilian tradition The digital turn from a newsroom perspective – How German journalists from different generations reflect on the digitalization of journalism
×
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