К вопросу об употреблении метафор, связанных с природными явлениями в правительственных документах Великобритании ¹¹⁴¹

Данная работа исследует строительство экологического дискурса в недавних правительственных документах Великобритании, которая акцентируется на убедительной роли метафоры.

Ключевые слова: эколингвистика, Британское правительство, правительственные документы

Рубрика: Межкультурная коммуникация и проблемы глобализации: психо-, социо- и этнолингвистика

Тип: научная статья

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/langt.2015020312

In a multimodal sense, framing would refer to the decision to show nature in the context of a perfectly kept garden of a college or church. A wild landscape showing nature untouched by human intervention would convey a different message. Nature is here shown to be ‘institutionalised’, a resource which needs the controlling, nurturing force of government intervention if its value is to be realised.

1. Castells, Manuel 2009. Communication power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Chapin, Henry and Denis Deneau 1978. Citizen involvement in Public Policy-making:  Access and the Policy-making Process. Canadian Council on Social Development: Ottawa.
3. Charteris-Black, Jonathan 2004. Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
4. Charteris-Black, Jonathan 2005. Politicians and rhetoric: the persuasive power of  metaphor. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
5. Charteris-Black, Jonathan 2009. Metaphor and political communication. In Musolff, Andreas and Zinken, Jörg (eds) Metaphor and discourse. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
6. Chilton, Paul 2009. Reading Sonnet 30: Discourse, metaphor and blending. In Musolff, Andreas and Zinken, Jörg (eds) Metaphor and discourse. Basingstoke and New York. Palgrave Macmillan.
7. Coulthard, Malcolm 1994. On analysing and evaluating written text. In Coulthard, M. (ed) Advances in written text analysis. London and New York: Routledge.
8. Dryzek, John S. 2005. The politics of the earth: environmental discourses. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
9. Edwards, Lynne, Y. 2005. Victims, villains, and vixens. Teen girls and internet crime. In Mazzarella, Sharon R. (ed) Girl wide web: girls, the internet and the negotiation of identity. New York: Peter Lang.
10. Ekins, Paul, Sandrine Simon, Lisa Deutsch, Carl Folke, and Rudolf de Groot 2003. A framework for the practical application of the concepts of critical natural capital and strong sustainability. Ecological Economics 44: 165/185: Elsevier.
11. Fairclough, Norman 2000.  New Labour, new language. London and New York: Routledge.
12. Geary, James 2011. I is an other: the secret life of metaphor and how it shapes the way we  see the world. New York: Harper Collins.
13. Goatly, Andrew 1996. Green grammar and grammatical metaphor, or language and myth of power, or metaphors we die by. Journal of Pragmatics 25 (537-60). Elsevier.
14. Götzsche, Hans 2009. Presupposition. In Chapman, Siobhan and Routledge, Christopher  (eds) Key ideas in linguistics and the philosophy of language. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
15. Harré, Rom, Jens Brockmeier and Peter Mühlhaüsler 1999. Greenspeak. A study of environmental discourse. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage.
16. Jaworski, Adam and Nikolas Coupland (eds) 1999. The Discourse Reader. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
17. Jones, Jason and Jean Stilwell Peccei 1999. Language and politics. In Thomas, Linda, Shân Wareing, Ishtla Singh, Jean Stilwell Peccei, Joanna Thornborrow, and Jason Jones (eds) Language, society and power. An introduction. Second edition. London and New York: Routledge.
18. Kress, Gunther and Theo Van Leeuwen, 1996. Reading images: the grammar of visual design. London, Routledge.
19. Lakoff,  George  1993.  The  contemporary  theory  of  metaphor.  In  Ortony, Andrew (ed) Metaphor and thought (2nd edition), Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
20. Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark 1980. Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
21. Lemke, Jay 1990. Talking science: language, learning, and values. Westport: Ablex.
22. Pemberton, John E. 1969. Government Green Papers. Library World 71:49.
23. Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca 1969. The new rhetoric. A treatise on  argumentation. University of Notre-Dame Press: Paris.
24. Rista-Dema, Mimoza 2008. Language register and the impacts of translation. In Gyasi Obeng, Samuel and A. S. Hartford, Beverly (eds) Political discourse analysis. New York: Nova Science.
25. Sibley-Esposito, Clare 2013. Accounting for ecology? The concept of ‘natural capital’ in British political discourse and policy (1997-2011). In Leydier, Gilles and Martin, Alexia (eds) Environmental issues in political discourse in Britain and Ireland. Newcastle-on-Tyne, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
26. Van Dijk, Teun A. 2003. The discourse-knowledge interface. In Weiss, Gilbert and Wodak, Ruth (eds) Critical discourse analysis: theory and interdisciplinarity. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
27. Vasta, Nicoletta 2005.“Profits & Principles: Is There a Choice?” The Multimodal Construction of SHELL’s Commitment to Social Responsibility and Environmental Care in and across Advertising Texts. In Cortese, G. and A. Duszak (eds) Identity, community, discourse: English in intercultural settings. Bern: Peter Lang.
28. Yrjölä, Riina 2011. Visual politics and celebrity humanitarianism. How colonial culture is revitalised in the West. In Stocchetti, Matteo and Kukkonen, Karin (eds) Images in use. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
29. Treanor, Fergal 2013. Ideological Presuppositions - Six German Higher Education Policy Documents. Academia.edu: http://www.academia.edu/4039613/Ideological_Presuppositions- Six_German_Higher_Education_Policy_Documents.
30. Turner, R.K. 2013. A pluralistic approach to ecosystem assessment and evaluation. DEFRA: http://www.defra.gov.uk/naturalcapitalcommittee/files/ncc-assetcheck-03.pdf