Abstract:Drawing upon a corpus approach to metaphor analysis, stance analysis, and Critical Discourse Analysis, the study analyzes different stances taken by the Chinese news outlet Global Times (GT) and the American The New York Times (NYT) in 2020 Coronavirus narratives to Chinese and English readers. The database includes all Coronavirus-related GT and NYT bilingual opinion articles in 2020, that is, 97 pairs from GT and 73 pairs from NYT which are comparable in Chinese and English tokens. Results show that the diff… Show more
“…Various researchers have applied CMA to examine the metaphorical construction of China’s image in the U.S. mainstream media. They conclude that these media outlets predominantly portray China as an adversary and competitor by carefully selecting source domains for their metaphors ( Liu and Li, 2022 ).…”
Metaphors extracted from COVID-19-related online texts offer a unique lens for examining how individuals perceive the pandemic. Users from distinct linguistic backgrounds may select varying source domains to discuss COVID-19, with these choices influenced by multiple factors. Utilizing Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA) theory and employing the Metaphor Identification Procedure VU (MIPVU), this study conducts a comparative analysis of Chinese and English COVID-19-related metaphors derived from social media platforms, specifically Twitter and Weibo. The findings reveal both commonalities and distinctions between the metaphors employed in Chinese and English texts. Commonalities encompass the widespread use of war and disaster metaphors in both sets of texts. Distinctions are characterized by a higher prevalence of zombie metaphors in English texts and classroom metaphors in Chinese texts. These similarities and differences can be attributed to varying socio-historical factors, as well as the active choices of users to express their values and judgments.
“…Accordingly, linguistic metaphors identified in discourse can be considered linguistic realisations of conceptual metaphors (e.g., she is in high spirit is a lexical realisation of the conceptual metaphor happy is up). Discourse analysis scholars have emphasised the role of metaphors in conveying certain ideologies and evaluations (Fairclough 1995;Liu and Li 2022), specifically focusing on their framing effect, defined as emphasising "some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described" (Entman 1993, 52).…”
The article explores Sinophobic discourses during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing specifically on violence-related metaphors used to frame China in American and Australian newspapers from January to June 2020. Specifically, the analysis aims to investigate the extent to which violence-related metaphors were used to frame China in a micro-diachronic perspective and the functions they performed in the dataset. The investigation was conducted by combining corpus linguistics and discourse analysis approaches to analyse the semantic domain of violence. The results revealed that violence-related metaphors were extensively used to negatively frame China and its institutions in both corpora, although they were more frequent in the Australian corpus. From a micro-diachronic perspective, in the American corpus, violence-related metaphors were less recurrent and evenly distributed over time, whereas they peaked in May 2020 in the Australian corpus, a time that coincided with China’s imposition of substantial tariffs on Australian barley. This seemed to suggest that the use of such metaphors was highly influenced by socioeconomic factors rather than by the spread of COVID-19.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.