War yesterday and today: The image of Russia in British media discourse

Abstract

The paper focuses on diachronic framing analysis of Russias images in British media discourse. The importance of the research is determined by a need to work out adequate linguistic foundations to counteract information war, generated by some foreign media and aimed at distorting Russias history and eroding its spiritual values. Few scholars have drawn on any systematic research into analysis of Russias images in foreign media discourses of different historical spans. The major objective is to compare Russias images and their emotional charge in the British media in chronologically divided periods of war and peace under the influence of changing historical and ideological factors. The authors account for the mechanisms by which Russias images are framed and transformed in the contexts of the largest war of the XX century and the information war of the XXI century. The material comprises 500 samples per period. The data covering two historical spans are investigated through a framing approach. The criteria for diachronic analysis are dominant diagnostic and prognostic frames, constituting the macroframe WAR. The significant difference in Russias images in war- and peacetime consists in their emotive load: Russias contemporary negative images are contrasted to positive images activated in the retrospective period. The findings support the idea that British media discourse focusing on Russia is subject-centered: Russias image is determined by the geopolitical situation, Great Britains political priorities and objectives, and the bilateral relationship between the countries. The results can be used to further develop the linguistic basics of war theory.

Metaphors across languages, cultures and discourses: A research agenda

“…Metaphor, as a powerful linguistic and persuasive tool, plays a multifaceted role in various types of discourse. In Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the examination of metaphor goes beyond its linguistic function to uncover deeper layers of meaning and ideology (Charteris-Black 2004, Martín de la Rosa 2023, Moody & Eslami 2020, Mussolf 2021, Solopova & Kushneruk 2021, Zappetini et al 2021, Zibin 2020. It reveals how metaphors are employed to construct and reinforce particular identities, beliefs, and social hierarchies.…”

“…Метафора, будучи широко востребованным средством убеждения, выполняет разнообразные функции в дискурсивных контекстах. В рамках критического дискурс-анализа акцентируется идеологическая функция метафоры: роль метафоры в конструировании идентичности, консолидации социальной солидарности или, напротив, интенсификации социального, этнического или иного неравенства, самопрезентации и формировании образа «другого» (Charteris-Black 2004, Martín de la Rosa 2023, Moody & Eslami 2020, Mussolf 2021, Solopova & Kushneruk 2021, Zappetini et al 2021, Zibin 2020. Учитывая метафоричность человеческого мышления, нельзя недооценивать «уместную и эффективную» метафору как механизм воздействия на адресата (Santa Ana 2002: 43): она преобразует существующую в сознании адресата картину мира, структурирует знания и создает новые смыслы, вызывает эмоции и оценки, часто предлагая альтернативный взгляд на явления окружающей действительности.…”

“…The interdisciplinary nature of metaphor research underscores its significance as a dynamic and ever-evolving field of study. Thus, it has produced a wide array of research that delves into the effect of culture on metaphor production and interpretation, the function of metaphor in different types of discourse, metaphorical conceptualization of emotions, metaphor uses and interpretation in multimodal texts, the role of metaphor in creating lexical relations, and many more (see Boutet et al 2016, Cienki & Müller 2008, Díaz-Vera & Caballero 2013, Leontovich, Kalinin & Ignatenko 2023, Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk 2021, Solopova & Kushneruk 2021, Trim 2015, Zykova 2023.…”

“…Важной особенностью метафорологии как динамичной и постоянно развивающейся области является ее междисциплинарный характер, что приводит к появлению ряда работ, проблематикой которых являются влияние культуры на производство и восприятие метафоры, функции метафоры в различных типах дискурса, концептуализация эмоций, использование и интерпретация метафоры в мультимодальном тексте, роль метафоризации в развитии лексико-семантической системы языка и др. (см Boutet et al 2016, Cienki & Müller 2008, Díaz-Vera & Caballero 2013, Kövecses 2000, Leontovich, Kalinin & Ignatenko 2023, Lewandowska- Tomaszczyk 2021, Solopova & Kushneruk 2021, Trim 2015, Zykova 2023…”

Metaphor power in the context of the author’s opinion expression and perception

“…Studies of metaphor are characterised by a considerable breadth of object and subject boundaries, which, according to Budaev and Chudinov, "reflects the ambiguity of solving the problem of metaphor in modern science" (Budaev & Chudinov 2006: 12). As it is known, metaphor, being one of the favourite topics of modern linguistic research, is considered as a means of 'ornamenting' speech (Cheremisova 2019), manifestation of dynamics in the sphere of lexical semantics a way of word formation (Gak et al 1988, Arutyunova 1990) a communicative phenomenon conditioned by context and author's intention (Searle 1979, Gibbs, Tendahl & Okonski 2011, a means of emotional and expressive influence (Teliya 1988, Solopova & Kushneruk 2021, and a mechanism of structuring, transforming and creating new knowledge (Lakoff & Johnson 2004, Turner & Fauconnier 2003. Philosophers have consistently argued about the mythological and symbolic nature of human thinking which have been formed into the theory of conceptual (cognitive) metaphor, according to which "our conceptual system is largely metaphoric, since the way we think, the things we learn from experience, and the things we do every day have the most direct relation to metaphor" (Lakoff & Johnson 2004: 25).…”