200 research outputs found
Climate change lifestyle narratives among Norwegian citizens: A linguistic analysis of survey discourse
Full text linkThe present study proposes an analysis of climate change (CC) narratives in answers to an open-ended survey question, where we ask what a climate-friendly lifestyle may imply. The representative survey has been conducted online by the Norwegian Citizen Panel/DIGSSCORE, located at the University of Bergen. The survey provided 1,149 answers from respondents across Norway. The analysis combines a lexical and a text linguistic approach (Fløttum & Gjerstad, 2017), based on Adam's (2008) analysis of the narrative text sequence (initial situation–complication–(re)action–resolution–final situation), and inspired by the Narrative Policy Framework's (NPF) notions of plot and narrative characters (Jones et al., 2014). Our analysis identified four main topics: consumption, transportation, politics, and energy, while the cast of characters is dominated by the first-person singular, frequently portrayed as hero, and the first-person plural in a predominantly villainous role. The frequent use of negation and argumentative connectives reflects the contentious nature of the issue
La polyphonie discursive: Pour un dialogisme ancré dans la langue et dans l’interaction
No full textThe aim of the present thesis is to develop a theoretical and methodological framework for the study of polyphony in discourse, and to apply it to the analysis of a speech by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to the European Parliament (EP). The Scandinavian theory of linguistic polyphony (ScaPoLine) describes the manner in which different linguistic markers – such as reported speech, epistemic modality, pragmatic connectives and negations – signal voices which do not correspond to that of the speaker at the time of utterance. When President Sarkozy says that “We must not be afraid of identities”, the negation signals that someone else has the opposite point of view. The identity of this individual or collective is not linguistically encoded, but might be inferred with the help of co(n)textual information. However, the presence of such voices does not depend on specific linguistic markers. Inspired by the philosophy of the Russian semiotician Mikhail Bakhtin, the linguistic theory of praxematics considers the presence of such voices to be a ubiquitous phenomenon. Discourse is fundamentally dialogical. No one speaks in complete isolation from what has been said before or without considering how the message will be received. The voice of “the other” is therefore present in any utterance, whether or not this presence is signalled by specific linguistic markers. The question is how this property of discourse can be theoretically described and systematically analysed. The ubiquitous nature of Bakhtin’s dialogism risks impeding its applicability. How can one analyse that which is everywhere? This theoretical problem can be resolved by delimiting a discursive polyphony, corresponding to the voices which occur as a function of the speaking subject’s communicative intention. Imagine telling an unsuspecting friend: “Your wife is faithful”. He would likely wonder who has said otherwise. There is an implicit voice which is not linguistically signalled but which appears in light of the utterance’s co(n)text. The theoretical discussion is followed by the development of a methodological framework for the analysis of discursive polyphony. The challenge is both to explain the interpretation of utterances containing polyphonic markers in co(n)text, as well as to account for possible polyphonic interpretations of utterances which do not contain such markers. The modular approach developed by the Geneva school of discourse analysis represents a systematic analytical tool, by treating discourse as a complex phenomenon which consists of several linguistic, textual and situational subsystems, or modules. In the analysis of discursive polyphony, the linguistic phase (based on the ScaPoLine) is coupled with the analysis of the relation between different parts of the text structure (e.g. argumentation or reformulation), as well as with situational parameters. This framework is applied to a segment of Sarkozy’s speech, in which he promotes a European identity while maintaining the need to preserve national identities. By doing so, he positions himself between federalist and nationalist voices in the EP, thereby striking a conciliatory note. He then says: “Human rights are part of the European identity”. Linguistically monophonic, the utterance gives rise to other voices in light of co(n)textual factors. In this case, Sarkozy is in opposition to a collective Euro-sceptic voice, while aligning himself with a federalist and interventionist voice. The notion of discursive polyphony can serve to describe how voices are mobilised and constructed strategically in verbal interactions, by means of both linguistic and discursive mechanisms
Diskursiv polyfoni: en dialogisme med forankring i språk og samhandling
No full textThe aim of the present thesis is to develop a theoretical and methodological framework for the study of polyphony in discourse, and to apply it to the analysis of a speech by French President Nicolas Sarkozy to the European Parliament (EP). The Scandinavian theory of linguistic polyphony (ScaPoLine) describes the manner in which different linguistic markers – such as reported speech, epistemic modality, pragmatic connectives and negations – signal voices which do not correspond to that of the speaker at the time of utterance. When President Sarkozy says that “We must not be afraid of identities”, the negation signals that someone else has the opposite point of view. The identity of this individual or collective is not linguistically encoded, but might be inferred with the help of co(n)textual information. However, the presence of such voices does not depend on specific linguistic markers. Inspired by the philosophy of the Russian semiotician Mikhail Bakhtin, the linguistic theory of praxematics considers the presence of such voices to be a ubiquitous phenomenon. Discourse is fundamentally dialogical. No one speaks in complete isolation from what has been said before or without considering how the message will be received. The voice of “the other” is therefore present in any utterance, whether or not this presence is signalled by specific linguistic markers. The question is how this property of discourse can be theoretically described and systematically analysed. The ubiquitous nature of Bakhtin’s dialogism risks impeding its applicability. How can one analyse that which is everywhere? This theoretical problem can be resolved by delimiting a discursive polyphony, corresponding to the voices which occur as a function of the speaking subject’s communicative intention. Imagine telling an unsuspecting friend: “Your wife is faithful”. He would likely wonder who has said otherwise. There is an implicit voice which is not linguistically signalled but which appears in light of the utterance’s co(n)text. The theoretical discussion is followed by the development of a methodological framework for the analysis of discursive polyphony. The challenge is both to explain the interpretation of utterances containing polyphonic markers in co(n)text, as well as to account for possible polyphonic interpretations of utterances which do not contain such markers. The modular approach developed by the Geneva school of discourse analysis represents a systematic analytical tool, by treating discourse as a complex phenomenon which consists of several linguistic, textual and situational subsystems, or modules. In the analysis of discursive polyphony, the linguistic phase (based on the ScaPoLine) is coupled with the analysis of the relation between different parts of the text structure (e.g. argumentation or reformulation), as well as with situational parameters. This framework is applied to a segment of Sarkozy’s speech, in which he promotes a European identity while maintaining the need to preserve national identities. By doing so, he positions himself between federalist and nationalist voices in the EP, thereby striking a conciliatory note. He then says: “Human rights are part of the European identity”. Linguistically monophonic, the utterance gives rise to other voices in light of co(n)textual factors. In this case, Sarkozy is in opposition to a collective Euro-sceptic voice, while aligning himself with a federalist and interventionist voice. The notion of discursive polyphony can serve to describe how voices are mobilised and constructed strategically in verbal interactions, by means of both linguistic and discursive mechanisms
The Polyphony of Politics: Finding Voices in French Political Discourse
No full textThis paper has been written with the dual aim of demonstrating the need for a systematic inclusion of contextual elements in the analysis of discourse, as well as the advantages of basing such an analysis on a theory of linguistic polyphony. By highlighting the danger of permitting models of context to rely on the social representations of the analyst, the paper calls for and proposes a set of methodic-theoretic principles to serve as a possible basis for future models for contextual reconstruction. These principles are then applied to the analysis of an op-ed by the French Socialist Party figure Laurent Fabius, written with the explicit purpose of obtaining a majority opposed to the European constitutional treaty in the referendum of May 2005. The theoretical tool of the analysis is the Scandinavian Theory of Linguistic Polyphony (the ScaPoLine), which serves to identify the presence of different points of view in one single utterance. The linguistic phenomena under analysis are primarily reported speech and concessive argumentative constructions. Demonstrating how Fabius relates his own points of view to those of others, the analysis aims to give insight into the manner in which he discursively constructs the political debate on the European Constitution
Le dialogue des récits climatiques : une analyse narrative et polyphonique
Full text linkCette contribution constitue la mise en œuvre d’une double perspective narrative et polyphonique, dans l’analyse de quatre déclarations à l’occasion de l’Assemblée générale de l’ONU en septembre 2018. Les discours analysés sont ceux des Seychelles, de Finlande, du Népal et du Nigéria. Dans ce contexte diplomatique, quels sont les ‘récits climatiques’ racontés, et de quelles manières se rencontrent-ils dans les déclarations des uns et des autres ? Ces rencontres sont-elles implicites ou explicites, convergentes ou divergentes ? En considérant la polyphonie non seulement comme la rencontre de ‘voix’ sur des contenus propositionnels précis, mais aussi comme une rencontre de récits, l’analyse vise à élargir la perspective de l’hétérogénéité énonciative en situant chaque occurrence dans un contexte discursif plus étendu. Autrement dit, dans une situation d’enjeux politiques, l’interprétation polyphonique de marqueurs comme la négation, les connecteurs (contre-)argumentatifs, la phrase clivée, le discours rapporté, et autres, peut se concevoir comme l’émergence ponctuelle d’un récit autre que celui du locuteur. L’analyse des quatre déclarations montre un dialogue entre chacun des locuteurs et des voix qui ne sont pas identifiées dans les textes, mais qui représentent toutes une attitude d’inertie et d’autosatisfaction concernant le problème du dérèglement climatique et les efforts nécessaires pour le combattre.This contribution brings a dual narrative and polyphonic approach to the analysis of four speeches at the UN General Assembly in September 2018. The speeches are those of the Seychelles, Finland, Nepal and Nigeria. In this diplomatic context, which ‘climate stories’ are being told, and in what manner do they encounter each other in the various speeches? Are these encounters implicit or explicit, and are the narratives convergent our divergent? By considering polyphony not only as a meeting of ‘voices’ within the confines of specific propositional content, but also as a meeting of narratives, the analysis aims to broaden the perspective of “multivoicedness” by situating each occurrence in a larger discursive context. In other words, in a situation of political stakes, the polyphonic interpretation of markers such as negation, (counter-)argumentative connectives, cleft sentences, reported speech, etc., could be conceived of as the a particular emergence of a narrative other than that of the speaker. The analysis of the four speeches shows a dialogue between each of the speakers and voices that are not identified in the texts but that represent an attitude of inertia and self-satisfaction regarding the problem of climate change and the necessary efforts to fight it
The Role of Social Justice and Poverty in South Africa’s National Climate Change Response White Paper
No full textStories about Climate Change in Political and Survey Discourse
No full textNarration as a fundamental activity practiced among human beings dates from long before writing was invented, and spread throughout many different civilisations. Within cultural and literary studies it underwent a renaissance through the work of the Russian folklorist and scholar Vladimir Propp, who analysed the basic plot components of Russian folk tales (published in Russia in 1928, translated to English in 1958, Morphology of the Folktale). Then, with the breakthrough of text linguistics, the narrative perspective entered forcefully into analyses of non-fictional texts (Wehrlich 1976, van Dijk 1980, Adam 1992). There have been many discussions about the number of components in the narrative structure, but there is currently a more or less clear consensus on the 5 component schema: initial situation, complication, reaction, resolution, final situation. The narrative structure has also entered non-linguistic fields, such as psychology and political science, and more particularly into climate change discourse, where even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has described its reports as “narratives”. With this as a backdrop, we will in the present contribution discuss the notion of narrative and its relevance in the analysis of climate change discourse within different genres, to show that despite their differences in both content and structure, there is a common climate change narrativity. The comparison involves two very distinct genres, the first of which is the political speech, exemplified by French President François Hollande’s prepared remarks at the climate change conference (COP21) in Paris in late 2015. The second genre has not yet received a label, but can be called “survey discourse”. This corresponds to answers to open-ended questions in a survey undertaken by the Norwegian Citizen Panel in 2015, where respondents answer freely in their own words the following question: “Concerning climate change, what do you think should be done?” The differences between the two genres are manifold. A political speech is carefully drafted by professionals and represents an institutional commitment by a leader. Survey answers are formulated by anonymous respondents who most often are not specialists in the field, and who in no way are bound by their statements. Despite these differences, our findings will show how these texts belonging to very different genres comprise a plot, and how different characters (heroes, victims, and villains) are integrated into the unfolding ‘story’, thus reflecting the socially pervasive nature of narratives.</jats:p
- …
