Immigration Discourse in the British Press: Peculiarities of Construction
https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2019-21-1-248-257
Abstract
The present research features immigration discourse published in the Daily Mail. The author believes immigration discourse to be a consequence of the so-called Arab Spring of 2011. The paper describes some peculiarities of the discourse related to the events of 2011, its semantic indicators, and some particular examples. According to the critical discourse analysis, discourse is a form of social interaction, which makes it possible to clarify how ideology sets the formatting rules of discourse and determines its content. The relevance of the study is due to the growing scientific interest to the phenomenon of political discourse and its various aspects. The research revealed non-politicized terminology that represents immigrants as helpless, desperate victims, who are described with the help of "humanitarian" concepts when it goes about immigration control measures. However, the humanization and victimization of immigrants act as a justification for the measures taken to combat "illegal" immigration and the "humanitarian rescue" of citizens in danger.
About the Author
M. S. Matytsina
Lipetsk State Technical University
Russian Federation
30, Moskovskaya St., Lipetsk, Russia, 398600
Russian Federation
30, Moskovskaya St., Lipetsk, Russia, 398600
References
1. Van Dijk T. A. Racism and discourse in Spain and Latin America. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2005, 198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.14
2. Van der Valk I. Parliamentary discourse on immigration and nationality in France. Racism at the top: parliamentary discourses on ethnic issues in six European states, eds. Wodak R., Van Dijk T. A. Klagenfurt: DRAVA-Verlag, 2000: 221–260.
3. Baker P., McEnery T. A corpus-based approach to discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in UN and newspaper texts. Journal of Language and Politics, 2005, 4(2): 197–226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.4.2.04bak
4. Zuparic-Iljic D., Kuti S., Gregurović M. Attitudes towards Immigrant Workers and Asylum Seekers in Eastern Croatia: Dimensions, Determinants and Differences. Migracijske i etničke teme, 2016, (1): 91–122. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11567/met.32.1.4
5. Zapata-Barrero R., Van Dijk T. A. (eds) Discursos sobre la inmigración en España: los medios de comunicación, los parlamentos y las administraciones. Barcelona, Spain: Fundación CIDOB, 2007, 272.
6. Zapata-Barrero R., Caponio T., Scholten P. Theorizing the "local turn" in a multi-level governance framework of analysis: a case study in immigrant policies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 2017, 83(2): 241–246. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852316688426
7. KhosraviNik M. Immigration Discourses and Critical Discourse Analysis: Dynamics of World Events and Immigration Representations in the British Press. Contemporary Critical Discourse Studies, eds. Hart C., Cap P. London; N. Y.: Bloomsbury Academic, 2014, 501–519.
8. Malmqvist K. Satire, racist humour and the power of (un)laughter: On the restrained nature of Swedish online racist discourse targeting EU-migrants begging for money. Discourse & Society, 2015, 26(6): 733–753. DOI: https://doi.
9. org/10.1177/0957926515611792
10. McGlashan M. The Branding of European Nationalism: perpetuation and novelty in racist symbolism. Analysing Fascist Discourse: European Fascism in Talk and Text, eds. Wodak R., Richardson J. E. London: Routledge, 2013, 297–314.
11. Musolff A. The heart of Europe: Synchronic variation and historical trajectories of a political metaphor. Speaking of Europe, ed. Flottum K. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2013, 135–150. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.49.07mus
12. Mellouki S. The infusion of Islam into pluralistic politics: The need to explore the Islamist identity beyond ideological boundaries – The case of the Moroccan Party of Justice and Development. Discourse & Society, 2015, 26(6): 662–681. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926515592778
13. Strom M. Intersemiotic relationships in Spanish-language media in the United States: A critical analysis of the representation of ideology across verbal and visual modes. Discourse & Communication, 2015, 9(4): 487–508. DOI: https://doi.
14. org/10.1177/1750481315576838
15. Toft A. Contesting the deviant other: Discursive strategies for the production of homeless subjectivities. Discourse & Society, 2014, 25(6): 783–809. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926514536839
16. Guzman A. L. Evolution of News Frames During the 2011 Egyptian Revolution: Critical Discourse Analysis of Fox News’s and CNN’s Framing of Protesters, Mubarak, and the Muslim Brotherhood. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 2016, 93(1): 80–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015606677
17. Sheygal E. I. Semiotics of political discourse. Moscow: Gnozis, 2004, 326. (In Russ.)
18. Chernyavskaya V. E. Text linguistics: Poly-codedness, intertextuality, interdiscursiveness. Moscow: Librokom, 2009, 248. (In Russ.)
19. Karasik V. I. Institutional Discourse Structure. Speech communication issues. Saratov: Izd-vo Saratovskogo universiteta, 2000, 25–33. (In Russ.)
20. Karasik V. I. Adresata specialization in public political discourse. Bulletin of Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Theory of language. Semiotics. Semantics, 2018, 9(1): 32–49. (In Russ.) DOI: DOI: https://doi.org/10.22363/2313-2299-2018-9-1-32-49
21. Chernyavskaya V. E. Discourse of power and power of discourse: problems of speech influence. Moscow: Flinta, 2006, 130. (In Russ.)
22. Balashova L. V. Implementation of the concepts of "friend or foe" in Russian political discourse in the beginning of XXI century. Political Linguistics, 2014, (1): 40–50. (In Russ.)
23. Fairclough N., Mulderrig J., Wodak R. Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse Studies. A multidisciplinary Introduction, ed. Van Dijk T. A. London: Sage, 2011, 357–378.
24. Fairclough N. Language and Power. 3rd ed. London: Routledge, 2015, 264.
25. Wodak R., Meyer M. Critical discourse analysis: history, agenda, theory and methodology. Methods of critical discourse analysis, eds. Wodak R., Meyer M. 2nd ed. London: Sage, 2009, 204.
26. Van Dijk T. A. Critical Discourse Analysis (new version). Handbook of Discourse Analysis. eds. Tannen D., Hamilton H., Schiffrin D. 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2015, vol. 1, 466–485.
27. Laclau E., Mouffe C. Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso, 1985, xix, 195.
28. Van Leeuwen T. Three models of interdisciplinarity. A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis: Theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity, eds. Wodak R., Chilton P. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2005. P. 3–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.13.04lee
29. Van Dejk T. A. Discourse and power. Representation of dominance in language and communication. Moscow: Librokom, 2013, 344. (In Russ.)
30. Matytsina M.S. Critical discourse analysis as the methodology of immigration discourse. Vestnik Samarskogo universiteta. Istoriia, pedagogika, filologiia, 2017, 23(2): 121–125. (In Russ.)
31. Fairclough N. Language and power. N. Y.: Longman Inc., 1989, 259.
32. Fairclough N. Analysing Discourse. Textual analysis for social research. N. Y.: Routledge, 2003, 270.
33. Fowler R. Language in the news: discourse and ideology in the press. N. Y.: Routledge, 1991, 254.
34. Neal A. Securitization and risk at the EU border: the origins of FRONTEX. Journal of Common Market Studies, 2009, 47(2): 333–356.
Review
For citations:
Matytsina M.S. Immigration Discourse in the British Press: Peculiarities of Construction. The Bulletin of Kemerovo State University. 2019;21(1):248-257. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2078-8975-2019-21-1-248-257
Views:
627
Email this article 