Cover not available
Part of
The Language of Crisis: Metaphors, frames and discourses
Edited by Mimi Huang and Lise-Lotte Holmgreen
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 87] 2020
► pp. 1–20

Introduction

Constructing and communicating crisis discourse from cognitive, discursive and sociocultural perspectives

Article outline
  • 1.Aims and contributions of the volume
  • 2.An overview of crisis and crisis management studies
  • 3.To study the language of crisis with a discourse and cognitive-based approach
    • 3.1Analysing the discursive aspects within crisis-related discourse
    • 3.2Exploring conceptual metaphors and frames with a discourse and cognitive-based approach
  • 4.The volume’s contributions to the studies of metaphors and frames in crisis discourse
  • 5.Overview of individual chapters’ original research and findings
  • 6.Scope and interest of the volume
  • References
Published online: 16 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.87.00hua
References (57)
References
Bailey, David J., Mònica Clua-Losada, Nikolai Huke, Olatz Ribera-Almandoz, and Kelly Rogers. 2016. “Challenging the Age of Austerity: Disruptive Agency after the Global Economic Crisis.” Comparative European Politics 20 (5):725–751.Google Scholar
Baxter, Judith. 2010. “Discourse-Analytic Approaches to Text and Talk.” In Research Methods in Linguistics, edited by Lia Litosseliti, 117–137. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Bendle, Mervyn F. 2002. “The Crisis of ‘Identity’ in High Modernity.” The British Journal of Sociology 53 (1):1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berger, Peter, and Thomas Luckmann. 1967. The Social Construction of Reality. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K., John Flowerdew, and Rodney H. Jones. 2008. Advances in Discourse Studies. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bloch, Olga. 2014. Corporate Identity and Crisis Response Strategies. New York: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boin, Arjen, Magnus Ekengren, and Mark Rhinard. 2010. “The Study of Crisis Management.” In The Routledge Handbook of Security Studies, edited by Cavelty Myriam Dunn and Victor Mauer, 452–462. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, Lynne, and Alice Deignan. 2006. “The Emergence of Metaphor in Discourse.” Applied Linguistics 27:671–90. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chalozin-Dovrat, Lin. 2013. “‘Crisis’ in Modernity: A Sign of the Times between Decisive Change and Potential Irreversibility.” In Discourse and Crisis: Critical Perspectives, edited by Antoon De Rycker and Zuraidah Mohd Don, 67–97. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2004. Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chilton, Paul. 2004. Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comfort, Louise K. 2007. “Crisis management in Hindsight: Cognition, Communication, Coordination, and Control.” Public Administration Review 67 (1):189–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coombs, W. Timothy, and Sherry J. Holladay. 2010. The Handbook of Crisis Communication. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dabrowska, Ewa, and Dagmar Divjak (eds.). 2015. Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science. Berlin; Boston: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara, Jose Sanders, and Lieven Vandelanotte. 2012. Textual Choices in Discourse: A View from Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Rycker, Antoon, and Zuraidah Mohd Don (eds.). 2013. Discourse and Crisis: Critical Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Vreese, Claes, H. 2005. “News Framing: Theory and Typology.” Information and Design Journal 13 (1):51–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Derrida, Jacques. 1978. Writing and Difference. Translated by A Bass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun 1995. “Aims of Critical Discourse Analysis.” Japanese Discourse 1:17-27.Google Scholar
Ensink, Titus, and Christoph Sauer. 2003. Framing and Perspectivising in Discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Entman, Robert M. 1993. “Framing: Toward a Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 41:6–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman, Guiseppina Cortese, and Patrizia Ardizzone. 2007. Discourse and Contemporary Social Change. Oxford: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, Norman 2010. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1975. “An Alternative to Checklist Theories of Meaning.” In Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 123–31. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John (ed.). 2014. Discourse in Context. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, and Hubert Cuyckens, eds. 2007. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Cognitive linguistics. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goffmann, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Marquez, Monica. 2007. Methods in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hallahan, Kirk. 1999. “Seven Models of Framing: Implications for Public Relations.” Journal of Public Relations Research 11 (3):205–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harder, Peter. 2010. Meaning in Mind and Society: A Functional Contribution to the Social Turn in Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin; New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hart, Christopher (ed.). 2011. Critical Discourse Studies in Context and Cognition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hearit, Keith, and Jeffrey Courtright. 2003. “A Social Constructionist Approach to Crisis Management: Allegations of Sudden Acceleration in the Audi 5000.” Communication Studies 54 (1):79–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heath, Robert L., and H. Dan O’Hair (eds.). 2009. Handbook of Risk and Crisis Communication. New York & London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Holmgreen, Lise-Lotte. 2015. “‘Why Am I to Blame When the Law is on My Side?’: A Study of Crises, Public Opinion and Frames.” On the Horizon 23 (4):363–73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janssen, Theodorus, Albertus Johannes Maria, and Gisela Redeker. 1999. Cognitive Linguistics, Foundations, Scope, and Methodology. Berlin; New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Zoltán. 2015. Where Metaphors Come From: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson. 1999. Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
. 2003. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, Ill.; London: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liebert, Wolf-Andreas, Gisela Redeker, and Linda R. Waugh (eds.). 1997. Discourse and Perspective in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minsky, Marvin. 1979. “The Society Theory of Thinking.” In Artificial Intelligence, an MIT Perspective, edited by Patrick Henry Winston and Richard H. Brown, 421–450. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Musolff, Andreas. 2004. Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. London: Palgrave Macmilan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. “Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse.” Metaphor and Symbol 21:23–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paltridge, Brian, and Ken Hyland. 2011. Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Potter, Jonathan. 1996. Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage Publications. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosenthal, Uriel, Arjen Boin, and Louise K. Comfort, eds. 2001. Managing Crises: Threats, Dilemmas, Opportunities. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, Uriel, Michael T. Charles, Paul Hart, T., Alexander Kouzmin, and Alan Jarman. 1989. “From Case Studies to Theory and Recommendations: A Concluding Analysis.” In Coping with Crisis, edited by Uriel Rosenthal, Michael Charles and Paul Hart, 436–472. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publishers.Google Scholar
Semino, Elena, Zsófia Demjén, and Jane Demmen. 2016. “An Integrated Approach to Metaphor and Framing in Cognition, Discourse and Practice, with an Application to Metaphors for Cancer.” Applied Linguistics:1–22.Google Scholar
Semino, Elena, Zsófia Demjén, Jane Demmen, Veronika Koller, Sheila Payne, Andrew Hardie, and Paul Rayson. 2017. “The Online Use of Violence and Journey Metaphors by Patients with Cancer, as Compared with Health Professionals: A Mixed Methods Study.” BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care 7:60–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shank, J. 2008. “Crisis: A Useful Category of Post-Social Scientific Historical Analysis?” The American Historical Review 113 (4):1090–1099. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soares da Silva, Augusto. 2016. “The Persuasive (and Manipulative) Power of Metaphor in ‘Austerity’ Discourse: A Corpus-based Analysis of Embodied and Moral Metaphors of Austerity in the Portuguese Press.” In Exploring Discourse Strategies in Socio-Cognitive Interaction: A Multimodal and Cross-Linguistic Approach edited by Manuela Romano and Maria Dolores Porto, 79–108. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Karen. 2013. Frames and Constructions in Metaphoric Language. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 1993. Framing in Discourse. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, Andrea, Yiyoung Kim, and Mari Takada. 2008. Language in the Context of Use: Discourse and Cognitive Approaches to Language. Berlin; New York: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, Rongpei, Shunde Men, Tailin Wang, Jiang Liu, Jianhua Song, and Xueqing Zheng (eds.). 2015. Xinhua Dictionary (Chinese-English Edition). 3rd ed. Beijing: The Commercial Press.Google Scholar
Wrenn, Mary, V. 2014. “Agency, Identity, and the Great Crisis: A Veblenian Perspective.” Journal of Economic Issues 46 (2):403–410. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weiss, Gilbert, and Ruth Wodak 2003. Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Paul A. Chilton 2005. A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Interdisciplinarity. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Constantinescu, Mihaela-Viorica
2023. Humorous Approaches to Environmental Issues. Półrocznik Językoznawczy Tertium 8:1 ► pp. 183 ff. DOI logo
Vainik, Ene & Geda Paulsen
2023. Values behind Metaphors. Półrocznik Językoznawczy Tertium 8:1 ► pp. 22 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 june 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.