A Contrastive Critical Cognitive Study Of The Framing Strategies In The Sino-US Mainstream Media Discourse Of The South China Sea Issue

Critical discourse analysis(CDA)is one of the main perspectives on the research into political discourse.Although van Dijk adopts a sociocognitve approach to critical discourse studies,in the mainstream studies of critical discourse analysis,the cognitive perspective on discourse analysis has not attained the adequate attention it deserves.Cognitive linguistics can offer a more detailed framework for political discourse analysis.Previous studies used to draw on one single cognitive linguistic theory to analyze the ideologies in political discourse and the critical cognitive studies which integrate different cognitive perspectives for a comprehensive exploration of political discourse are rarities.Frames are "the mental structures that allow human beings to understand reality—and sometimes to create what we take to be reality"(Lakoff 2006a:25).Framing is about "getting language that fits your worldview"(Lakoff 2004:4)and "how to conceptualize a situation"(Lakoff 2008:25).To put it simply,framing is the language strategy of using the language that fits one's worldview to construct certain realities.Conceptual metaphor can be viewed as the mapping from one frame to the other;frame blending is a mental operation of blending two or more input frames into a blended frame(Turner 2008);discourse space is typically structured by frames.Framing,conceptual metaphors,frame blending and discourse space are in line with each other on the fact that discourse producers construct political realities on the basis of their own values and potential intentions,and thus conceptual metaphors,frame blending and discourse space could be the strategies by which political actors frame realities and demonstrate their ideologies.Framing,conceptual metaphors,frame blending and discourse space are complementary to each other in the analysis of the framing strategies in political discourse.Scholars home and abroad mainly study the South China Sea issue from the perspective of political science,and the linguistic research into the issue is still in its infancy stage.The existing studies focus on the contrast among the media in China,America and the Philippines in reporting the South China Sea issue.The critical research into the issue from the perspectives of cognition and receivers remains to be conducted in depth and the critical research adopting various cognitive theoretical perspectives appears to be even scarcer.In view of this,the present study aims to integrate Framing Theory with Critical Metaphor Analysis,Conceptual Integration Theory and Discourse Space Theory and make a contrastive critical cognitive study of the framing strategies in the Sino-US mainstream media discourse of the South China Sea issue,explaining the underlying intentions and ideologies in the discourse in combination with the specific sociohistorical contexts from the perspective of receiver interpretation and exploring the discursive strategies of legitimizing and the cognitive process in which the receivers are manipulated by the frames/framing in the discourse to construct the political realities the discourse producers expect.Taking the editorials,commentaries and reports on the American military operations in the South China Sea and the gaming between China and America on the issue of the South China Sea from the official websites of New York Times,Washington Post,People's Daily and Global Times between January 2011 and June 2018 as its corpora,the present study selects 122 articles from the America media of which the total number of words is 95,884 and 126 articles from the Chinese media of which the total number of words is 162,311.The selection of the data is based on two criteria:the content is about the American military operations in the South China Sea and the Sino-US gaming on the South China Sea issue;when the content criterion is met,the priorities in data selection go to editorials,then commentaries and then reports.The research questions of this dissertation are as follows:(1)What kinds of cognitive strategies of conceptual metaphors are used in the American and Chinese media to frame the political realities of the American military operations in the South China Sea and the political gaming between China and America on the South China Sea issue?What are their similarities and differences?What are the reasons for these similarities and differences?(2)What kinds of cognitive strategies of conceptual integration are used in the American and Chinese media to frame the political realities of the American military operations in the South China Sea and the political gaming between China and America on the South China Sea issue?What are their similarities and differences?What are the reasons for these similarities and differences?(3)What kinds of cognitive strategies of discourse spaces are used in the American and Chinese media to frame the political realities of the American military operations in the South China Sea?What are their similarities and differences?What are the reasons for these similarities and differences?The present study identifies the metaphor-related words through MIPVU proposed by Steen et al.(2010),uses AntConc 3.4.4 to search and count the metaphor-related words and then selects the metaphor-related words with higher frequencies to induce conceptual metaphors.The dissertation makes a contrastive critical cognitive study of the framing strategies of conceptual metaphors,conceptual integration and discourse space in the Sino-US discourse of the South China Sea issue from the aspects of discourse,discursive practice and social practice and draws the following conclusions:(1)The American discourse uses 12 conceptual metaphors such as CREATIING ISLANDS/CONTAINING CHINA IS A MARCH and CHINESE SOVEREIGNTY CLAIMING IS BUILDING ACTIVITIES and 7 metaphorical frames of "march,war,human,drama,building,commerce and game" to construct the political realities of the American military actions and the political gaming between China and America,with the purpose of legitimizing the American provocative military actions against China and manipulating international audience.The Chinese media uses 20 conceptual metaphors such as AMERICAN MILITARY ACTIONS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA IS A MARCH/WAR/PLAYING WITH FIRE/FRAUDULENT ACTIVITIES/PERFORMING,THE GAMING BETWEEN CHINA AND AMERICA OVER THE SOUGH CHINA SEA ISSUE IS A CONTEST/WRESTLING/MARTIAL ART COMPETITION,THE SITUATION IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA IS WEATHER and 14 metaphorical frames of "march,human,war,drama,game,commerce,contest,playing with fire,wrestling,weather,fraud,martial art,performance and building" to restore the truth of the American military actions and the political gaming between China and America.In the process of constructing the political realities of the American military actions and the Sino-US political gaming over the South China Sea issue,the Chinese and American media both use the conceptual metaphors of AMERICAN MILITARY ACTIONS IN THE SOUTH CHINA SEA IS ACTING,THE SINO-US POLITICAL GAMING OVER THE SOUTH CHINA SEA ISSUE IS WAR/ACTING/COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES/A GAME,THE SINO-US RELATION IS A MARCH/BUILDING,STATE IS A PERSON and THE AMERICAN ASIA-PACIFIC POLICY IS BUILDING and the metaphorical frames of "march,drama,war,human,commerce,game and building".Although the Chinese and American discourses use the same conceptual metaphors,their choices of metaphorical words and phrases are usually different,thus constructing different political realities.Even though they use the same conceptual metaphor and the same metaphorical word in that conceptual metaphor,the realities constructed are still different.The Chinese and American discourses use the same metaphorical frames and metaphorical words,but those frames and words express the different discourse content and highlight the different realities.The ultimate causes for the differences in the use of conceptual metaphors,metaphorical frames and metaphorical words and expressions between the American and Chinese discourses are:Sticking to a uni-polar world view,America spares no efforts to maintain its global hegemony and hold the rising China in check;Upholding the idea of harmony and cooperation,China is committed to cooperation,win-win and peaceful development,and China will never seek hegemony.(2)The American discourse adopts the discursive strategy of "positive self-presentation" and"negative other-presentation",applies the mental operations of frame blending and uses novel metaphors of "Great Wall of sand","sand castle","the massive fortress in the middle of the South China Sea","China is digging in","build sovereignty","The South China Sea will be virtually a Chinese lake","...the two nations falling into the Thucydides Trap" and "a benign hegemon" to criticize China's construction and defense on South China Sea islands within the scope of Chinese sovereignty,boast its impact on the Sino-US relations,and project America as a "benign hegemon",constructing the political realities of the American military actions and the Sino-US gaming on the South China Sea issue to manipulate the international audience.The Chinese discourse uses novel metaphors and imageable idioms like "The provocation of US vessels is streaking on the South China Sea","Defending the absolute security of one's own is hitting a wall","Deliberate trouble-making in the South China Sea is shooting oneself in the foot","American provocation is a thief yelling 'stop thief'","American reckless actions cannot enhance its sense of existence in Asia-Pacific","South China Sea is not the right place for America to put an armchair and sit in","China should be good at playing Tai Chi with America in the South China Sea","The situation in the South China Sea is just like a tree may crave calm,but the wind will not drop" to disclose the truth and the nature of American military actions and Sino-US gaming in the South China Sea.The overall frequency of the novel metaphors the American and Chinese media use is the same,but the novel metaphors themselves in the Chinese and American discourses are different:Being blind to the historical facts that China has sovereignty over the South China Sea islands,the American discourse focuses on emphasizing the reasons for American military actions so as to exaggerate the idea of "China Threat" and legitimize America's infringement on China's sovereignty and maritime rights;The Chinese discourse focuses on the issue-defining of American military actions themselves so as to disclose the nature and restore the truth of American vessels and fighters defying and deterring China's South China Sea islands.The fundamental causes for the differences in the use of frame blending and novel metaphors between American and Chinese media are:Clinging to cold war and zero-sum ideology,America does its utmost to contain the rising of China so as to maintain its status as a hegemon in Asia and Pacific;Believing that peace and harmony is everything,China advocates cooperation and win-win in its relations with other countries in the world,but it will never make deals with others at the expense of its sovereignty and core interests.(3)Based on a general discursive manipulation strategy of "positive self-presentation" and"negative other-presentation",the American discourse launches a moral criticism against China through the use of propaganda like "freedom of navigation is a vital national interest of America and the right recognized under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea","American patrols are to exercise the right to freedom of navigation in international waters,and undertake the responsibilities of defending freedom of navigation and overflight in the South China Sea","China's territorial claims to the South China Sea are illegal and excessive","China's‘nine-dash line' map is sketchy,vaguely drawn and slapdash","Chinese massive and provocative effort to build up islands is killing marine organism and violating the feng shui of Southeast Asia","China is‘using its muscle'to bully smaller nations" and "America demands justice for the weak and small nations" so as to manipulate the audience and guide them to construct the expected discourse spaces and discourse worlds.Based on the historical facts of the South China Sea issue,the system of freedom of navigation under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,the practical situations of navigation in the South China Sea and the facts of American strategic plans against China,the Chinese discourse uses the reframes of "American patrols defy Chinese sovereignty and security and violate international law","Freedom of navigation is a pseudo-proposition","American freedom of navigation is the freedom of being on a rampage","China's sovereignty over the islands has solid historical and legal basis","Chinese construction in the South China Sea is justified and legal,and is the undertaking of a responsible power","America implements the strategy of 'Rebalance in Asia and Pacific' through the military actions in the South China Sea","The Philippines and Vietnam invade and occupy Chinese islands and claim sovereignty illegally" and "China was forced to defend its maritime rights peacefully",restoring the truth of American military actions in the South China Sea.The American and Chinese discourse are in sharp contrast with each other in the use of concrete frames,but they both frame the American military actions on the basis of the moral values of their respective audience to arouse their emotional resonance,and guide them to construct the expected discourse spaces and discourse worlds.The primary causes for the differences in the use of frames in the discourse space strategy between the American and Chinese discourse are:Influenced by liberalism and American Exceptionalism,America is given to implementing overseas interference in the name of freedom,exceeding international law and making moral judgements about other countries;under the influence of Harmonious Culture,the Chinese nation believes in "Do as you would be done by"and will never make concessions on its sovereignty and core interests.The research conducted in the dissertation bears important theoretical,methodological and pedagogical implications for the research in relevant fields.