Cross-Cultural Communication
Current Discourse Space in Sino-American Economic News on “The Belt and Road”
Abstract
To unveil the covert relation between cognitive perceptions and language use, and to probe into the cognitive mechanism revealed by news discourses, the authors set out to analyze the economic news semantically and textually, in an attempt to grasp a preliminary picture of different cognitive patterns of the Chinese and Americans on “The Belt and Road” (B&R), drawing insights on how people from different cultural backgrounds interpret B&R and its promotion, based on the current discourse space (CDS) analysis. The findings show that the variation of CDS frame applied in both Chinese and American news reports exists in dynamic linguistic representations, which sheds light on the substantial roles that mass media plays in affecting news readers’ perceiving manners or cognitive patterns. The authors emphatically claim that the promotion of B&R still has a long way to go until it reaches the highland of positive and objective social cognitive perceptions embedded in people from various backgrounds. This research provides evidences to identify interdependencies between particular CDS models that allow inferences about the CDS frames of a certain situation evoked by the news agencies and their discourse writers from different cultural backgrounds and from different political stances.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Applegate, E. (2011). Journalism in the United States: Concepts and issues. New York: Scarecrow Press.
Augustyn, R. (2013). Discourse-driven meaning construction in neosemantic noun-to-verb conversions. Research in Language, 11(2), 141-161. doi:10.2478/v10015-012-0026-4.
Croft, W., & Cruse, D. A. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dirven, R., Wolf, H. G., & Polzenhagen, F. (2012). Cognitive linguistics and cultural studies -- The Oxford handbook of cognitive linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Fowler, R. (1991). Language in news: Discourse and ideology in the press. London: Routledge.
Fowler, R., Hodge, R., Kress, G., & Trew, T. (1979). Language and control. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Gao, L. (2009). The feasible analysis of frame theory and current discourse space on discourse coherence. Journal of Shanxi Coal-Mining Administrators College, 12(2), 76-77.
Given, L. M. (2008). The sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. London: Sage Publications.
He, X. Q. (2009). A reflection on discourse theory in cognitive grammar. Shangdong Foreign Language Teaching Journal, 30(3), 10-16.
Huang, G. W. (2001). The outline of functional discourse analysis. Foreign Languages and Teaching, (12), 1-4.
Huang, G. W. (2002). An interpersonal analysis of Du Mu’s “Qingming” and its translated versions. Foreign Languages and Teaching, 23(3), 34-38.
Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the mind: The Bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Kerlinger, F. (1986). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Kövecses, Z., & Radden, G. (1998). Metonymy: Developing a cognitive linguistic view. Cognitive Linguistics, 9, 37-77. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1998.9.1.37.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R. (2001). Discourse in cognitive grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 12(2), 143-188. doi: 10.1515/cogl.12.2.143.
Langacker, R. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Liu, L. H. (2012). Discourse and manipulation: Stories about China in the New York times. Language & Communication, 32, 249-256. doi: 10.1016/j.langcom.2012.04.002.
Mashak, S. P., Pazhakh, A., & Hayati, A. (2012). A comparative study on basic emotion conceptual metaphors in English and Persian literary texts. International Education Studies, 5(1), 200-207. doi:10.5539/ies.v5n1p200.
Shoemaker, P. J., & Reese, S. (1996). Mediating the message: Theories of influences on mass media content. New York: Longman.
Talmy, L. (1988). Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12(1), 49-100. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1201_2.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Handbook of discourse analysis. London: Academic Press.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and context: A sociocognitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wodak, R. (1995). Critical linguistics and critical discourse analysis: Language and ideology. Antwerp: International Pragmatics Association.
Yang, W. H., Liang, Q. C., & Zhen, K. Y. (2016). A discourse study of cognitive frame construction of ‘China’ in American economic news. English Language Teaching, 5(4), 7-24.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/10686
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2019 Wenhui YANG
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Share us to: 
Remind
We are currently accepting submissions via email only.
The registration and online submission functions have been disabled.
Please send your manuscripts to ccc@cscanada.net，or ccc@cscanada.org for consideration. We look forward to receiving your work.
Articles published in Cross-Cultural Communication are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).
CROSS-CULTURAL COMMUNICATION Editorial Office
Address: 1055 Rue Lucien-L'Allier, Unit #772, Montreal, QC H3G 3C4, Canada.
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org
E-mail:caooc@hotmail.com; office@cscanada.net
Copyright © Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture 
