Home Linguistics & Semiotics “Occupy Central” and the rise of discursive illusions: a discourse analytical study
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

“Occupy Central” and the rise of discursive illusions: a discourse analytical study

  • Aditi Bhatia

    Aditi Bhatia received her PhD in Linguistics from Macquarie University and is currently Associate Professor at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Her research interests include discourse analysis, with particular reference to the study of political and public discourses. Her most recent book-length publication is Discursive Illusions in Public Discourse: Theory and Practice (2015, Routledge).

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: September 20, 2016

Abstract

Drawing on Hong Kong’s “Occupy Central” movement, this paper explores the construction of discursive illusions in both China Daily and South China Morning Post’s (SCMP) contrasting coverage of the event. More specifically, the paper investigates how a multi-perspective analytical approach can enable a deeper study of how and to what extent abstract constructs with significant social implications are discursively formed. In order to do so, the framework draws on a three-pronged approach: historicity (habitus as key to the creation of discursive illusions, dealing with the change of perceptions over time); linguistic and semiotic action (subjective conceptualizations of the world to give rise to linguistic and semiotic actions, often through metaphorical and dominant rhetoric); and the degree of social impact (as language and actions engender many categories and stereotypes). The analysis reveals that data from both newspapers draws on similar linguistic and rhetorical tools, including temporal referencing, metaphor, category-pairings, and recontextualization in the discursive construction of a “double contrastive identity” (Leudar et al. [2004], On membership categorization: “Us”, “them” and “doing violence” in political discourse. Discourse & Society 15(2/3). 243–266.) of the movement and its participants in diametrically opposed ways around themes such as law versus lawlessness, victim versus aggressor, etc.

About the author

Aditi Bhatia

Aditi Bhatia received her PhD in Linguistics from Macquarie University and is currently Associate Professor at The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Her research interests include discourse analysis, with particular reference to the study of political and public discourses. Her most recent book-length publication is Discursive Illusions in Public Discourse: Theory and Practice (2015, Routledge).

References

Atkinson, Maxwell J. 1984. Our masters’ voices: The language and body language of politics. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Baev Pavel, K. 2010. Re-examining the ‘Colour Revolutions’: The turn of the tide from Belgrade to Ulan Bator’. In Kristian Berg Harpviken (ed.), Troubled regions and failing states: The clustering and contagion of armed conflicts, 249–272. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.10.1108/S0195-6310(2010)0000027014Search in Google Scholar

Berger, Peter L. & Thomas Luckmann. 1966. The social construction of reality. London: Penguin Books.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatia, Aditi. 2008. Discursive illusions in the American national strategy for combating terrorism. Journal of Language and Politics 7(2). 201–227.10.1075/jlp.7.2.02bhaSearch in Google Scholar

Bhatia, Aditi. 2015a. Discursive illusions in public discourse: Theory and practice. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315776903Search in Google Scholar

Bhatia, Aditi. 2015b. in press. Construction of discursive illusions in the umbrella movement. Discourse & Society 28(4). 407–427.10.1177/0957926515576635Search in Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1990. The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.10.1515/9781503621749Search in Google Scholar

Cameron, Lynn. 1999. Operationalising ‘metaphor’ for applied linguistics research’. In Lynn Cameron & G. Low (eds.), Researching and applying metaphor, 3–28. UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.10.1017/CBO9781139524704.004Search in Google Scholar

Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2004. Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230000612Search in Google Scholar

Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2005. Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of m metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230501706Search in Google Scholar

Cissel, Margaret. 2012. Media framing: A comparative content analysis on mainstream and alternative news coverage of Occupy Wall Street. The Elton Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications 3(1). 67–77.Search in Google Scholar

Collins, John & Ross Glover (eds.). 2002. Collateral language: A user’s guide to America’s new war. New York: New York University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Dirlik, Arif. 2014. The mouse that roared: The democratic movement in Hong Kong. http://boundary2.org/2014/10/29/the-mouse-that-roared-the-democratic-movement-in-hong-kong-2/ (accessed 15 January 2015).Search in Google Scholar

Erjavec, Karmen & Zala Volcic. 2007. ‘War on terrorism’ as a discursive battleground: Serbian recontextualization of G.W. Bush’s discourse. Discourse & Society 18(2). 123–137.10.1177/0957926507073370Search in Google Scholar

Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203697078Search in Google Scholar

Foucault, Michel. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge & the discourse on language. London: Tavistock.Search in Google Scholar

Gal, Susan & J.T. Irvine. 1995. The boundaries of language and disciplines: How ideologies construct difference. Social Research 62(4). 967–1001.Search in Google Scholar

Graham, Phil, Thomas Keenan & Anne-Maree Dowd. 2004. A call to arms at the end of history: A discourse–historical analysis of George W. Bush’s declaration of war on terror. Discourse & Society 15(2–3). 199–221.10.1177/0957926504041017Search in Google Scholar

Jayyusi, Lena. 1984. Categorization and the moral order. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Search in Google Scholar

Kant, Immanuel. 1970. The active mind: The judgements of experience. In E. Kuykendall (ed.), Philosophy in the age of crisis, 346–355. New York: Harper & Row.Search in Google Scholar

Kress, Gunther. 1983. Linguistic processes and the mediation of “reality”: The politics of newspaper language. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 40. 43–57.10.1515/ijsl.1983.40.43Search in Google Scholar

Lazar, Anita & Michelle M. Lazar. 2004. The discourse of the new world order: ‘Out-casting’ the double face of threat’. Discourse & Society 15(2–3). 223–242.10.1177/0957926504041018Search in Google Scholar

Leudar, Ivan & Nekvapil Jiri. 2011. Practical historians and adversaries: 9/11 revisited. Discourse & Society 22(1). 66–85.10.1177/0957926510382840Search in Google Scholar

Leudar, Ivan, Victoria Marsland & Jiri Nekvapil. 2004. On membership categorization: ‘Us’, ‘them’ and ‘doing violence’ in political discourse. Discourse & Society 15(2–3). 243–266.10.1177/0957926504041019Search in Google Scholar

Oktar, Lutfiye. 2001. The ideological organization of representational processes in the presentation of us and them’. Discourse & Society 12(3). 313–346.10.1177/0957926501012003003Search in Google Scholar

Partridge, Samuel. 2012. The end of the South China Morning Post and legitimate investigative journalism in South Asia. http://www.freedomobservatory.org/access-to-truth-surfeit-of-inquiry/ (accessed 28 December 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Russell, Peter. 2002 [2003]. From science to God: The mystery of consciousness and the meaning of light. http://www.peterussell.com/SG/contents.html (accessed 5 March 2006).Search in Google Scholar

Sarangi, Srikant. 1998. Rethinking recontextualisation in professional discourse studies. TEXT 18(2). 301–318.10.1515/text.1.1998.18.2.301Search in Google Scholar

Sarangi, Srikant & Christopher N. Candlin. 2003. Categorization and explanation of risk: A discourse analytical perspective’. Health, Risk & Society 5(2). 115–124.10.1080/1369857031000123902Search in Google Scholar

South China Morning Post. 2014. How the Umbrella Movement Unfolded Part One. Guidebook.Search in Google Scholar

Smith, Dorothy. 2004. Writing the social: Critique, theory, and investigations. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Search in Google Scholar

Tai Yiu-ting, Benny. 2014. SCMP guidebook.Search in Google Scholar

Van Dijk, Teun A. 1993. Principles in critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society 4(2). 249–283.10.1177/0957926593004002006Search in Google Scholar

Van Leeuwen, Theo. 1995. The grammar of legitimation. London: School of Printing, School of Media.Search in Google Scholar

Van Leeuwen, Theo. 2008. Discourse and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

White, Hayden. 1978. Tropics of discourse. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wilkins, Karin G. 2000. The role of media in public disengagement from political life. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 44(4). 569–580.10.1207/s15506878jobem4404_3Search in Google Scholar

Wodak Ruth, De Cillia Rudolf, Reisigl Martin & Liebhart Karin. 1999. The discursive construction of national identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.10.1177/0957926599010002002Search in Google Scholar

Yag ̆cıog ̆lu, Semiramis & Aysen Cem-Deg ̆er. 2001. Logos or mythos: (De)legitimation strategies in confrontational discourses of sociocultural ethos. Discourse & Society 12(6). 817–852.10.1177/0957926501012006005Search in Google Scholar

Ying, Pei. 2014. Hong Kong’s identity crisis. http://thediplomat.com/2014/11/hong-kongs-identity-crisis/ (accessed 1 December 2014).Search in Google Scholar

Young, Iris M. 2011. Responsibility for justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392388.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Zinken, Jorg. 2003. Ideological imagination: Intertextual and correlational metaphors in political discourse. Discourse & Society 14(4). 507–523.10.1177/0957926503014004005Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2016-9-20
Published in Print: 2016-11-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 14.2.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/text-2016-0029/html
Scroll to top button