ABSTRACT
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a branch of linguistics which is concerned with discovering how values and ideologies are represented in text (see, for example, CaldasCoulthard and Coulthard 1996; Fairclough 2001). In CDA, hard news stories are often analysed, because they are so important in contemporary culture. This chapter is embedded within the tradition of CDA and will also analyse hard news material. The following from Bell (1991: 14) provides a definition of hard news. I follow this definition in this chapter:
In the next section of this chapter we will look at a hard news story. One focus of CDA is highlighting how metaphors can be ideologically significant –
how metaphors can influence how people think about situations. For example, Chilton and Schäffner (1997: 222) point out examples such as the opposition’s claims were shot down in flames, in articles about politics. Examples such as this draw on the metaphor that ARGUMENT = WAR. Chilton and Shäffner argue that when a metaphor such as this is used it makes readers think that it is natural to see an opponent’s opinion as something to be destroyed. It would be possible to see an opponent’s opinion in a different way; for example, perhaps when we hear two different views we can see them both as contributing to an attempt to solve a problem, rather than being opposed to each other. But a metaphor such as the opposition’s claims were shot down in flames makes it difficult to think of these alternatives. In other words, the metaphor makes us see a particular approach to disagreement as the only possible approach. This view is very similar to that of Lakoff and Johnson (1980). Lakoff and Johnson also argue that using sets of metaphors makes us accept one way of seeing the world as the only way. CDA practitioners usually accept Lakoff and Johnson’s view of metaphor. They often argue that when writers use a metaphor they are making readers see the world in a particular way.
