The Use of Purr and Snarl Words as a Means of Manipulation in the American Presidential Debates

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14640%2F12%3A00063980" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14640/12:00063980 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

—

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

The Use of Purr and Snarl Words as a Means of Manipulation in the American Presidential Debates

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Politicians very often use language which is supposed to manipulate people?s thought and influence their perception of reality. This kind of language is called doublespeak and euphemisms and jargon are its most common forms. However, in order to understand how doublespeak is used and what effects its use has on what people think about a particular issue, it is essential to pay attention also to more basic forms of it, i.e. ?purr? and ?snarl? words. These can be defined as words whose favourable (in caseof ?purr? words) or unfavourable (in case of ?snarl? words) connotations become more important than the conceptual meaning of the particular word. The analysis focuses on the use of ?purr? and ?snarl? words in American presidential debates in the years2000, 2004 and 2008. It discovers four most common groups of ?purr? and ?snarl? words. These are 1) words referring to social groupings (e.g. American), 2) political ideas or movements (e.g. democracy, communism), 3) emotionally coloured

Název v anglickém jazyce

The Use of Purr and Snarl Words as a Means of Manipulation in the American Presidential Debates

Popis výsledku anglicky

Politicians very often use language which is supposed to manipulate people?s thought and influence their perception of reality. This kind of language is called doublespeak and euphemisms and jargon are its most common forms. However, in order to understand how doublespeak is used and what effects its use has on what people think about a particular issue, it is essential to pay attention also to more basic forms of it, i.e. ?purr? and ?snarl? words. These can be defined as words whose favourable (in caseof ?purr? words) or unfavourable (in case of ?snarl? words) connotations become more important than the conceptual meaning of the particular word. The analysis focuses on the use of ?purr? and ?snarl? words in American presidential debates in the years2000, 2004 and 2008. It discovers four most common groups of ?purr? and ?snarl? words. These are 1) words referring to social groupings (e.g. American), 2) political ideas or movements (e.g. democracy, communism), 3) emotionally coloured

Druh

O - Ostatní výsledky

CEP obor

AI - Jazykověda

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2012

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů