DOCSLIB.ORG

About What About: Topicality at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
About What About: Topicality at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface About What About: Topicality at the Semantics-Pragmatics Interface Justin Bledin (JHU Philosophy) and Kyle Rawlins (JHU CogSci) What about questions have featured prominently in the literature on topicality. Gundel (1974/1988) proposes a what about diagnostic for topichood, where alignment with a what about question can help to identify the entity-type “pragmatic topic” of a subsequent utterance: (1) What about Archie? (Gundel, ex. 46) a. Archie rejected the proposal. b. #It was [ARCHIE]F who rejected the proposal. What abouts have also been taken to be contrastive topic markers (Jackendoff 1972; Buring¨ 2003; Beaver et al. 2017; see (4) below), and Ebert et al. (2014) propose that what abouts introduce new discourse topics (i.e., QUDs). Taking these connections as our point of departure, the goal of this project is to contribute to the understanding of the role of both entity-style and question-style topics in semantics and pragmatics by homing in on the what about construction itself, which has yet to be analyzed in serious detail. We also offer a new linguistic perspective on “whataboutism”, a defensive rhetorical strategy associated with Soviet era propaganda but more recently employed by President Trump in many of his tweets whereby a speaker deflects criticism from an interlocutor by making a counteraccusation that asks what about some action or policy that they have taken. Part of the challenge with analyzing what about is that this construction is extremely flexible both syntactically and pragmatically: Syntactic flexibility puzzle: What about can combine with a large range of “prejacents” including DPs, APs, certain TPs, certain CPs, and more. How to account compositionally for this generality? (2)A: What color should we paint the bedroom? B: fWhat/Howg about the same color as the living room? (DP prejacent) B0: fWhat/Howg about green? (AP prejacent) B00: f??What/Howg about we paint it green? (futurate present clausal prejacent) B000: fWhat/Howg about if we paint it green? (if -clause prejacent) (etcetera.) Functional heterogeneity puzzle: What about moves can serve a variety of different discourse purposes. How to account for this pragmatic flexibility? Four core uses are illustrated below: (3) Suggestive use: Where should we go for dinner? fWhat/Howg about The Brewer’s Art? (4) Contrastive use: A: Well, what about FRED? What did HE eat? B: [FRED]CT ate the [BEANS]F. (Jackendoff, ex. 6.145) (5) Challenging use: A: Kenny G is the GOAT of saxophone. B: Umm, what about Coltrane? (6) Exclamatory use: How ‘bout fthem Dodgers/that local sports teamg! We argue that this flexibility owes to the dependency of what about on a prior question in discourse (the “antecedent QUD”), which delimits their inquisitive scope. We first attempt to model this QUD dependency by interpreting the antecedent as an unstructured proposition set (Hamblin 1973; Karttunen 1977; Groenendijk & Stokhof 1984; Ciardelli et al. 2019) and letting what about filter this input down to the subset consisting solely of those propositions about the prejacent denotation (the ABOUT relation is further analyzed using the theories of Lewis 1988a,b; Partee 1989): c c (7) Unstructured intepretation: what about X = fphs;ti : p 2 QUDc^ABOUT(p; X )g J K J K Defined only if Qc 6= hi (i.e., the QUD stack in c is nonempty). However, this unstructured analysis makes wrong empirical predictions in cases where the what about prejacent also occurs as a constituent of the antecedent QUD, such as (8) where applying (7) to B’s suggestive use seems to incorrectly predict that B re-asks A’s question rather than asking 1 whether Archie could have nominated himself, as well as cases where the antecedent is a multiple constituent question and the prejacent denotation lies in the quantificational domain of more than one wh-item, such as (9) where (7) undergenerates readings in predicting neither the interpretation “Who did Bill hit?” nor “Who hit Bill?” for A’s what about: (8)A: Who could have nominated Archie for the prize? (He’s clearly undeserving of it.) B: What about Archie? (9)A: Who hit who? B: Felix fhit/was hit byg Max. A: What about Bill? The basic problem is that the what about prejacent targets a specific wh-item in the antecedent but we cannot enforce this if the input to the what about mechanism is an unstructured set of propositions. Our solution is to adopt a structured meaning (aka. “functional”) approach to questions on which they denote “background” properties paired with quantification domains or “restrictions”: Q = hBQ;RQi (von Stechow 1991; Krifka 2001). Within this more fine-grained framework, we can say that the speaker of what about asks whether the background of the antecedent QUD is true of the prejacent denotation, which is implemented in the following (preliminary) entry where the restriction of the antecedent is contracted to the prejacent: c c (10) Structured interpretation (simple version): what about X = hBQUDc ; f X gi c J K J K Defined only if Qc 6= hi and X 2 RQUDc . J K This handles the syntactic flexibility puzzle in giving nice results for DP and non-DP prejacents: (11) a. W hoi ti rejected the proposal? = hλxeλws:(x rejected the proposal in w); PERSONi c J W hat about Archie? = hλxeλwK s:(x rejected the proposal in w);fArchiegi J K Equivalently: Did Archie reject the proposal? (unlike Krifka 2001, we assume a structured variantJ of the singleton set analysis ofK polar interrogatives (Roberts 1996; Biezma & Rawlins 2012)) (12) a. W hat color1 should we paint the bedroom t1? = J 0 K 0 hλPhe;hs;tiiλws:Should(w)(λws:(we paint the bedroom P in w )); COLORi c 0 0 b. How about green? = hλPhe;hs;tiiλws:Should(w)(λws:(we paint P in w )); fgreengi J K However, the basic structured meaning entry (10) must be further refined to accommodate multiple constituent questions, coordinated prejacents (e.g., “What about chicken or fish?”), and disjunctive antecedent QUDs, though we must omit details here. A nice bonus application of our QUD-based analysis is to cases of “whataboutism”, exhibited in many of Trump’s tweets such as the following response to allegations of collusion: (13) (Trump tweet on July 22, 2017) What about all of the Clinton ties to Russia, including Podesta Company, Uranium deal, Russian Reset, big dollar speeches, etc. We propose that such whataboutery works precisely because what about allows for substantial pragmatic flexibility in the targeted QUD—in the example (13), Trump’s what about question triggers accommodation with the implicit QUD “Which links to foreign governments influenced the presidential election?” (see Cooper & Larsson 2010; Roberts 2012; Bledin & Rawlins 2019 for more on such QUD repair). Applying our analysis (10) against this antecedent, Trump asks whether Clinton’s ties to Russia influenced the election. Note that whataboutism is most effective when directly rejecting the what about question leaves the hearer open to accusations of hypocrisy or inconsistency. It is also often combined with other tricks, such as smuggling in controversial assumptions via presuppositions of the prejacent. 2 Bibliography David Beaver, Craige Roberts, Mandy Simons, and Judith Tonhauser. Questions under discussion: Where information structure meets projective content. Annual Review of Linguistics, 3(1):265–284, 2017. Mar´ıa Biezma and Kyle Rawlins. Responding to alternative and polar questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 35(5):361–406, 2012. Justin Bledin and Kyle Rawlins. What If s. Semantics & Pragmatics, 12(14):1–55, 2019. Daniel Buring.¨ On D-trees, beans, and B-accents. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26(5):511–545, 2003. Ivano Ciardelli, Jeroen Groenendijk, and Floris Roelofsen. Inquisitive Semantics. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019. Robin Cooper and Staffan Larsson. Accommodation and reaccommodation in dialogue. In Rainer Bauerle,¨ Uwe Reyle, and Thomas Ede Zimmermann, editors, Presuppositions and Discourse: Essays Offered to Hans Kamp, pages 101–124. Emerald Group Publishing, 2010. Christian Ebert, Cornelia Ebert, and Stefan Hinterwimmer. A unified analysis of conditionals as topics. Linguistics and Philosophy, 37(5):353–408, 2014. Jeroen Groenendijk and Martin Stokhof. Studies on the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of an- swers. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam, 1984. C. L. Hamblin. Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language, 10(1):41–53, 1973. Lauri Karttunen. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1(1):3–44, 1977. Manfred Krifka. For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. In Caroline Fery and Wolf- gang Sternefeld, editors, Audiatur Vox Sapientia: A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow, pages 287–319. Akademie Verlag, 2001. David Lewis. Relevant implication. Theoria, 54(3):161–174, 1988a. David Lewis. Statements partly about observation. Philosophical Papers, 17(1):1–31, 1988b. Barbara Partee. Speaker’s reply. In Allen´ Sture, editor, Possible Worlds in Humanities, Arts and Sciences, pages 152–161. de Gruyter, 1989. Craige Roberts. Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In Jae Hak Yoon and Andreas Kathol, editors, Papers in Semantics (Working Papers in Linguistics), volume 49. Ohio State University, 1996. Craige Roberts. Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics & Pragmatics, 5(6):1–69, 2012. Armin von Stechow. Focusing and backgrounding operators. In Werner Abraham, editor, Discourse Par- ticles: Descriptive and Theoretical Investigations on the Logical, Syntactic and Pragmatic Properties of Discourse Particles in German, pages 37–84. John Benjamins, 1991. 3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Online Russia, Today
    Online Russia, today. How is Russia Today framing the events of the Ukrainian crisis of 2013 and what this framing says about the Russian regime’s legitimation strategies? The case of the Russian-language online platform of RT Margarita Kurdalanova 24th of June 2016 Graduate School of Social Sciences Authoritarianism in a Global Age Adele Del Sordi Dr. Andrey Demidov This page intentionally left blank Word count: 14 886 1 Table of Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 3 1.Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 4 2.Literature Review .................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Legitimacy and legitimation ............................................................................................. 5 2.2. Legitimation in authoritarian regimes ............................................................................. 7 2.3 Media and authoritarianism .............................................................................................. 9 2.4 Propaganda and information warfare ............................................................................. 11 3.Case study ............................................................................................................................. 13 3.1 The Russian-Ukrainian conflict of 2013 .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Framing Environmental Movements: a Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Anti-Plastic Straw Movement
    Framing Environmental Movements: A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Anti-Plastic Straw Movement MPP Professional Paper In Partial Fulfillment of the Master of Public Policy Degree Requirements The Hubert H. Humphrey School of Public Affairs The University of Minnesota Caroline Arkesteyn 5/1/2020 Peter Calow, Professor Mark Pedelty, Professor _______________________________ ________________________________________ Typed Name & Title, Paper Supervisor Typed Name & Title, Second Committee Member ` FRAMING ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENTS A Multidisciplinary Analysis of the Anti-Plastic Straw Movement Caroline Arkesteyn Humphrey School of Public Affairs | University of Minnesota Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Literature Review 2.1. The Public Policy Process 2.2. Social Movements Theory 2.3. Framing Theory 3. The Movement 3.1. The Environmental Issue 3.2. Spurring Event 3.3. Social Media Trajectory 3.4. Issue Framing 3.4.1. Frames Used by Supporters 3.4.2. Frames Used by Critics 3.4.3. Message and Participant Motivation 3.5. Industry Response 3.6. Policy Response 3.6.1. Seattle 3.6.2. California 3.6.3. New York City 3.6.4. United Kingdom 3.7. Critiques 4. Conclusions and Recommendations 4.1. Policy Recommendations 4.1.1. Investing in Recycling Technology and Infrastructure 4.1.2. Implementing a “Producer-Pays” Fee on Single-Use Plastics 4.1.3. Expanding Environmental Education 4.2. Communications Recommendations 4.2.1. Systems-Focused Language 4.2.2. Highlighting Agency 4.2.3. Social Media Communication and Agenda-Setting 5. Implications and Future Research 1 I. INTRODUCTION In the late months of 2017, a new viral message began circulating social media platforms.
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full Journal (PDF)
    SAPIR A JOURNAL OF JEWISH CONVERSATIONS THE ISSUE ON POWER ELISA SPUNGEN BILDNER & ROBERT BILDNER RUTH CALDERON · MONA CHAREN MARK DUBOWITZ · DORE GOLD FELICIA HERMAN · BENNY MORRIS MICHAEL OREN · ANSHEL PFEFFER THANE ROSENBAUM · JONATHAN D. SARNA MEIR SOLOVEICHIK · BRET STEPHENS JEFF SWARTZ · RUTH R. WISSE Volume Two Summer 2021 And they saw the God of Israel: Under His feet there was the likeness of a pavement of sapphire, like the very sky for purity. — Exodus 24: 10 SAPIR Bret Stephens EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Mark Charendoff PUBLISHER Ariella Saperstein ASSO CIATE PUBLISHER Felicia Herman MANAGING EDITOR Katherine Messenger DESIGNER & ILLUSTRATOR Sapir, a Journal of Jewish Conversations. ISSN 2767-1712. 2021, Volume 2. Published by Maimonides Fund. Copyright ©2021 by Maimonides Fund. No part of this journal may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the prior written consent of Maimonides Fund. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. WWW.SAPIRJOURNAL.ORG WWW.MAIMONIDESFUND.ORG CONTENTS 6 Publisher’s Note | Mark Charendoff 90 MICHAEL OREN Trial and Triage in Washington 8 BRET STEPHENS The Necessity of Jewish Power 98 MONA CHAREN Between Hostile and Crazy: Jews and the Two Parties Power in Jewish Text & History 106 MARK DUBOWITZ How to Use Antisemitism Against Antisemites 20 RUTH R. WISSE The Allure of Powerlessness Power in Culture & Philanthropy 34 RUTH CALDERON King David and the Messiness of Power 116 JEFF SWARTZ Philanthropy Is Not Enough 46 RABBI MEIR Y. SOLOVEICHIK The Power of the Mob in an Unforgiving Age 124 ELISA SPUNGEN BILDNER & ROBERT BILDNER Power and Ethics in Jewish Philanthropy 56 ANSHEL PFEFFER The Use and Abuse of Jewish Power 134 JONATHAN D.
    [Show full text]
  • FAKE NEWS!”: President Trump’S Campaign Against the Media on @Realdonaldtrump and Reactions to It on Twitter
    “FAKE NEWS!”: President Trump’s Campaign Against the Media on @realdonaldtrump and Reactions To It on Twitter A PEORIA Project White Paper Michael Cornfield GWU Graduate School of Political Management [email protected] April 10, 2019 This report was made possible by a generous grant from William Madway. SUMMARY: This white paper examines President Trump’s campaign to fan distrust of the news media (Fox News excepted) through his tweeting of the phrase “Fake News (Media).” The report identifies and illustrates eight delegitimation techniques found in the twenty-five most retweeted Trump tweets containing that phrase between January 1, 2017 and August 31, 2018. The report also looks at direct responses and public reactions to those tweets, as found respectively on the comment thread at @realdonaldtrump and in random samples (N = 2500) of US computer-based tweets containing the term on the days in that time period of his most retweeted “Fake News” tweets. Along with the high percentage of retweets built into this search, the sample exhibits techniques and patterns of response which are identified and illustrated. The main findings: ● The term “fake news” emerged in public usage in October 2016 to describe hoaxes, rumors, and false alarms, primarily in connection with the Trump-Clinton presidential contest and its electoral result. ● President-elect Trump adopted the term, intensified it into “Fake News,” and directed it at “Fake News Media” starting in December 2016-January 2017. 1 ● Subsequently, the term has been used on Twitter largely in relation to Trump tweets that deploy it. In other words, “Fake News” rarely appears on Twitter referring to something other than what Trump is tweeting about.
    [Show full text]
  • RESEARCH and REPORT by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Echelon Insights for the Reporters Committee for Freedom for the Press and the Democracy Fund
    RESEARCH AND REPORT BY Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research and Echelon Insights for the Reporters Committee for Freedom for the Press and the Democracy Fund PRESS FREEDOM FOR THE PEOPLE 1 Table of contents Foreword 2 Key Findings 4 Trust in National Media 5 Regaining Trust 7 Appendix A: Media Sources 21 Appendix B: Media Doubts and Facts 24 __________________________ ã2018 All Rights Reserved, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner PRESS FREEDOM FOR THE PEOPLE 2 Foreword By Jenn topper communications director, reporters committee for freedom of the press A robust free press is vital to an informed public. It’s with that in mind that we sought to understand the public’s perceptions of press freedom at a moment in time when trust in the press remains low, and when the president of the United States regularly deems members of the press “enemy of the people” and refers to entire news organizations as “fake news.” The research took on even more significance after the murder of four journalists and one sales assistant at the Capital Gazette in Annapolis, Maryland, by a gunman who had a long history of making threats against the newspaper. We learned, through a series of focus groups and a 2,000-voter survey, that there is a lack of urgency around the idea that press freedom is at risk here in the U.S. Press freedom advocates see an alarming confluence of threats to journalists and the news media, including harmful rhetoric emanating from ã2018 All Rights Reserved, Greenberg Quinlan Rosner PRESS FREEDOM FOR THE PEOPLE 3 government officials, investigations of unauthorized disclosures to the press, tighter restrictions on access to the White House and key agencies and officials, lawsuits targeted at crippling or bankrupting news outlets, all combined with increasing economic strain on newsrooms.
    [Show full text]
  • BPGC at Semeval-2020 Task 11: Propaganda Detection in News Articles with Multi-Granularity Knowledge Sharing and Linguistic Features Based Ensemble Learning
    BPGC at SemEval-2020 Task 11: Propaganda Detection in News Articles with Multi-Granularity Knowledge Sharing and Linguistic Features based Ensemble Learning Rajaswa Patil1 and Somesh Singh2 and Swati Agarwal2 1Department of Electrical & Electronics Engineering 2Department of Computer Science & Information Systems BITS Pilani K. K. Birla Goa Campus, India ff20170334, f20180175, [email protected] Abstract Propaganda spreads the ideology and beliefs of like-minded people, brainwashing their audiences, and sometimes leading to violence. SemEval 2020 Task-11 aims to design automated systems for news propaganda detection. Task-11 consists of two sub-tasks, namely, Span Identification - given any news article, the system tags those specific fragments which contain at least one propaganda technique and Technique Classification - correctly classify a given propagandist statement amongst 14 propaganda techniques. For sub-task 1, we use contextual embeddings extracted from pre-trained transformer models to represent the text data at various granularities and propose a multi-granularity knowledge sharing approach. For sub-task 2, we use an ensemble of BERT and logistic regression classifiers with linguistic features. Our results reveal that the linguistic features are the reliable indicators for covering minority classes in a highly imbalanced dataset. 1 Introduction Propaganda is biased information that deliberately propagates a particular ideology or political orientation (Aggarwal and Sadana, 2019). Propaganda aims to influence the public’s mentality and emotions, targeting their reciprocation due to their personal beliefs (Jowett and O’donnell, 2018). News propaganda is a sub-type of propaganda that manipulates lies, semi-truths, and rumors in the disguise of credible news (Bakir et al., 2019).
    [Show full text]
  • Religion and Fake News: Faith-Based Alternative Information Ecosystems in the U.S. and Europe
    Religion and Fake News: Faith-based Alternative Information Ecosystems in the U.S. and Europe Christopher Douglas | 6 January 2018 Summary he intersection of fake news and religion is marked by three asymmetries. First, fake news circulates more among Americans than Europeans. Second, fake news circulates T among conservatives more than liberals. Third, fake news for conservatives often feature religious themes. The origin of the fake news information-entertainment ecosystem lies largely in Christian fundamentalism’s cultivation of counter-expertise. The intersection of fake news and religion today is being exploited by Russia to subvert Western democracies and deepen social divisions. Western countries need to strengthen mainstream evidence-based journalism, incorporate conservative religious leaders into mainstream discussions, and detach high religiosity from fake news information ecosystems. Page 1 About the Report This report was commissioned by the Cambridge Institute on Religion & International Studies (CIRIS) on behalf of the Transatlantic Policy Network on Religion and Diplomacy (TPNRD). About the TPNRD The TPNRD is a forum of diplomats from North America and Europe who collaborate on religion-related foreign policy issues. Launched in 2015, the network is co-chaired by officials from the European External Action Service and the U.S. Department of State. About CIRIS CIRIS is a multi-disciplinary research centre at Clare College, Cambridge. CIRIS’s role as the Secretariat of the TPNRD is generously supported by the Henry Luce Foundation’s initiative on religion in international affairs. For further information about CIRIS, visit ciris.org.uk. About the Author Christopher Douglas teaches American literature and religion at the University of Victoria, Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • Spy Culture and the Making of the Modern Intelligence Agency: from Richard Hannay to James Bond to Drone Warfare By
    Spy Culture and the Making of the Modern Intelligence Agency: From Richard Hannay to James Bond to Drone Warfare by Matthew A. Bellamy A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (English Language and Literature) in the University of Michigan 2018 Dissertation Committee: Associate Professor Susan Najita, Chair Professor Daniel Hack Professor Mika Lavaque-Manty Associate Professor Andrea Zemgulys Matthew A. Bellamy [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6914-8116 © Matthew A. Bellamy 2018 DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to all my students, from those in Jacksonville, Florida to those in Port-au-Prince, Haiti and Ann Arbor, Michigan. It is also dedicated to the friends and mentors who have been with me over the seven years of my graduate career. Especially to Charity and Charisse. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Dedication ii List of Figures v Abstract vi Chapter 1 Introduction: Espionage as the Loss of Agency 1 Methodology; or, Why Study Spy Fiction? 3 A Brief Overview of the Entwined Histories of Espionage as a Practice and Espionage as a Cultural Product 20 Chapter Outline: Chapters 2 and 3 31 Chapter Outline: Chapters 4, 5 and 6 40 Chapter 2 The Spy Agency as a Discursive Formation, Part 1: Conspiracy, Bureaucracy and the Espionage Mindset 52 The SPECTRE of the Many-Headed HYDRA: Conspiracy and the Public’s Experience of Spy Agencies 64 Writing in the Machine: Bureaucracy and Espionage 86 Chapter 3: The Spy Agency as a Discursive Formation, Part 2: Cruelty and Technophilia
    [Show full text]
  • Dataset of Propaganda Techniques of the State-Sponsored Information Operation of the People’S Republic of China
    Dataset of Propaganda Techniques of the State-Sponsored Information Operation of the People’s Republic of China Rong-Ching Chang Chun-Ming Lai [email protected] [email protected] Tunghai University Tunghai University Taiwan Taiwan Kai-Lai Chang Chu-Hsing Lin [email protected] [email protected] Tunghai University Tunghai University Taiwan Taiwan ABSTRACT ACM Reference Format: The digital media, identified as computational propaganda provides Rong-Ching Chang, Chun-Ming Lai, Kai-Lai Chang, and Chu-Hsing Lin. a pathway for propaganda to expand its reach without limit. State- 2021. Dataset of Propaganda Techniques of the State-Sponsored Informa- tion Operation of the People’s Republic of China. In KDD ’21: The Sec- backed propaganda aims to shape the audiences’ cognition toward ond International MIS2 Workshop: Misinformation and Misbehavior Min- entities in favor of a certain political party or authority. Further- ing on the Web, Aug 15, 2021, Virtual. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5 pages. more, it has become part of modern information warfare used in https://doi.org/10.1145/nnnnnnn.nnnnnnn order to gain an advantage over opponents. Most of the current studies focus on using machine learning, quantitative, and qualitative methods to distinguish if a certain piece 1 INTRODUCTION of information on social media is propaganda. Mainly conducted Propaganda has the purpose of framing and influencing opinions. on English content, but very little research addresses Chinese Man- With the rise of the internet and social media, propaganda has darin content. From propaganda detection, we want to go one step adopted a powerful tool for its unlimited reach, as well as multiple further to providing more fine-grained information on propaganda forms of content that can further drive engagement online and techniques that are applied.
    [Show full text]
  • Abra Berens, “The Return of a Chef” by Madeleine Hill Vedel More, Rethinking the Role of Vegetables Sun Contributor on the Plate, and in the Pantry
    Glen Arbor Sun Here to Enlighten You Volume XXV, Issue X OUR 25TH YEAR October 8, 2020 www.GlenArbor.com FREE! Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore turns 50 with virtual party By Jacob Wheeler within the current boundaries of the Sun editor park. … My hope is the Sleeping Bear Dunes of 2045 is as recognizable as it Twenty-five years from now a fu- is today and the relationship created ture superintendent of Sleeping Bear over the next 25 years contributes to Dunes National Lakeshore will open a the park you are managing today.” time capsule stored in a metal lockbox In the time capsule the future super- and read a letter written to them by intendent will also find memorabilia Scott Tucker, the Lakeshore’s current showing what it felt like to experience superintendent, on the occasion of 2020 here in northwest Michigan. The Sleeping Bear’s 50th anniversary on items in the lockbox will tell the story of October 21. a global pandemic—of signs encourag- “As Sleeping Bear Dunes National ing people to wear masks and practice Lakeshore celebrates the 50th anni- social distancing, of a spring shutdown versary of the park’s establishment, of the National Lakeshore prompted we must remember our story is not by COVID, a celebrated reopening, a finished,” wrote Tucker. “Throughout record number of visitors during a gor- 2020 and 2021, we will look to how geous summer, and also record-high the past 50 years will shape the next Lake Michigan water levels. As intense, 50. One key piece of the celebration bewildering and painful as 2020 has is acknowledging how we have gotten felt, Sleeping Bear Dunes has leant us to where we are today.
    [Show full text]
  • How People Make Sense of Trump and Why It Matters for Racial Justice
    Journal of Contemporary Rhetoric, Vol. 8, No.1/2, 2018, pp. 107-136. How People Make Sense of Trump and Why It Matters for Racial Justice Will Penman Doug Cloud+ Scholars, journalists, pundits and others have criticized the racist, anti-queer, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, and xeno- phobic rhetoric that pervades the Trump campaign and presidency. At the same time, commentators have expended a vast number of words analyzing Trump’s character: why does he do the things he does? We ask, how do the latter (analyses of Trump’s character) help explain the former (Trump’s racist statements)? Through a close rhetorical analysis of 50 diverse examples of Trump criticism, we reveal four prevailing characterizations or “archetypes” of Trump: Trump the Acclaim-Seeker, Trump the Sick Man, Trump the Authoritarian, and Trump the Idiot. Each arche- type explains Trump’s racism in a different way, with significant consequences for social critique. For example, the Trump the Idiot archetype dismisses his racist statements as a series of terrible gaffes, whereas Trump the Authori- tarian explains them as an actualization of white supremacy. We trace the benefits and tradeoffs of each archetype for resisting white supremacy. Keywords: Donald Trump, white supremacy, identity, rhetoric, archetypes Read enough critiques of Donald Trump—the president and the candidate—and you’re likely to be struck by three things: 1) there are a great many of them, 2) they expend significant effort analyzing Trump’s character as a way of explaining why he does what he does, and 3) they are repetitive—certain characterizations surface over and over and become familiar as explanations (e.g., the idea that Trump does what he does because he is an incompetent idiot).
    [Show full text]
  • A Disinformation-Misinformation Ecology: the Case of Trump Thomas J
    Chapter A Disinformation-Misinformation Ecology: The Case of Trump Thomas J. Froehlich Abstract This paper lays out many of the factors that make disinformation or misinformation campaigns of Trump successful. By all rational standards, he is unfit for office, a compulsive liar, incompetent, arrogant, ignorant, mean, petty, and narcissistic. Yet his approval rating tends to remain at 40%. Why do rational assessments of his presidency fail to have any traction? This paper looks at the con- flation of knowledge and beliefs in partisan minds, how beliefs lead to self-decep- tion and social self-deception and how they reinforce one another. It then looks at psychological factors, conscious and unconscious, that predispose partisans to pursue partisan sources of information and reject non-partisan sources. It then explains how these factors sustain the variety and motivations of Trump supporters’ commitment to Trump. The role of cognitive authorities like Fox News and right-wing social media sites are examined to show how the power of these media sources escalates and reinforces partisan views and the rejection of other cognitive authorities. These cognitive authorities also use emotional triggers to inflame Trump supporters, keeping them addicted by feeding their anger, resentment, or self-righteousness. The paper concludes by discussing the dynamics of the Trump disinformation- misinformation ecology, creating an Age of Inflamed Grievances. Keywords: Trumpism, disinformation, cognitive authority, Fox News, social media, propaganda, inflamed grievances, psychology of disinformation, Donald Trump, media, self-deception, social self-deception 1. Introduction This paper investigates how disinformation-misinformation campaigns, particularly in the political arena, succeed and why they are so hard to challenge, defeat, or deflect.
    [Show full text]