“The Wreckognition”: Discourse of the British and the US Press on Germany's Recognition of Croatia and Slovenia: A Corpus-based Critical Discourse Analysis
Masterarbeit zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades MASTER OF ARTS an der Geisteswissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz
vorgelegt von Morana Lukač
am Institut für Anglistik Begutachter: Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Bernhard Kettemann Graz, im Juni 2012
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First of all, I would like to thank my supervisor Professor Bernhard Kettemann not only for his guidance in writing this thesis, but also for his constant encouragement and support of my academic work. Furthermore, I would like to thank Nancy Campbell, PhD who advanced my writing skills and provided her assistance in occasions too numerous to recall them all. Thanks also go to Professor Georg Marko for his technical support, and introducing me to the field of corpus linguistics. I would like to thank my colleagues at the Zadar Linguistics Department and Professor Hans Bickes with his students at the Department of German Studies at the University of Hannover for the fruitful discussions which stirred me in the right direction in my research. Additional thanks to Professor Ruth Wodak in the course of whose seminar the idea for this thesis was conceived and developed. I thank my former lecturers at my Croatian alma mater, Dr Marija Omazić, Dr Višnja Pavičić- Takač and Dr Mario Brdar, among others, who continuously take care of their students. Finally, this thesis would not be possible without the loving support of Zdenka, Slavica and Robert.
2
Contents
1. Introduction ...... 4 2. Independence and Recognition of Croatia and Slovenia ...... 6 3. Socio-Philosophical and Discourse Analytic Contextualization of the Media Reports on the German Recognition 13 3.1. The Public Sphere and the Media ...... 14 3.2. Discourse, Media and Manipulation ...... 17 4. Corpus-based critical discourse analysis and critical metaphor analysis...... 22 4.1. Critical Discourse Analysis ...... 22 4.2. Critical Metaphor Analysis ...... 28 4.2.1. Corpus-based Critical Metaphor Analysis ...... 31 4.2.2. Research on metaphors in discourse ...... 32 5. Data ...... 34 6. Methodology: Implementation ...... 37 7. Research Questions Revisited ...... 37 8. Results ...... 38 8.1. Collocation analysis: Germany...... 38 8.1.1. Premodifiers ...... 38 8.1.2. Lexical verbs ...... 40 8.2. World War references: Semantic analysis...... 42 8.3. Corpus-based conceptual metaphor analysis ...... 44 8.3.1. REFUGEES ARE WATER ...... 45 8.3.2. POLITICAL ENTITIES ARE HUMAN BODIES ...... 48 8.3.3. NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE ...... 55 8.3.4. ESTABLISHMENT OF A COUNTRY IS A BIRTH OF A CHILD ...... 56 8.3.5. POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HOUSE...... 57 8.3.6. BALKANS ARE A POWDER KEG...... 59 8.3.7. POLITICS IS THEATRE ...... 61 8.3.8. POLITICS IS WAR...... 62 8.3.9. GERMANY IS A COERCER ...... 63 9. Discussion ...... 66 10. Conclusion ...... 69 Summary ...... 70 Zusammenfassung ...... 71 Bibliography ...... 73 Sources ...... 80
3
1. Introduction “The reunification of Germany is not in the interests of Britain and Western Europe. It might look different from public pronouncements, in official communiqué at NATO meetings, but it is not worth paying ones attention to it. We do not want a united Germany.” Margaret Thatcher on 23 September, 1989 (Times 2009, Sept. 10)
A series of articles in the British press, all stemming from a full-report by The Times (Times 2009, Sept. 10) featured and commented on Margaret Thatcher’s quoted statement. A general opposition towards German unification of then British Prime Minister Thatcher comes as no surprise, claims Michael Binyon (Recknagel 2009), the diplomatic correspondent for The Times, however, the context of the quoted passage does. Secret Kremlin documents released in 2009 showed that the above quoted words were exchanged between Thatcher and the Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1989, several weeks before the Fall of the Berlin Wall. Thatcher sought alliance and proposed a joint effort to stop the unification. She went so far as to completely contradict the official Western and NATO attitudes towards German unification and proposed the continuation of the status quo. “Internal changes are happening in all Eastern European countries”, Thatcher acknowledges, “However, we would prefer if those processes were entirely internal, we would not interfere in them or push the de-communisation of Eastern Europe. I can say that the President of the United States is of the same position.” (Times 2009, Sept. 10) Nevertheless, Germany’s European partners gave their “grudging, basic” nod for German reunification in December 1989 in Strasbourg (Katzenstein 1997: 1) as they acknowledged that the on-going political changes were inevitable. The reserved nod did not come without a price, journalists (Sauga et al. 2010, Sept. 30) and analysts (Katzenstein 1997: 2) claim. The decision for the acceptance of a speedier reunification was made after a long discussion between the French President Mitterand and the German Foreign Minister Genscher. The German government accepted the agreement for the European Monetary Union and the European partners accepted the unification, or as the journalists writing for the Spiegel put it “the Deutsche Mark was sacrificed for reunification” (Sauga et al. 2010, Sept. 30). The consensus on making the steps towards a tighter union, now also based on economic ties, was possibly an assurance which made it clear for the partners where Germany’s heart lay, strongly tied to the interests of the European Community (EC).
During the period after the Second World War the term “economic giant, political dwarf” was often used in relation to Germany. However, in the eve of the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain, it became obvious that things were about to change. Europe witnessed the greatest disruption of the balance of powers and rewriting of borders since the end of the Second World War.
4
The insecurities of the Germany’s EC partners were related to the place of the reunited power in the newly emerged post-communist world.
Today analysts claim that the fear about the “possible German relapse into its old, self- regarding, egoistical, nationalistic persona” (Deckers 2002: 157) was not justified (Rittberger and Wagner 2001). Instead of pursuing power politics, “Germany’s foreign policy was marked by a mixture of continuity and change with cases of continuity in the majority” (Rittberger and Wagner 2001: 30-31). Germany continued supporting the newly founded, as well as the already existing international institutions (Rittberger and Wagner 2001: 31) and nurtured international multilateral cooperation, with the exception of one case, according to some analysts (Woodward 1995: 198), around Christmas 1991 when the country decided to recognise the breakaway Yugoslav republics of Croatia and Slovenia. This decision faced strong opposition at the time it was made and until this day some claim that it was actually this action that fuelled the Yugoslav conflict (Woodward 1995: 198) and made the war over territory inevitable.
This thesis focuses on the representation of these events in mass print media on a corpus of more than 300 broadsheet newspaper articles published in the USA and the UK in the beginning of the 1990s. By combining the methodological approaches of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA) this study clarifies the media representations of the new political role Germany asserted in international foreign policy after its unification. I will concentrate on identifying particular discourses which emerged in the English-speaking world’s print media which, as the analysis shows, transcend the actual political event and give ideologically charged representations of the newly unified Germany. This thesis is also an attempt at a rather novel inter- methodological approach in critical discourse studies, through which I plan to illustrate how methodological tools from different fields of linguistics (conceptual metaphor studies, critical discourse analysis, pragmatics, and corpus linguistics) can be mutually inclusive and yield relevant results.
5
2. Independence and Recognition of Croatia and Slovenia
Before giving an account of the events surrounding the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the recognition of the two newly emerged republics, I would like to note that through the last two decades quite opposing views emerged on the causes of the conflict, the reasons for disintegration, on the responsibility and the (lack of) interference by the Western states (Woodward 1995, Sadkovich 1998). Since this research focuses on media analysis it is worth mentioning that similar discrepancies also exist in the analysis of news reporting on the Balkans. Whereas some authors blame the (US) press for under-representing and not sympathizing enough with the nations striving for independence (Sadkovich 1998), others claim that the media reports were based on black-and- white portrayals which villainised the Serbian population (Brock 1993-94). This study reports on those accounts which have been written by recognized scholars, positively reviewed, published by internationally renowned publishers or in high impact journals. After the fall of Communism in Europe, the rise of nationalism and power struggle within Yugoslavia, the Yugoslav Republics of Croatia and Slovenia declared independence on 25 June, 1991. After this event the Yugoslav National Army started the Ten-Day War against Slovenia. The conflict which subsequently started in Croatia lasted considerably longer, as border and minority issues, due to a much higher number of the Serbian population in this country, were considerably more disputable (Woodward 1995: 202). At this point Germany and other European nations did not rush into recognising the republics. The US considered Yugoslavia to be a stabilising factor in the region and many European states feared the actions of their own regional separatists if they were to recognise Croatia and Slovenia (Woodward 1995: 206). However, as the possibility of preserving the unified Yugoslavia seemed to fade and as the scale of the conflicts on the territory grew, the positions of the international community changed, primarily those of Germany. Although at the Rome Summit in November 1991 Britain and France opted for a multilateral non-recognition policy and Germany for a multilateral pro-recognition policy, the EC agreed on a conditional recognition on 16 December, 1991 (Bearce 2002: 481-82), which was to be realised when the countries proved fair treatment of the Serbian minority. Instead of waiting for a report on the status of minorities, Germany went ahead and recognised the countries a week later on 23 December, 1991. The other EC countries waited until mid-January 1992 to follow suit. Prior to this event, President George Bush Sr. had offered Germany “partnership in leadership” (Deckers 2002: 168). The US planned to make Germany its European ally and the country was to assume more responsibilities both politically and militarily (Létourneau and Räkel 1997: 127). These attitudes transformed from optimism to scepticism in December 1991 as Germany recognised Croatia and Slovenia. This independent move “raised suspicions of rekindled
6 political hegemony” (Létourneau and Räkel 1997: 125). The question is why Germany decided to act so confidently, going against the wishes of its allies in the period when it was only re- establishing its position and trying to chase away the ghosts of its fascist past. In the following passages three theories are presented which provide answers from perspectives of different disciplines to the above posed question. Although applying different theoretical and methodological frames, the studies show very strong concurrence in terms of the representations of the event dynamics. In her historical work entitled “Germany and the Baltic Problem after the Cold War”, Kristina Spohr-Readman (2004) touches on the relationship between the newly unified Germany and the emerging ex-Yugoslav states. An international relations scholar, Richard Caplan (2005) devotes an entire book to the topic of recognition or, more specifically, to the EC’s use of recognition as an instrument of conflict management in Yugoslavia, drawing on four fields: strategic and development studies, international law and international relations (Caplan 2005: 12). David H. Bearce (2002), a political scientist, uses a two-phase cooperation framework in analysing how the risk of institutional breakdown helps promote international cooperation on the respective case study (Bearce 2002: 471). According to Spohr-Readman (2004: 79ff), upon unification Germany continued following suit of West Germany’s foreign politics, acting as a “civilian power” (Spohr-Readman 2004: 79) or as it was popularly referred to, an “economic giant and a political dwarf” (New York Times, 20; Guardian, 25; New York Times, 46). The first stumbling stone in establishing the united Germany’s foreign policy was the Persian Gulf War, which opened what Spohr-Readman refers to as the “German question” (2004: 79). According to Spohr-Readman (2004: 79ff), Germany was criticised for primarily financially supporting NATO actions instead of taking a more active military role. Observers suggested that Germany should return to a “normal” role in international politics instead of avoiding a fair share of responsibility (Times, 26; Washington Post, 20; Times, 4; New York Times, 16)1. Spohr-Readman suggests that the outside criticism of Germany was unavoidable during the Gulf Crisis, even if the country took military action, a discussion would have been triggered about Germany’s “power and history” (2004: 79) and this is precisely what happened when the unified
1 “But strains developed [between Germany and the USA] as Germany held back offering assistance during the Gulf war.” (Times, 26), “When Germany declined to play a military role in the Persian Gulf War last year - and when German troops balked even at helping their NATO allies in Turkey - even Bonn’s closest friends were astonished by the depth of the reunited country’s pacifism. ” (Washington Post, 20), “The newly united country was left floundering by the Gulf war, and Herr Genscher’s almost Panglossian belief in the spread of reason, peace and disarmament throughout the world was exposed as a lame response to dictatorship.” (Times, 4), “The Foreign Minister was also criticized over Germany’s role in the Persian Gulf war. Mr. Genscher, ever a believer in the possibilities of negotiation, sought to deal with Iraq after other Western leaders had decided to go to war to force it out of Kuwait. Germany made a substantial financial contribution to the allied cause but, citing constitutional restrictions on the use of its armed forces, provided almost no military assistance.” (New York Times, 16)
7
Germany, which had hitherto been staying in line with the foreign policies of its allies, decided to support Croatia and Slovenia’s independence: “The Yugoslav crisis not only demonstrated Germany’s reluctance to accept its new status as a dominant power in the centre of Europe but also the hesitation of other European powers to accord Germany that status. (…) They [the critics] say a Germany that subsequently revealed itself to be unwilling to send military forces to the region, even as part of a “blue-helmet” U.N. peacekeeping contingent, should not have urged the European Community (EC) to extend diplomatic recognition to the newly independent successor states of Slovenia and Croatia in late 1991.” (Krieger 1994: 26)
The outside criticism of Germany as a world power which avoids assuming leadership in Europe has reappeared quite recently in international politics. Die Zeit published an article on 14 June, 2012 entitled “Alle wollen nur das Eine”, in which the author comments on how the Western leaders, who see the solution to the European financial crisis in Germany taking the position of the Führer, seem to completely dismiss the post-World War II resentment towards German leadership2. From this rather arbitrary choice of including the historical discourse of Nazi Germany in on-going political debates, it seems that the negative historical symbolism is triggered or dismissed when it suits the goals of individual politicians, institutions or particular situations. Germany’s decision to advocate independence of Croatia and Slovenia or, as one reporter labels it, “Alleingang” (Times, 41), has been commented on and analysed in detail. Most negative assessments about Germany’s motives for recognizing Croatia and Slovenia came at the time when the recognition took place: the Turkish President, Turgut Ozal, accused Germany of “trying to prove it’s a great power as ‘Hitler’s Germany’ did in the past” (Washington Post, 22), Serbian media at the time reported that Germany is “using Croatia as a puppet as it forges a “Fourth Reich” reaching from the Baltic to the Adriatic” (Washington Post, 23), and French commentators similarly refer to Germany building a “Fourth Reich” (Washington Post, 22). Spohr-Readman (2004: 80) analyses the German recognition policy by attributing the motives of the German government to the two most influential German political figures of the time, Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Foreign Minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher. Press reports in 1991/1992 were comparably highly personalized and the political moves of the German government were often related to Kohl and Genscher themselves, which several newspaper headlines confirm, “Kohl forces European pace on Yugoslav break-up.” (Times, 48), “Kohl ‘victory’ on Croatia.” (Guardian, 10), "Kohl hijacks Brussels policy." (Times, 22), “Genscher offers vision of future to EC and NATO; Germany.” (Times, 50).
2 (Ross, Die Zeit, 2012, Jun.14) “Deutschland soll führen. Der Satz wird jetzt so oft gesagt und geschrieben, dass man seine Ungeheuerlichkeit kaum mehr bemerkt. Wie nennt man jemanden, der führt? Einen Führer. ‘Der Führer’ war für das Nazireich und seine Zeitgenossen Adolf Hitler. Führung durch Deutschland wäre jahrzehntelang das Letzte gewesen, das die Welt gewollt hätte, und die Deutschen selbst haben nicht im Traum daran gedacht. Das Wort war tabu; man spürte einen Knoten in der Zunge, wenn leader und leadership zu übersetzen waren, was im Englischen ganz gewöhnliche politische Begriffe sind. Nun sollen die Deutschen Europa und die globale Wirtschaft aus der Krise führen: den Motor anwerfen, die Hauptlast schultern, den Weg zeigen - was immer das Bild der Wahl ist. Soll Deutschland die Welt retten?” 8
Spohr-Readman claims (2004: 80) that by recognizing Croatia and Slovenia, Helmut Kohl wanted to demonstrate leadership at home due to the shaky state of affairs after the unification, which were induced by social and economic problems in East Germany. In a similar line of argumentation, Krieger (1994: 30) additionally emphasizes Kohl’s or rather CDU’s individual party interests: by acting indecisively, Kohl’s conservative-liberal coalition would have lost support of the electorate to the opposing party, the Social Democrats (SPD). Hans-Dietrich Genscher advocated the recognition policy by emphasizing the principle of self-determination. Only two years before, Germany had united under the same principle, which accounted for the general sympathy within the country for Croatian and Slovenian independence claims (Nuttal 1994: 17). Genscher hoped that in the end the recognition would enable internationalisation of the conflict and consequently halt the war by opening the possibility of third-party intervention, which presumably the conflicted parties would try to avoid. On the other hand, Germany might have had an ulterior motive in conflict internationalisation: Krieger (1994: 31) suggests that the country’s government wanted to avoid international humiliation which it had recently experienced in the Gulf War episode when it had to once again refuse to take part in a military intervention due to its historical burden. In his interdisciplinary study, Caplan reports on three reappearing explanations of the German conduct: expansionist aims, domestic pressures and strategic considerations (2005: 42). Although often reported on in the media as one of the main motives behind the German recognition policy (Chicago Sun-Times, 4; Boston Globe, 10; Boston Globe, 11)3 , Germany’s alleged striving for expanding its influence in Eastern Europe and the Balkan region Caplan finds to be the least compelling. Germany’s economic interests in the region were negligible. According to some statistics, only 1,7 per cent of total imports and 1,1 per cent of total exports came from trading with Yugoslavia at the time (Caplan 2005: 43). Germany would have probably profited more from an intact Yugoslavia, as the country was deeply indebted to Germany, hence after the dissolution, the return of the debt would become even more questionable. The post-unification policy of “self- containment by integration” and Germany’s promotion of EC’s common foreign and security policy also greatly contradicts the proposed explanation (Caplan 2005: 44). Similarly to Spohr-Readman, Caplan rather sees the genuine motives related to the importance of the principle of self- determination in Germany’s political circles, the escalation of violence in Yugoslavia and to biased conservative media’s coverage (Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Die Welt [Spohr-Readman
3 "The secession of two Yugoslav republics has revived Europe’s fears of the rise of violent nationalism and an expansionist Germany. French and Yugoslav commentators and politicians are drawing parallels between sudden German sympathy for independence movements in Slovenia and Croatia and the expansionist dreams of Kaiser Wilhelm II and, later, the Nazis." (Chicago Sun-Times, 4). "In contrast to the low profile it adopted during the Gulf War, Germany has taken an intense interest in Yugoslavia. That has stirred some anxiety that, along with Austria, Germany wants to extend its influence into Slovenia and Croatia , which were once part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and are heavily influenced by German culture and language." (Boston Globe, 10). "The French are most upset by the new German resurgence, fearing that German influence will grow as it becomes the bridge to Eastern Europe and new states like the Baltics and perhaps Slovenia and Croatia. Much of the British resistance to embracing the European Community is a fear that Germany will dominate a united Europe" (Boston Globe, 11) 9
2005: 79]), which supported the Croatian and Slovenian political cause (Caplan 2005: 42-48). Caplan concludes his portrayal of the German led recognition by saying: “The majority [of the EC states], clearly accepted that recognition was inevitable, not simply because the German ‘bulldozer’ could not be stopped but, more important, because the desire for independence on the part of some Yugoslav republics was too strong to be countered indefinitely” (Caplan 2005: 48). Finally, Bearce (2002) explains the recognition process by applying a two-phase cooperation network and game theory on the events of 1991. As previously mentioned, the course of the common EC conditional recognition policy drastically changed in the last months of 1991. Initially, on one side was Germany, strongly favouring the recognition, and Britain and France on the other opting for non-recognition and later, delayed recognition. Bearce’s analysis sheds new light on the political processes which led to all EC member states recognizing Croatia and Slovenia by mid- January 1991. The condition Croatia and Slovenia were to fulfil before being granted the recognition was to be based on positive findings of the Badinter Commission (Caplan 2005: 47; cf. Rich 1993: 48ff), meaning the states had to ensure that “the Serbian minorities are entitled to the rights accorded to minorities (as opposed to peoples) under international law” (Rich 1993: 48). However, the EC member states did not wait for the findings of the Badinter Commission, but followed Germany and recognized the two countries. In his two-phase model Bearce argues that after the initial bargaining between Germany and other EC members, which ended in Brussels on December 16, 1991 in favour of a conditional recognition, the players engaged in the second phase of the game, enforcement (2002: 471). Bearce analyses the enforcement phase in terms of the Prisoner’s Dilemma (PD) model. The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a concept from game theory which suggests that two players might not cooperate even if cooperation would be in their best interests. Player A and B can earn a profit (R) if they cooperate (C), however, the players can also defect (D) by only looking after their own interests and earn more than in the case of mutual cooperation T > R. In the second case, however, if one of the players still cooperates she will be playing the “sucker” (S). If both decide to defect they will earn the value of P, which means less than when both cooperate, however, still more than when playing the “sucker”: T > P > S. The following table illustrates the possible moves (Gintis 2009: 50):
Table 1 Possible moves in a symmetric game of the Prisoner’s Dilemma model C D
C R, R S, T
D T, S P, P
10
What Bearce proposes are changes to the usual PD model. In cases when the players are making their moves within an institutional frame, their biggest concern might be damaging the institution itself which raises the possibility of cooperation. Under such circumstances, playing the “sucker” pays off more than both players defecting and punishing each other (ST > PP). Bearce refers to this as an “asymmetric game” (2002: 480). According to this analysis, after Germany’s recognition, France and other EC countries opposing the recognition played a move expected in an asymmetric game, they played the “sucker” and did not sanction Germany, but rather cooperated because of their fear of institutional breakdown. Germany, however, at this point did not fear institutional breakdown and played a move according to the values of a symmetric game. This position and the German conviction that EC stability would not be endangered by the recognition is well portrayed in the words of the Foreign Minister Genscher “This was not the issue upon which European foreign policy cooperation would be made or broken; our major achievement was providing the EPC with legal status at Maastricht” (In Crawford 1996: 501). Bearce argues that upon resolving the questions of establishment of the European Union (EU) in Maastricht, Germany did not fear possible sanctions over the recognition, whereas the countries which were initially advocating the non-recognition policy (France, Britain) found the common institution of more relevance for their interests than the developments in Yugoslavia. The analysed pre-recognition and the recognition period are of primary focus in this study, and the materials which were collected in the process of corpus building also centre around these political events. However, the debate concerning the legitimacy of the recognition and the consequences of the events, questioning whether the recognition had been the ‘spark’ setting Bosnia-Herzegovina alight (Times, 22) continued in the years after the event. A number of commentators were tempted to draw comparisons between 1991 and World War I, fearing the outset of another war which might spread beyond the region.4 Some authors claim that the recognition “seems to have contributed to the outbreak of fighting in Bosnia-Herzegovina” (Spohr- Readman 2004: 80), whereas others are convinced that “the Bosnian war was no more ‘caused’ by EC recognition than the First World War was ‘caused’ by the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on 28 August 1914.” (Caplan 2005: 120), implying that the outbreak of violence would have occurred even without this single event. The presented theories explaining German foreign policy moves on the recognition cover motives related to conflict internationalisation which was to change the nature of the conflict from civil to inter-state war and subsequently curb the fighting (i), relevance of the principle of self-
4 "All of this seems at times to evoke less the bright optimism of 1992 than the darkness of 1914, when the eruption of fighting in these same fields and mountains set off World War I" (New York Times, 44), "THE SECOND great challenge to the post- Cold War new world order has raised its bloodied fist in the Balkans, that smelting furnace of World War I." (San Francisco Chronicle, 1) 11 determination (ii), Germany’s domestic interests (iii), and German media reports which supported the Croatian and Slovenian cause (iv). However, in explaining the German political determination on the Yugoslav issues, the press reports in the English-speaking world in 1991/1992 rather put emphasis on the explanations beyond the ones which we find in the latter scientific analyses. The fears of the alleged German expansionism were partly overtly and partly covertly present in the mainstream media discourse. The Sunday Times (34) evoked rhymes dating from WWI: “I was playing golf one day/ When the Germans landed/ All our troops had run away/ All our ships were stranded/ Oh, the thought of England’s shame/ Completely put me off my game.” and the British politicians related to the WWII discourse referring to Germany as the “over-mighty Hun” (Tony Marlow cited in Times, 55). More or less subtly, newspaper headlines portrayed Germany as an expansionist force, gloomily re-entering the world’s political stage: “Europeans’ Balkan Stance Attests to Rising German Influence” (Washington Post, 11), “Germany Facing Harsher Criticism; Reunited Nation’s Assertiveness Evokes Comparisons to its Past.” (Washington Post, 22), “CONFLICT IN THE BALKANS: IN GERMANY; Half a Century After Hitler, German Jets Join the Attack.” (New York Times, 6), “German domination of Europe will make political union a much less attractive idea.” (Times, 53), “A master Germany wants to lose. From political pygmy to the bully of Europe.” (Guardian, 25). Although political analysts today claim that the post-unification Germany “did not step up the pursuit for power politics” (Rittberger and Wagner 2001: 30), the English-speaking world’s newspaper reports published twenty years ago painted a different picture, primarily relating the situation in December 1991 to past narratives, namely Germany’s role in the World Wars and the potentially explosive Balkan region. This research provides a contribution to understanding the media discourse of the early nineties by elaborating on the existing political and historical accounts from the perspective of critical discourse analysis.
12
3. Socio-Philosophical and Discourse Analytic Contextualization of the Media Reports on the German Recognition
The focus on the analysis of the print media in this study stems from the strong interrelation between politics, the (Habermasian) public sphere and the media. The coexistence of the three is elaborated on within this chapter. For the purposes of disambiguation of the 1990s state in political mass media reporting and its correlation with the public opinion, I first turn to the theory of the public sphere and the development of journalism in the work of Jürgen Habermas (1991, 1997) and the criticism of mass media in the works of Bourdieu (1998) and Holly (2008). In the second part of the chapter, the case study in question is related to the existing CDA theories of political discourse and manipulation by mass media (van Dijk 2002, 2006) in the specific historical context of post- communist Europe (Wodak and Stråth 2009). Mass media as tools used for enacting the public sphere are both constitutive of and constituted by the social context. The media reflect the existing public discourses and opinions, however, especially in terms of political news reports, they are informed and influenced by “public releases”, information disseminated by the state apparatus and, finally, they interchangeably create public opinions and influence decision making. Journalists are ideally conceived as independent professionals reporting objectively, independently and, when called for, critically of the government institutions (Preston & Metykova 2009: 37). However, a series of empirical (Pancake 1993, Khosravinik 2009) and theoretical works (Herman & Chomsky, cited in Preston & Metykova 2009: 38) show that instead of critically and multidimensionally portraying political events, media reports often tend to confirm and uncritically reproduce the official institutional releases when it comes to foreign policies. Instead of in-depth political analyses, we are presented with superficial “politainment” (Dörner, cited in Holly 2008: 329), which implies the production of simplified stories, heroes and villains of political affairs and nodding to the governmental positions. In the light of the digital revolution and the beginning of the Internet Age, the criticism stemming from the 20th-century media sociology cannot be viewed without taking into account recent changes in media dynamics brought about by the rapid global information exchange (Hilbert & López 2011). However, the current study focuses on the pre- Internet Age which lacked the medium supporting such plurality of voices we are witnessing in contemporary society.
13
3.1. The Public Sphere and the Media
The public sphere is a domain of social life open to all citizens in which public opinion can be formed through discourse, it mediates between state and society and it is where the vehicle of public opinion is formed. In large communities, communication in the public sphere cannot be direct, instead it is disseminated by the media (Habermas 1997: 105). This kind of “publicness” has not existed since time immemorial; it is rather the product of democratisation of society which has been possible only since establishing the bourgeois society in the 18th century (Habermas 1997: 106ff). In addressing the development of the public sphere, Habermas devotes considerable amount of attention to the history of the political daily press which paved the way for, and simultaneously mirrored the evolution of the opinion publique. In their beginnings, newspapers were simply institutions which collected and distributed news, however, in the second half of the 18th century, the political daily press assumed a role which became more fundamental, that of the guide of the public opinion, “for the newspaper publisher, however, the significance of this development was that from a seller of new information he became a dealer in public opinion” (Bücher, cited in Habermas 1997: 107). Habermas illustrates the period of predominance of the ideologically charged press by describing mid-19th century Paris where every politician founded his own club, and every other club formed its own newspaper in attempt to compete and establish a position in the public sphere arena. In mature bourgeois constitutional states of the 1830s, respectively in France, Great Britain and the United States, political daily press was no longer needed as means for engaging individuals in public discourse, which contributed to its final transformation into a primarily commercial endeavour. Due to the concentration of many media sources in the hands of a small number of associations or people, Habermas observes what has become “an influx of private interests that achieved privileged representation within it [mass media]” (1997: 108). Habermas sees a development towards “refeudalization” (1997: 108) with the rise of mass media and the weakening of the critical functions of the public sphere. What is initially conceived as a critical public debate of private persons now becomes a media discourse shaped by organized individuals promoting their private interests. In his criticism of the mass media Habermas states: “The world fashioned by the mass media is a public sphere in appearance only. By the same token the integrity of the private sphere which they promise to their consumers is also an illusion.” (Habermas 1991: 171). From news distributing, to an ideologically charged medium, and finally to manipulation of public opinion and promoting individual interests instead of enabling a rational informed public discourse are roughly the main transformations of the mass print media until the late 20th century.
14
Habermas is but one of the authors expressing disappointment with the unrealized liberal potentials of the media which had instead taken part in the hindering of critical thought. One of the fiercest late 20th century media critics, Pierre Bourdieu, caused a considerable amount of controversy upon his publication of the work "On Television" as he not only theoretically approached the criticism of mass media, but also applied his insights to the French media context. However, to cite the English version’s translator, the readers need to follow Bourdieu’s reasoning and substitute his examples with those from their own cultural context, and they will be able to find comparable patterns (1998: 83). Contrary to one’s expectations having read the title of the work, Bourdieu does not exclusively devote the book to criticism of television, but also to journalism in general which has become, to reformulate, televised (1998: 56). Journalistic field holds the monopoly on large-scale informational instruments of production and diffusion of information (Bourdieu 1998: 46). The consequences of such monopoly on the public and cultural sphere include influence over the public expression and the discarding of the unwanted individual voices. Journalists have influence public discourse participants as they have to power to "make and break" public figures. Another phenomenon of mass media is anti-intellectualism: despite influencing the cultural, political and intellectual sphere, journalists are not intellectuals themselves (1998: 46-47). Even though some critics found the work to be an example of a defence of the ivory tower which offers negative interpretations without suggesting alternatives (Szeman 2000), Bourdieu does present most of the traditional arguments of media criticism. Similarly to his analysis of the academic field in “Homo academicus” (1988), Bourdieu exposes the underlying principles of journalism, which instead of objectively covering political events imposes a one-dimensional vision influenced by the structure of the field and the individual interests of journalists (1998: 2). Finally, Bourdieu claims that political news reporting produces a general effect of depolitization, which transforms “current events” to entertainment lying “halfway between the human interest story and the variety show” (1998: 6). This point of criticism has been the topic of much discussion in media analysis and is summarized in the concepts of “infotainment” (Thussu 2007) and the closely related “tablodization” (Holly 2008). Although the portmanteau word “infotainment” is a more recent coinage, journalists have for a long time catered to the public’s need for entertainment which is illustrated in the 19th century verse: Tickle the public, make ‘em grin, The more you tickle the more you’ll win; Teach the public, you’ll never get rich, You’ll live like a beggar and die in a ditch. (Anon, cited in Engel 1996)
15
In his article on the nature of tabloidization Holly (2008) provides an overview of the current discussions of the interdependence between politics and the media, and their corresponding changes for the purposes of entertainment (respectively creating “politainment” and “infotainment”) which have changed the nature of the Habermasian public sphere. Instead of following the direct critical line of reasoning of the Frankfurt School and defining mass media as manipulation tools, Holly presents a sophisticated discussion in which he explores the borders between political journalism which potentially uses entertainment and clarity for inclusive purposes and the banal Boulevardisierung (Holly 2008: 321). Holly argues that instead of proclaiming a general decline in media political reporting due to aestheticization and entertaining elements, one should engage in case-by-case analysis and judge whether the entertaining elements function “as mere ‘icing’ and ‘packaging’, making them ultimately dysfunctional, or whether they can be seen as stimulating, enriching and facilitating comprehension” (2008: 328). Although assuming a middle ground between the proponents of the Critical Theory for whom mass communication in many ways equals mass deception and the Critical Studies scholars who view recipients as creative subjects adapting to whatever content the media offer, Holly does agree that there is a certain general tendency towards “loss of information under layers of packaging (...) in commercially oriented media institutions” (2008: 329). Since the time of Athens, where direct democracy was feasible, the re-enactment of the “government-by-discussion” model (Holly 2009: 318) from the beginning of Modernity onwards became dependent on the providers of public information, as suffrage was granted to a much greater share of the constantly growing population. The commercialization of media in the last two centuries has strongly influenced the changes in the nature of the public sphere as well as the form and content of media reports themselves. The mass media gradually softened the distinctions between “hard” and “soft” news due to their strong dependence on entertaining elements which made information more accessible to masses of people, but also dismissed elements of criticism and in-depth analyses. Since many larger media houses are part of a handful of powerful conglomerates, the public sphere is highly influenced by private interest groups. Additionally, when reporting on political events, especially those in the sphere of a country’s foreign policy, the media are influenced by another important discourse participant, the nation state, which directly influences the broadcast information through often unfiltered public releases. The findings of the current study indicate that the mechanisms of “hard” news simplification, the so-called tabloidization, can result in one-dimensional portrayals of political events. The superficial media representation in this case study not only omitted some of the relevant factors which shaped the processes of political recognition of the ex-Yugoslav states, but also revived the discourses of world divisions which characterized the first half of the twentieth century. 16
Except for the general tendency towards simplistic media representation, the analysed reports were largely influenced by information disseminated by the respective countries’ ministries of foreign affairs (Secretary of State) and public statements of key political figures. The discussion has hitherto addressed some mechanisms inherent to the media field which account for the overly simplified, insufficiently processed accounts of political events. In the following chapter the theoretical framework of CDA is used in providing a new dimension to the interpretation of the biased media depiction of German foreign policy upon the disintegration of Yugoslavia. It is argued that the media reports engaged in the processes of manipulation of social cognition (van Dijk 2002, 2006) by creating direct interdiscursive relations (Fairclough 1995: 134) between the events of the early 1990s and the political alliances of the World Wars. The social and the political circumstances in Europe after the Fall of the Berlin Wall, which Wodak and Stråth refer to as one of the “crisis moments” (2009: 18), provided the necessary climate for the revival of old fears.
3.2. Discourse, Media and Manipulation
Studying media reports dating from the early 1990s offers advantages in terms of the historical stance. The events can be contextualized and the journalists’ representations can be contrasted to the now thoroughly analysed political events. More than twenty years after the recognition of Croatia and Slovenia, the most relevant political and historical analyses (Rittberger and Wagner 2001, Bearce 2002, Spohr-Readman 2005, Caplan 2005) show a high level of consensus in terms of motivation behind the international recognition, the significance and the direct consequences of the events. However, what is found in media reports of the time are assessments and predictions which do not fall in line with the objective insights the contemporary scholars share. Before turning to the exact circumstances in which such accounts were produced, the significance of studying media for understanding macro-processes in society is addressed. Teun van Dijk’s works on manipulation (2006) and political discourse (2002) are used as a framework for illustrating the concrete tools which the US and the British media used for manipulation of the public opinion in the events of 1991. In “Political discourse and political cognition” (2002) van Dijk argues that by analysing political “text and talk of individuals, [more general conclusions can be drawn about] socially shared political representations and collective interactions of groups and institutions” (2002: 204). Thereby, following van Dijk’s scheme (2002: 204), an article written by a newspaper reporter reflects that individual’s personal political beliefs embedded in the unique context in which the article has been produced, this represents the micro-level of analysis. Simultaneously, on the
17 intermediate level, the reporter is publishing in a certain newspaper whose general attitudes and style of reporting she mirrors and adopts. The newspaper is one among many on the commercially- oriented print media scene competing for readership, thus potentially offering varying views on current affairs. However, as the forthcoming analysis shows, though we would expect diversity in media functioning in democratic societies, what we find is a general tendency towards uniformity (cf. Bourdieu 1998: 72). Finally, on the macro-level, the reporter is building on the existing shared cultural knowledge and reproducing discourses and ideologies. Articles written by individual reporters therefore cannot be merely reduced to individual views and interpretations. They are meaningful on a higher level as they are related to shared representations in the media and, in a broader sense, in the public sphere. The analysis of media reports which focus on a single political event, sheds light not on a plurality of voices, but rather on large-scale processes in media and politics. All media communication, and other forms of communication for that matter, presupposes socially shared knowledge and beliefs (van Dijk 2006: 367). When reading a report on Germany’s recognition of Croatia and Slovenia, in the majority of cases a person is not presented with the entire European history, the geography of South-Eastern Europe, or the German fascist past. These narratives and the historical-political knowledge are presupposed in interaction (van Dijk 2002: 220) between the reporter and the informed reader. Many elements of such historical-political knowledge are interrelated with certain value judgements, metanarratives and ideologies. The underlying ideology of the discourse in question has roots in the simple in-group/out-group (Us/Them) polarization based on historical divisions which are preserved in collective memory, and accessed in the appropriate circumstances. Negative assessment of the actions by the German government may easily result in discrimination of the country in international political interaction by simply reaching for the topos of history, to use the terminology of the Discourse Historical Approach: “because history teaches that specific actions have specific consequences, one should perform or omit a specific action in a specific situation (allegedly) comparable with the historical example referred to” (Wodak 2001: 76). Linguistic tools represent the observable products of biased discourse; moreover, additional situational criteria cater to the processes of media manipulation. Van Dijk (2006: 375) identifies four crucial context criteria for manipulation which make discourse participants, or in the case of mass media, discourse recipients more susceptible to manipulation: incomplete or lack of relevant knowledge (i), fundamental norms, values and ideologies that cannot be denied or ignored (ii), strong emotions, traumas, etc. which make people vulnerable (iii), and social positions, professions, status etc. that due to their authority effect people’s acceptance of the presented discourses and arguments (iv) .
18
All of the four prerequisites for manipulation are fulfilled in the case of the US and the UK print media reports on Germany’s political actions in December 1991. When it comes to international politics, the public often lack their own insights and alternative sources and therefore have to rely on mass media within their own country (although progressively less in the 21st century) (i). The reports on German recognition emphasized the potential destabilisation of some of the basic values of Western societies. The democratic nature of international institutions, in this case, the EC, Germany supposedly tried to replace with its diktat (Independent, 7) (ii). Evoking the World War discourses subtly reopened the fears of potential renewal of the old animosities and rebuilding of alliances which would threaten an outbreak of another large scale conflict, if not world-wide, then surely in the Eastern European region5. Linguistically, such associations are activated by systematic use of vocabulary and imagery semantically related to World Wars and conceptual metaphors such as GERMANY IS A COERCER (see linguistic analysis in the following chapters) (iii). The authority aura of quality newspaper reports does not rely only on the reputation of the media sources and the professional journalists, but also on other authoritative figures, such as the politicians and institutions whose official statements the reporters cite (iv).
Finally, some attention should be devoted to the specific circumstances and the possible motivation behind evoking the images of old world divisions in the analysed print media reports. When arguing the existence of bias, it should be explained why such bias would exist to begin with. A prototypical example of ideology creation in democratic societies which has recently evoked a considerable amount of the critical discourse analysts’ interest is the ideology of the “war on terrorism” (Chourliaraki 2005, van Dijk 2006). By using group polarization, racist ideology and the rhetoric of fear, the US (and the UK) government attempted to justify the “war on terrorism”. Such attempts of manipulation are not in all cases equally efficient. An example of a failed implementation of ideology by the government is the terrorist bomb attack in Madrid, and the Vietnam war, where people (gradually) rejected manipulative discourse based on an inflow of contradicting information (van Dijk 2006: 376). Whereas the motivation behind manipulation in the mentioned examples is quite transparent (justification of war, increased military expenses, etc.), the events of 1991 should be put in the context of “crisis events” (as used in Wodak and Stråth 2009) to fully understand the emerged discourse. Certain historical events are considered to be iconic turning points, from which new eras of history begin or when new nations are constructed. The examples of such events are the French Revolution in 1789, the Spring of Nations in 1848, the Hour Zero in 1945, or the Fall of the Berlin
5 (Economist, 7) "True, a repeat of 1914, when trouble in the Balkans escalated to world war, is unlikely; but the risk that instability could spread through an already fragile Eastern Europe is much less unlikely, as is the danger that divisions in Western Europe could undermine its ability to help settle disputes in the East" 19
Wall on 9 November 1989 (Wodak and Stråth 2009: 16). In democratic societies, crisis moments are openly discussed in the public sphere and reflected on in the media. Another characteristic of crises is that they open uncertainties about the future which potentially externalise the existing (historical) discourses embedded in “collective memory” (as defined by Koselleck, cited in Wodak and Stråth 2009: 18ff). Crises emphasize the historically inherent gap between the Erfahrungsraum and the Erwartungshorizonte (Koselleck, cited in Wodak and Stråth 2009: 18). On the one hand, the present is always defined by the space of experiences and the relation to history, and the horizon of expectations and uncertainty about the future on the other. In the light of the great changes in the late 1980s and early 1990s in Europe, one of such crisis moments emerged. For the first time since 1945 people witnessed a great political turmoil due to the Fall of Communism and the dissolving of many of the large federations established after World War II. Due to these events and to the general uncertainty about the future which they evoked, historical experiences stored in the collective memory were decontextualized and related to the on-going affairs. Although the parallels drawn between historical ties between Germany and Croatia during World War II and 1991 can be explained by the mechanisms of historical crisis, this does not exclude the element of instrumentalisation of historical narratives. As mentioned earlier, such interdiscursivity6 is established when the situation calls for it. When Germany’s foreign policy actions collided with the interests of its Western allies, the media reached for World War analogies. However, on other occasions when Germany was expected to provide military (Gulf War) or financial assistance (the on-going financial crisis), reporters and politicians who emphasize the need for German leadership seem to be oblivious of the negative historical implications. In this chapter the specific circumstances which lead to biased print media representations in 1991/1992 were put in context of socio-philosophical and CDA theories. Media sociology and philosophy offer answers as to why media may distribute biased instead of objective reports of events. Some of the main reasons lie in the underlying mechanisms of mass media: they strive for entertaining the readers and the viewers, which often leads to the loss of content in the struggle for “breaking it down for the reader”. On another note, in foreign news reports, one of the main interest parties and a major source of information is the government whose version of events often receives exclusive or dominant coverage in the national media. Critical discourse theories of van Dijk (2002, 2006) and Wodak (2009) were applied to the case study for the purpose of illustrating how manipulation in political discourse of German recognition was achieved during a historical “crisis”
6 “The concept of interdiscursivity highlights the normal heterogeneity of texts in being constituted by combinations of diverse genres and discourses. The concept of interdiscursivity is modelled upon and closely related to intertextuality (Kristeva 1980), and like intertextuality it highlights a historical view of texts as transforming the past – existing conventions, or prior texts – into the present.” (Fairclough 1995: 134, emphases in the original) 20 period. The presented applied theoretical frameworks provide contextual knowledge necessary for a full understanding of the implications of the forthcoming linguistic analysis.
21
4. Corpus-based critical discourse analysis and critical metaphor analysis
4.1. Critical Discourse Analysis
For defining the methods of corpus-based critical discourse analysis, its place and relation to other CDA approaches needs to be established. Critical discourse analysis is one of the latest emerging approaches within linguistics. There are several events which occurred almost simultaneously which marked the birth of critical discourse analysis, the launch of van Dijk’s journal Discourse and Society in 1990, the publication of Norman Fairclough’s Language and Power and Wodak’s Language, Power and Ideology in 1989 (Wodak 2001a: 4). The dates of publications of these seminal works are quite relevant for contemporary critical discourse analysts, nevertheless, critical approaches to language analysis existed a long time before the coinage of the term critical discourse analysis. Chourliaraki and Fairclough (2001: 2) claim that the conceptual birth of CDA can be traced to a date as early as 1929 in the work of a Russian Marxist Vološinov who was the first to establish a relation between Marxism and the philosophy of language, and address the role of language in manufacturing ideology7. The direct predecessors of CDA were the scholars at the East Anglia University who published two books in 1979, respectively Language and Control (Fowler et al.) and Language and Ideology (Hodge and Kress) which set the stage for Fairclough and other critical discourse analysts. Other than these figures, CDA has been greatly influenced by the philosophical works of the Frankfurt School (Adorno, Habermas and Horkheimer) and Michel Foucault (Wodak 2011, Jun.6: 10), and other linguistic disciplines such as pragmatics, conversation analysis, narrative analysis, rhetoric, stylistics, sociolinguistics, etc. (van Dijk 2008: 352). Critical discourse analysis is a heterogeneous field, consisting of several approaches which use a variety of different methods; for example, whereas Discourse Historical Analysis focuses on qualitative analysis of different argumentation strategies, the corpus-based approach uses corpus linguistic tools and relies on the combination of qualitative and quantitative methods8. However, although critical discourse analysts claim that the field
7 “Any ideological product is not only itself a part of reality (natural or social), just as is any physical body, any instrument of production, or any product for consumption, it also, in contradistinction to these other phenomena, reflects and refracts another reality outside itself. Everything ideological possesses meaning: it represents, depicts, or stands for something lying outside itself. In other words, it is a sign. Without signs there is not ideology.” (Vološinov 1973: 9) (emphasis in the original). 8 There are counter-examples for this traditional division between CDA approaches. In a more recent article by Prentice (2010), automated semantic tagging was used within the framework of the discourse-historical approach. 22 cannot be classified as a specific direction of research which shares a unitary theoretical framework, nor as a linguistic discipline (Wodak 2002: 7, Baker 2006: 273-74, van Dijk 2008: 353), most would agree on a definition describing common features as given by van Dijk: “Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context. With such dissident research, critical discourse analysts take explicit position, and thus want to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality.” (2008: 352) Some of the major trends within CDA and their main representatives include: the systemic- functional approach (N. Fairclough, T. van Leeuwen, G. Kress), the socio-cognitive approach (T. van Dijk), the discourse-historical approach (R. Wodak, M. Reisigl), the socio- psychologically oriented Loughborough Group (M. Billig, J. Potter), the Duisburg Group (S. and M. Jäger, J. Link, U. Mass), the corpus-based approach (G. Mautner, P. Baker) (Wodak 2011, Jun.6: 13-14). Norman Fairclough, the scholar who is often designated as the founder of CDA, set theoretical foundations of CDA in 1989 and illustrated its methods of analysis. Fairclough claims that his approach takes elements both from discourse analysis as conducted within social sciences and text linguistics. Fairclough’s approach to CDA combines the interests both in the understanding of the socially ‘constructive’ effects of discourse and the close linguistic analysis of written or spoken discourse (2003: 3). Teun van Dijk developed a cognitive model for explaining the construction of meaning on a societal level (Wodak 2001a: 7). Van Dijk takes references in his work from the fields of both cognitive (psychology of text processing) and social psychology (van Dijk 2002). Wodak’s discourse-historical approach “adheres to the socio-philosophical orientation of critical theory” (Wodak 2001b: 64) and relies on the available historical, social and political knowledge in which discursive events are embedded (Wodak 2001:65). Michael Billig, a social psychologist, devoted his work to developing a critical social psychology that stresses the importance of studying language and rhetoric (Billig, Michael: Homepage 2012). The analytic framework of the Duisburg group, strongly influenced by the philosophical work of Michel Foucault, focuses on the linguistic and iconic characteristics of discourse (collective symbols or topoi) which has primarily been applied to right-wing discourses and the analysis of tabloids in the Germany (Wodak 2001a: 9). For establishing what characteristics all of the CDA trends have in common, it is useful to turn to the concepts of “discourse” and “critical” themselves (Wodak 2002: 7). As Jørgensen and Phillips (2002: 1) accurately observe, “discourse” has become a very
23 fashionable term in the last two decades across different academic disciplines. However, the concept is often left undefined or used with a different meaning in different contexts. A very general idea about discourse which is, nevertheless, shared across different disciplines is that “language is structured according to different patterns that people’s utterances follow when they take part in different domains of social life” (Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 1), hence the terms legal, medical, political, media discourse. In linguistics, the use of the term “discourse” also varies in different cultural context. In the Central European context, “text” is understood differently than “discourse”, due to definitions stemming from the continental traditions in text linguistics and rhetoric. In the Anglo-Saxon context, the term “discourse” designates both written and oral texts (Wodak 2002: 8). For critical discourse analysts, “discourse” is not limited to speech and writing but it also encompasses social practices framed by social situations and institutions. Discourse is constituted by society, but it may also transform the society vice versa. Due to its major social role, discourse may have great ideological effects and “help produce and reproduce unequal power relations” (Fairclough and Wodak, cited in Wodak 2002: 8). The notion of being “critical when doing CDA, simply means that CDA scholars do not advocate their complete objectivity, they admit bias in terms of their social and political engagement (Wodak 2002: 8-9). In the attempt to identify the ideological discourse of the dominant groups, the analysts are politically committed to social change and exposing the position of the oppressed groups in society (Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 64). Wodak stresses other layers of the meaning of “critical” in CDA: being “critical” also stands for having a distance to data, embedding in socio-historical context and self-reflecting during the process of analysis (Wodak 2002: 8-9). Aside for the understandings of the concepts “discourse” and “critical” which CDA scholars share, Jørgensen and Phillips have identified four additional common features of CDA (2002: 60-95) . The first unifying element shared by critical discourse analysts is that the character of social and cultural processes is partly linguistic-discursive (Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 61). The study of discourse is always related to social practices outside discourse, and it is simultaneously dedicated to analysing the realization of these social practices by linguistic/semiotic means (Fairclough 2005). One of such areas of cultural production are mass (print) media to which researchers have devoted a considerable amount of attention (Charteris-Black 2001, Skorczynska and Deignan 2006, Baker et al. 2008, Khosravinik 2009, ter Wal et al. 2009).
24
The second common feature of CDA is the position that discourse both constitutes social reality, and is constituted by social practices. In a theoretical sense, CDA takes the middle position between those theories which claim that the world is predominantly constituted by discourse (Laclau and Mouffe’s theory) and on the other side of the spectrum that discourse is primarily constituted by social reality (Althusser, Historical materialism) (Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 61). For critical discourse analysts, discourse is not a result of free flowing ideas in people's heads, it is grounded in the existing social practices, however, such practices only acquire meaning through discourse (Fairclough, cited in Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 62). Third, language use should be empirically analysed within its social context (Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 62). The study of language in view of its social context is related to the CDA inherent feature, interdisciplinarity. From the simplified accounts of the above mentioned main trends in CDA, one can already conclude that this linguistic approach is in its essence interdisciplinary. Some of the mentioned fields critical discourse analysts relate to outside of the linguistics realm are philosophy, psychology, sociology, history, literary theory, and cultural studies. The fourth shared belief among CDA researchers is that discourse functions ideologically (Jørgensen and Phillips 2002: 63). Critical discourse analysts see ideology as the representation of reality from the perspective of dominant groups in society for the purposes of maintaining and reproducing social inequality (Fairclough 1995: 17, 44). By establishing a relation between discursive events and wider social and cultural relations, critical discourse analysis looks into how “[discursive] practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power.” (Fairclough 1995: 132). The field of CDA studies is highly dynamic, it has evolved considerably since the first publications on topics of interest by Fairclough, Wodak, and van Dijk. The change has included the widening of the scope of the analysed forms of media, types of discourse, and new methodological approaches in an already methodologically heterogeneous field. When the influence of the new media spread largely in the 2000s, the critical discourse analysts devoted more of their attention to computer mediated communication (CMC). This process has led to the formation of a subdiscipline known as Computer Mediated Discourse Analysis (CMDA) (Herring 2004). Second, by browsing through the publications in the Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis (CADAAD)9 Journal, one will find papers on minority,
9 CADAAD Journal (2012). [Online] http://cadaad.net/journal [2012, Aprl.16]
25 feminist and specialist genre discourses. Instead of focusing merely on the mainstream political and media discourse, the self-perception of smaller, oppressed groups becomes the object of analysis itself in its relations towards the majority discourse. Finally, from initially being based on largely qualitative analysis of smaller samples of texts, there are now a number of CDA studies using corpus linguistics tools and working on large corpora, which brings us to the sixth major trend in critical analysis, corpus-based CDA. One of the main proponents of this approach is Gerlinde Mautner who published a breakthrough article in 1995 (under Hardt-Mautner), which was the first of this kind to directly establish a “methodological synergy” (Baker et al. 2008: 273) between corpus linguistics (henceforth CL) methods and CDA. Mautner also contributed to collections of works on different methodological and theoretical approaches within CDA with chapters on corpus-based analysis (2008, 2009). Paul Baker is another name worth mentioning, not only for his empirical work (2008), but also for the reader-friendly student textbook “Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis” (2006). The list of relevant researchers in the field goes on: Michael Stubbs, Jane Mulderrig, Alice Deignan, to name but a few. What advantages does corpus-based CDA offer, and what caused the rapid growth of empirical studies using CL methods in critical analysis since the publication of Matuner’s article in 1995? Mautner mentions three main benefits (2009: 123) of the CL/CDA synergy: corpus linguistics enables working with large data volumes, and answers the need for representativeness empirical studies put much emphasis on (“the more the merrier”). “By working with a greater number of texts which belong to the same genre and by building a specialised corpus, we are able to analyse particular types of text, and not only individual texts which might have been selected because they best suit the pre-existing line of argumentation” (Lukač 2012: 191). Working with a larger number of texts resolves the “cherry-picking” criticism (Widdowson 1995) which CDA had to face in traditional discussions. The term “cherry-picking” applies to the argument that critical analysts tend to choose those sources which “confirm” their expectations and support their claims; such reselections are problematic when researchers make general conclusions based on their biased selection of data. It has previously been mentioned that some authors, such as Wodak, argue that the term “critical” in CDA also applies to the process of analysis itself, meaning that researchers should be self-aware and critically evaluate every step of their inquiry. However, “it is difficult if not impossible to be truly objective, and acknowledging our own positions and biases should be a prerequisite for carrying out and reporting research.” (Baker 2006: 10). Using corpus data nevertheless reduces the scope of researcher bias. Seeking
26 representativeness and employing extra-linguistic criteria for data collection, or in this case, corpus construction, contributes to establishing a stronger claim of objectivity, intersubjectivity and systematicity (Marko 2008). “Intersubjectivity” in this sense refers to the explicitness which makes the analysis accessible to other subjects, namely by being explicit of the background, procedure and the selected data, whereas “systematicity” is a term applied to the consistency in the use of analytic tools (Marko 2008: 92). Finally, corpus-based CDA allows a merger of qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis (Mautner 2009: 122). The largest corpus-based CDA project focusing on mass print media was the RASIM project conducted by a group of researchers at the University of Lancaster (Baker et al. 2008, Khosravinik 2009) which analysed the discourse of refugees, immigrants and asylum seekers in the UK press within a ten year time span (1996-2006). This project, based on a 140-million word corpus, would not have been possible by applying only the traditional in-depth qualitative analysis. Some of the basic CL tools employed by critical discourse analysts include frequency word lists, dispersion, concordancing, keyness, collocates, grammatical (Part-of-Speech [POS]) and semantic tagging (Baker 2006). Careful examination of frequency word lists may direct researchers in focusing on e.g. particular semantic categories of a given corpus or provide insight in patterns of lexical choices. Stubbs claims (cited in Baker 2006: 47) that choices of words are never neutral, they always express the speaker's intention and ideological position. Nevertheless, the researcher should be wary of the dependence of lexical choice on the frequently occurring linguistic patterns; in revealing the existence of bias in lexical use in an examined corpus, reality checks are necessary. In the case of specialised Do-It-Yourself (DIY) corpora, the examined patterns should be compared to naturally occurring language via large-scale general corpora, such as the British National Corpus (BNC), or the Contemporary Corpus of American English (COCA) to surely conclude if the observed phenomena contradict the usual linguistic patterns through statistical calculations of keyness. Measures of dispersion inform the researcher about the “where” in the corpora, i.e. about the location of the analysed structure within individual texts (Baker 2006: 49). Concordancing tools, or as they are sometimes referred to, key words in context (KWIC) (Anthony 2007) are useful for in-depth analysis of (sequences of) words (Baker 2006: 71). This tool offers the possibility of looking up each occurrence of a pattern in a corpus, thus being the interface between quantitative and qualitative analysis. Collocates are words which show statistically significant patterns of co-occurrence, similarly, clusters are strings of words which tend to “go together”, again providing information on lexical patterns
27 in a corpus. Finally, (grammatical) tagging offers possibilities for more complex searches within a corpus which allow us to look beyond single words (Baker 2006: 151). The here presented study set out with the application of the listed traditional tools of corpus-based CDA, however, upon a careful examination of the collected corpus, I found that figurative language played a major role in ideology construction in the selected newspaper corpus. Therefore this study can also be considered partly corpus-driven, and not only corpus- based. Upon these findings, I have done an additional analysis on the great number of conceptual metaphors which appear across the corpus by using the Critical Metaphor Analysis approach (henceforth CMA) (Charteris-Black 2004a, 2006). The CMA approach is a framework integrating CL with cognitive linguistics and CDA (Charteris Black 2004a: 41). Other authors who have also been using CL methods in discourse studies of metaphor, but who have not taken over Charteris-Black's syntagm (CMA), are Alice Deignan (2008), Veronika Koller (2002) and Anatol Stefanowitsch (2006a, 2006b)10, among others. The following chapter provides an overview of the theoretical foundations and current research in CMA and corpus-based metaphor discourse studies.
4.2. Critical Metaphor Analysis
The research on metaphor since the late 1970s until today has resulted in a great amount of new insights about how metaphors “work”, but to truly understand how much the “cognitive turn” has contributed to our understanding of the functioning of metaphors, I here present an excerpt from the work of one of its forerunners, Andrew Ortony:
“The view that metaphors are essentially comparisons is perhaps the nearest that we have to an accepted theory of metaphor. It does explain their intelligibility compared with anomaly but does not well explain the tension. Nor does it account for the important pedagogic value of metaphor.” (Ortony 1975:45)
Steven Pinker claims that today we know not only how metaphors influence learning, but the findings we currently have, may even point to the relationship between metaphor and the evolution of abstract thought (Pinker 2007: 241-242). From the publication of Lakoff and Johnson's seminal work “Metaphors We Live By” in 1980, the discussions have moved from elaborating on the differences between the Aristotelian linguistic definition of metaphor and the constitutive conceptual role of metaphor, to the differences about blending and mapping
10 Stefanowitsch uses the term "metaphorical pattern analysis" for his approach (2006b: 63). 28 as potential underlying cognitive functioning of metaphor (Fauconnier and Turner 1998, Grady et al. 1999). Due to my practical application of the Conceptual Metaphor Theory (henceforth CMT) in the following chapters, I here repeat some of the theory's basic notions. In CMT, metaphor is defined as understanding one conceptual domain in terms of another (Kövecses 2010: 4). The domain from which metaphorical expressions are drawn to understand the other is called the source domain, whereas the domain which is understood through this process is the target domain. The proponents of the theory argue that the source of domain is always related to the concrete and the physical, whereas the target domain is a more abstract concept; the abstract is understood in the terms of the concrete (AFFECTION IS WARMTH, LIFE IS A JOURNEY, LOVE IS A JOURNEY) (Kövecses 2005: 6). This position has however been subject of some criticism (Žanić 2011: 130ff). The proponents of the Blending Theory (henceforth BT) claim that our cognitive processes are separable from our bodily experiences. We are able to abstract and manipulate different domains without primarily relying on the physical world11. Steven Pinker provides an argument from the position of the evolutionary theory of language, which offers an additional insight to the CMT/BT debate. According to some theories, metaphorical relations were used in the past as ladders in constructing meaning which related the new concepts to the existing ones. The illustrations of the new via old concepts provided metaphorical expressions with advantages in the “Darwinian competition among neologisms” (2007: 238). The extreme position of this theory, which Pinker refers to as the “killjoy theory” (2007: 238), implies that the ladder has been “kicked away” with the development of the human cognition leaving behind mere fossils of these older processes which are now mostly dead metaphors. Although the mechanisms of metaphor production cannot be considered “dead”, otherwise we couldn't fully explain the creativity involved in generating novel metaphors, the “Darwinian competition among neologisms” seems still to plausibly account for the great number of metaphors functioning in the direction described by CMT (concrete → abstract). For CMT the choice of the corresponding target-source domains is motivated by physical experience which results in creating certain neural connections between areas of the brain. As Kövecses illustrates on the prototypical universal metaphor example AFFECTION IS
11 How to explain an example such as "You are digging your own grave." which seems to imply processes opposit to the ones predicted by the CMT, projecting from the abstract to the more concrete domain (Fauconnier and Turner, cited in Žanić 2011: 130).
29
WARMTH, when the brain area for affection is activated, so is the area corresponding to warmth (2005: 6). Common human bodily experiences which are projected on the functioning of metaphor account for universality of metaphors in typologically unrelated languages (Kövecses 2010, Ch.13). The process of mapping from the source to the target domain often results in moving beyond the basic correspondences in terms of additional mappings, entailments, or inferences (Kövecses 2005: 7). An example of an entailment is the extending scope of the metaphor INTENSITY IS HEAT, which may result in some of the following metaphorical expressions: CHANGE OF INTENSITY IS CHANGE IN HEAT (I think that the Scottish problem might cool off.), CAUSATION IS STARTING HEAT (The strike was sparked by a demand for higher pay.) (Kövesces 2005: 33). One of the ways of classifying conceptual metaphors in CMT is according to their conventionality. On the top of the conventionality scale we find the mentioned “dead metaphors”12 which have become so automatic that speakers no longer not notice the tension between the domains (“a local branch of the organisation”, “cultivating business relationships that can lead to major accounts”) (Kövesces 2010: xi). Unconventional metaphors are established when experiences fall outside of the conventional, everyday mechanisms (Kövecses 2010: 36). Another criterion for metaphor classification is its cognitive function (structural, ontological, and orientational metaphors) (Kövecses 2010: 37-40). Moreover, the scope of the influence of metaphors goes beyond their linguistic realizations and cognitive functions, they are part of our social and physical practices. Metaphors also produce culturally specific mental representations of aspects of the world (Kövecses 2005: 7-8). Much of the on-going scientific debates in cognitive linguistic theories of metaphor are centred around the two competing (or, in some views, mutually independent) approaches, CMT and BT. Whether the BT approach challenges the basic notions of CMT is a rather complex question, however, the work of Fauconnier and Turner (1998) has doubtlessly gained a considerable amount of attention, and their concepts of “blends” have been featured in the works of the CMT proponents (Kövecses 2005: 7). Some of the main differences between the two views are as follows: CMT observes the relationships between two domains whereas BT allows for more than four mental spaces. In CMT, metaphor is strictly directional, which is not the case in BT, and finally, BT elaborates on the short-lived novel conceptualizations,
12 The term "dead metaphor" has been critically reflected on in the works of the proponents of the CMT (Kövecses 2010: xi), and in psycholinguistic research (Gibbs and Boroditsky, cited in Kövecses 2005: 150).
30 whereas CMT is concerned with the entrenched conceptual relationships. The short term connections and temporary representations are explained in BT with “mental space”, a concept potentially complementary to “domains”; the short-term constructs enabled by mental spaces are informed by the more stable structures of conceptual domains (Grady et al. 1999: 101ff). The role of conceptual metaphors in our understanding of the world is a theoretically and empirically supported fact. The studies on conceptual metaphors have had a great impact on the fields of linguistics, psychotherapy, learning, evolutionary theories (of language), economics, etc. (Pinker 2007: 244ff). However, additional functions of metaphors need some further elaboration to fully comprehend the significance of studying metaphors in (media) discourse.
4.2.1. Corpus-based Critical Metaphor Analysis
The definition of metaphor within CMA is based on its three functions, cognitive, semantic and pragmatic. Metaphors have a cognitive role in developing our understanding on the basis of analogy, semantic in creating new meanings for words, and a pragmatic role in that they aim to provide evaluations (Charteris-Black 2004a: 23-24). One of the most interesting aspects of Charteris-Black’s theory of metaphor is that he advocates a form of a “pragmatic turn”. The insights from semantics and cognitive studies provide explanations for the cognitive functioning of metaphor, but they do not reflect on the relevance of speaker choice, intentions, nor impact of metaphor use. Although most authors describe the development in current metaphor studies as moving far away from the first linguistic definitions of metaphor, Charteris-Black proposes a re-examination of its rhetorical functions (Charteris-Black 2004a: 10-11). Whereas in CMT, metaphor use is an unconscious reflex, from a pragmatic view, speakers use metaphor to persuade by combining cognitive and linguistic resources (2004a: 11). The choice of metaphor in political and public discourses is largely motivated by the rhetorical aim of persuasion, “in many cases, therefore, metaphor choice is motivated by ideology.” (2004a: 247), it may largely influence one’s coherent view on reality (for examples see next chapter). In explaining the goals of his proposed theoretical and methodological approach to metaphor analysis, Charteris Black establishes: “The value of Critical Metaphor Analysis is that by making us more aware of the subliminal role of metaphor in situations where we are not aware that a speech act of persuasion is taking place we are in a better position to identify its discourse role in forming evaluations. (…) If 31
language is a prime means of gaining control of people, metaphor is a prime means by which people can regain control of language and create discourse. Metaphor both reflects and determines how we thing and feel about the world, and therefore, understanding more about metaphor is an essential component of intellectual freedom.” (2004: 253).
4.2.2. Research on metaphors in discourse
A recent psychological study by Landau et al. (2009) provided insight on how conceptual metaphors can contribute to framing13 in political discourse. In other words, the choice of a particular metaphor may account for stimulating negative attitudes towards social phenomena, such as immigration. The results of the conducted studies empirically prove the effects metaphor has on cognition and value judgements, and support the efforts of the scholars dealing with critical analysis of metaphors in revealing the ideological implications of metaphor choice, primarily in political discourse (Pancake 1993, Straehle et al. 1999, Santa Ana 2002, Charteris-Black 2004b, 2006). According to the findings of Landau et al. (2009), self-relevant motivational states in one conceptual domain can influence attitudes in loosely related political and social domains. One of their two respective studies, conducted in the US, showed that when activating the semantic domain of body contamination, and subsequently being exposed to body-metaphoric framing of the US, strongly influenced the participants’ negative attitudes towards immigration. The experimental group was exposed to texts written on a contamination threat via airborne bacteria, whereas the control group read texts on airborne bacteria which were described as harmless. In the next step, the experimental group read articles which activated the conceptual metaphor COUNTRY IS A HUMAN BODY, and the control group was exposed to literal language only. In the final step of the experiment, the participants’ attitudes on immigration policy were tested, where the experimental group reported significantly more negative attitudes towards immigrants entering the United States. The researchers conclude that metaphors in language interaction which can influence opinions on controversial issues (such as immigration) should be used with caution, considering their possible influence on political and social attitudes.
13 The concept of “framing” in the sense which is here used was established in psychological experiments conducted by Tversky and Kahneman (cited in Druckman 2001). The researchers found that presenting people with the same statements in different form influences their opinion. The famous Tversky/Kahneman example shows how people tend to be risk-averse when exposed to gains format and risk-seeking when exposed to a losses format (Druckman 2001: 92). 32
Discourse studies of metaphor have so far focused on a number of different topics: the Kosovo crisis (Paris 2002), the Persian Gulf War (Pancake 1993), immigration discourse in political campaigns (Charteris-Black 2006), populist right-wing rhetoric (Semino and Masci 1996) diachronic studies on war reporting (Fabiszak 2007), business periodicals (Skorczynska and Deignan 2006), etc. All of these studies presuppose that the function of metaphor transcends language, and is also fundamental for the sphere of cognitive, and, finally, pragmatic. Metaphors highly influence how people's interpretations of historical and current events are shaped, and the manner in which communities direct their collective goals (Paris 2002: 426). In his study, Paris (2002: 428) focuses on the use of historical metaphors. The author claims that historical metaphors represent implicit or explicit comparison between the present and the past (2002: 428). As a political communications scholar, Paris gives a rather extended elaboration of the pragmatic functions of metaphors, and particularly historical metaphors. Respectively, in describing the Kosovo crisis as another potential Holocaust14 the politicians are trying to offer justification for intervention and even imply its necessity. On the other hand, the American politicians opposing interference in the Kosovo crisis referred to Kosovo as a potential Vietnam, the symbol of a failed US military intervention15 (Paris 2002: 425ff). Paris concludes that by referring to past collective experiences, not only are our views about the on-going events being shaped, but also our opinions on the possible future actions (2002: 426). Although there are usually simultaneously existing, competing metaphors in discourses, the metaphors which prevail in public discourse, in terms of their frequency of use generally shape the public opinion and are primarily associated with the event in question. In her research on the Gulf War discourse in the US, Pancake (1993: 293) claims that the metaphors which were then institutionalised in political discourse, such as the "Desert Storm", rapidly became part of media and everyday discourses, and greatly influenced the public opinion. The established metaphors, Pancake implies, were a powerful tool in war justification and creating conditions for public support of the military actions (1993: 294).
14 “What if someone had listened to Winston Churchill and stood up to Adolf Hitler earlier? How many peoples’ lives might have been saved, and how many American lives might have been saved? What if someone had been working on the powder keg that exploded World War I, which claimed more lives than World War II for most European countries, what would have happened?” (Clinton in Paris 2002: 435) 15 Since Vietnam ended, [we have paid] a terrible price for our mistake and we are still reaping the bitter fruit of those decisions. The war in Southeast Asia is very similar to the Balkans, a civil war . . . [that] has to be settled by those who are most affected-those who live there . . . and it will be impossible for us militarily from the outside to impose successful solution on the problems faced by the people of this area.” (Costello, cited in Paris 2002: 444) 33
Some of the conceptual metaphors Pancake identified are MACHINES ARE ANIMATE (“US jets unleash 'storm'”), WAR IS A GAME (“The US navy scored a victory”), and WAR IS ENTERTAINMENT (“Nintendo war”). When machines are used for reporting on conflicts, agents are hidden and the focus is taken away from the people actually operating the machinery and committing the killings (1993: 285). Presenting the domain of war in terms of entertainment, it is insinuated that war is scripted, theatrical, similar to video games or football, which completely directs the attention away from the real consequences and atrocities of warfare (1993: 292). Several studies have also touched upon the relevance of metaphor in right-wing populism rhetoric (Semino and Masci 1996, Charteris-Black 2005). Metaphor, due to its possibilities of subtle referencing can be a useful device in the new nationalist rhetoric. Semino and Masci (1996, cit. in Charteris-Black 2004: 51), report on explicit manipulation of football as the symbol of national identity in Italy in the rhetoric of Silvio Berlusconi. Through the systematic use of the cognitive metaphor POLITICS IS FOOTBALL, the popular and the familiar was related to the vague and the abstract in engaging in the populist right-wing rhetoric. The studies introduced in this chapter examine the impact of metaphor on shaping the public opinion in the instances when the government or individual political figures tried to influence the perception of military interventions, and promote acceptance and support for a specific political agenda. The findings of psychological studies confirm that people's opinions can be influenced and framed depending on the manner in which state of affairs are linguistically framed, which makes metaphor a very relevant linguistic tool in political and public discourse.
5. Data
The data collected for the purposes of this study consist of 308 articles from the British and American print media dating from June 1991 to September 2004. The criteria for selecting the articles in corpus building were that the articles were published in quality newspapers (i), that the key words Germany, Croatia and recognition appeared in a single paragraph (ii) which indicated that the topic of Germany's recognition was addressed, and the third criterion was that the articles were not published in the Opinions section of the newspapers (iii), which guaranteed (the claim of) objectivity and that the published articles are representative of the opinions supported by the newspaper. For identifying newspapers as
34 belonging to the category “quality newspapers”, I followed the classification of British newspapers of the RASIM Lancaster study, which identified the following as broadsheets: Business, Guardian and Observer, Independent and Independent on Sunday, Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph, Times and Sunday Times (Wodak 2011, Jun. 9: 13). For the US classification, I used the list of 100 newspapers by circulation released by the Audit Buerau of Circulations (List of newspapers in the United States by circulation 2011). The collection of newspaper articles was a challenging task in the course of this study because many of the articles dating from the beginning of the 1990s are not available in electronic format. For these reasons, the collection was partly opportunistic; I collected the articles which were available. All of the articles were retrieved from Highbeam Reseach, an online article database. Table 2 shows the exact number of articles and the titles of the newspapers which constitute the corpus.
Table 2 Corpus data
US newspapers No. of tokens No. of articles
Chicago Sun Times 7,643 16
The Boston Globe 14,971 20
The Economist 7,821 9
The Houston Chronicle 4,773 8
The New York Times 47,074 55
The San Francisco Chronicle 3,088 3
The Washington Post 43,266 46
The Washington Times 4,925 6
USA Today 2,353 7
Total (US) 135,914 170
UK newspapers
Evening Standard 1,287 4
The Guardian 39,462 58
35
The Independent 7,979 10
The Times 41,054 66
Total (UK) 89,782 138
Total (US & UK) 225,696 308
The articles from the US newspaper sub-corpus account for 60.22% of the corpus in terms of token distribution and 55.19% in terms of number of articles. In the process of article selection I did not use a temporal frame, articles which were published from mid-1990s until today were included in the corpus. However, the publication of articles on the topic of Germany's recognition showed regular temporal patterns shown in Picture 1.
Picture 1 Temporal distribution of articles
The temporal distribution illustrates that the largest number of articles was published around the period of Croatian and Slovenian declarations of independence, in end June, in July, and August of 1991, and in the time of Germany’s and EC’s recognition in December 1992, and January 1992. After March 1992, the articles were published only sporadically, and were related to events which focused the attention of the foreign desks back on the Balkan region, 36 such as the war in Bosnia, the war in Kosovo, and the Milosevic trail. Another event which focused the attention on the relationship between Croatia and Germany which brought up the recognition discourse was the FIFA World Cup quarter-final football match between Croatia and Germany, where “old friends” became sports rivals. The corpus has since its compilation also been used for didactic purposes in a Corpus Linguistics class at the Linguistics Department, University of Zadar, Croatia.
6. Methodology: Implementation
In previous chapters some of the basic concepts of CL, as well as the theoretical and methodological basis of CDA and CMA have been described. Here I clarify the concrete implementation of the CL tools in critical (metaphor) discourse analysis. Quantitative CL methods were applied by the tools of the software package Wordsmith Tools Version 5.0 (Scott 2008). Semantic and POS tagging of the corpus was performed by Wmatrix 3 (Rayson 2009). The study was not initially conceived as an in-depth analysis of metaphor use in media discourse; the interest in metaphors arose after close readings of the texts which highly relied on pragmatic functions of metaphors as rhetorical devices. Due to problematic aspects of automatic metaphor recognition, all the metaphors in the corpus were manually tagged and categorised. The total number of identified metaphors and metonymies exceeded 3,000 and all the identified categories could not be included in the results chapter of this thesis. The metaphors were thereupon classified according to the target domains. The research was initially conceived as a comparative study between the two sub-corpora, however, the qualitative analysis showed that the discourses of the British and the US media, did not differ significantly, therefore they were taken as representative of the English-speaking world’s print media.
7. Research Questions Revisited
The intentions and the hypothesis of the thesis were thoroughly addressed in the previous chapters, however, now “armed” with methodological and theoretical concepts, I repeat some of the main areas of research presented in the following chapters. Since the representation of Germany and the recognition are the main focus of the study, the main research questions are the following:
37
How and by which linguistic means are the ideological implications of Germany's political recognition of Croatia and Slovenia realised in the British and US print media discourse?
What is the relevance of interdiscursivity in the British and US print media discourse of Germany's political recognition of Croatia and Slovenia?
What ideological implications do conceptual metaphors have in the British and US print media discourse of Germany's political recognition of Croatia and Slovenia?
8. Results
8.1. Collocation analysis: Germany
8.1.1. Premodifiers
In the first step of investigating the media representation of Germany, premodifiers for the noun Germany were calculated and categorised accordingly. The hypothesis was that the adjectival modifiers would provide insight into particular patterns of the representation of Germany, and serve as a starting point for further analysis.
Table 2 Semantic categories of premodifiers of Germany
CATEGORY TYPES (tokens) SUB-TOTALS
GEOGRAPHY East Germany (16)
West Germany (11) 27 CHANGE united Germany (19) new Germany (13)
reunited Germany (10) unified Germany (5)
resurgent Germany (3) modern Germany(2)
newly-united Germany (1)
a different Germany (1) 54 IDEOLOGICAL Nazi Germany (8) ATHROPONYMS Hitler’s Germany (3)
“fascist“ Germany and Austria (1) 11
38
ASSERTIVENESS assertive Germany (6)
expansionist Germany (2)
strong/er Germany (2) a particularly aggressive Germany (1) 11
The altogether 103 adjectival premodifiers are distributed in four categories: Geography, Change, Ideological Anthroponyms, and Assertiveness. All premodifiers, except for the category Geography are considered to be relevant for the media’s representation of Germany. In the largest semantic category of Change, even the prima facie neutral adjective united, assumes different connotations when the individual occurrences are looked up in the corpus.
(1) “At the heart of political Europe is an empty space. It is filled with nervous uncertainty, a wish for recognition yet a fear of action, memories that crowd out policies and preoccupations that impede achievement. It is called united Germany.” (Sunday Times, 23)
(2) “United Germany is becoming a foreign-policy power to be reckoned with. For it was German arm-twisting that forced the Community-against the better judgment of some EC members and the advice of the United Nations and the United States-to agree to recognise any well-behaved ex-Yugoslav republic within a month.” (Economist, 7) In these and other examples, the premodifications from the category of Change are used with negative connotations. It is implied that the event of German unification was the cause for negative modifications in Germany's foreign policy which the authors criticise. In the second example, the concept of unification is related to the concept of power. After unification Germany regained power on the international scene. The semantic field of change is more emphatically expressed in the uses of the adjective resurgent:
(3) “An older generation with memories of the second world war remains apprehensive about a resurgent Germany.” (Times, 55)
(4) “The European Community they want to join is one that is increasingly dominated by resurgent, united Germany, not France or by any of its other members, such as Britain.” (Boston Globe, 15) In (3), the resurgent Germany is a term creating a direct interdiscursive relation between the unified Germany after 1989, and the World War II Germany. In (4), the author explicitly states that he considers French and British leadership within the EC to be more suitable than the one of the “suspicious” rising power.
39
The category Ideological Anthroponyms will be addressed in more detail in the analysis of the relevance of World War discourse. Describing Germany in terms of Assertiveness is a direct comment on Germany's foreign policy actions after the unification.
(5) “After a newly assertive Germany pushed the EC into recognizing Croatia on Jan. 15, other nations followed their lead instead of the United States'.” (Houston Chronicle, 3) This final example reflects the relation established between the domain of political power and physical power, in which terms Germany is physically forcing EC into following its foreign policy actions. Such representations form a large group which is classified under the conceptual metaphor GERMANY IS A COERCER, which is subject of a more detailed analysis later on.
8.1.2. Lexical verbs
In the second step of the analysis of the representation of Germany, the group of 181 lexical verbs used in combination with the noun Germany in the subject position, isolated through POS tagging, was classified in twelve semantic categories: Change (8.28%), Cognition (12.15%), Communication (42.44%), Competition (2.76%), Contact (2.2%), Creation (1.1%), Emotion (8.28%), Motion (6.07%), Perception (1.1%), Possession (1.1%), Social (6.62%), and Stative (8.84%). The distribution of the verbs across categories is illustrated in Picture 2.
Picture 2 Distribution of lexical verbs across semantic categories
The number of Communication lexical verbs is easily accounted for in terms of the relevance of metonymic relations throughout the corpus. When reporting on events, the authors are not writing about political decisions and actions of particular public figures, or governments, they are attributed to the country as a whole. 40
(6) “Germany threatened to strike out independently and recognise the republics by itself” (Evening Standard, 4)
(7) “Diplomats say the original French-British plan ran into trouble after Germany made clear that it was standing firm.” (New York Times, 19) The two following biggest categories of Emotion and Cognition can be accounted for in similar terms. However, the use of verbs of emotion and cognition calls for a more complex conceptualisation process, that of cross-domain mapping. The underlying conceptual metaphor in the cases where actions of a country are illustrated in terms of feeling and thinking is COUNTRY IS A HUMAN BEING.
(8) “Germany understands how completely the old post-war world has been shattered” (Chicago Sun-Times, 3)
(9) “This strengthening of the community will almost certainly be followed by its enlargement in an effort to reduce the poverty and political turmoil Germany fears to its south and east” (New York Times, 20) It can be argued that the examples (6-7) also account for the same conceptual process; however, the metonymic use of the reference to a country instead of its government, or political figures has become so common in political reporting that its non-literal meaning has become unnoticeable and automatically processed.
For additional analysis, the most frequent lexical verbs with Germany in the subject position were isolated from the list, regardless of their category membership: the ten most frequent lexical verbs and the number of their occurrences are: say (14), want (11), push (8), flex muscles (5), argue (5), announce (5) threaten (4), insist (4) dominate (3), grant [recognition] (2).
The lexical classification provided more insight into the rhetorical devices of reporting (use of metonymy), but the list of the individual most frequent verbs in the corpus supports the findings of the premodifier semantic classification, as most of the verbs are semantically related to the concept of assertiveness, except for the most common Communication verbs, say, argue and announce.
(10) “Much of the British resistance to embracing the European Community is a fear that Germany will dominate a united Europe” (Boston Globe, 11)
(11) “The Germans pushed hard to shift European Community policy.” (Washington Post, 15)
41
8.2. World War references: Semantic analysis
One of the key reasons for arguing the existence of bias in representations of Germany's recognition was the interdiscursive relation the analysed articles established with the events of the two World Wars. The first step in analysing the relevance of the semantic category “World War” was isolating the words appearing in the frequency word list which were classified as members of the category. In the second step, the corpus was compared with a reference corpus, the BNC16, by using the KeyWords tool. For calculating keyness, the log- likelihood test was used, with the p-value set to 0.05. The minimal frequency of an analysed word was set at 3, thus some of the rarely occurring words in Table 3 were not included in the calculation. Finally, the list of “World War” words was compared with the results of the Key Words calculation. In interpreting the results presented in Table 3 it should be noted that the words world and ally were accepted only as marginal members of the category. The word world is used in other contexts as well, but it has been accepted in the category since the results of the collocation analysis show that the words first, second and war collocate highly frequently with the word world, accounting for a third of the word's overall occurrences. The word ally is another marginal member because it occurs 84 times in the corpus, and it is identified as being used with the meaning “World War Allies” in 16 occurrences. Table 3 World War I/II references
SEARCH TERM NUMBER OF Keyness OCCURENCES 1914 12 1918 8 1930s 4 1939 3 1940s 5 1941 17 1943 1 1945 19 WW II/Second World War/World War 91 144,79 (world) II/last World War WW I/First World War/World War I 20 another world war/ World War III/three 4 two world wars 6 axis 2 Nazi* 79 294,05 fascist* 41 43,42 (fascists), 38,01 (fascist) Allies 15 368,09 (ally)
16 The BNC wordlist used in the study is available at: http://www.lexically.net/downloads/version4/downloading%20BNC.htm 42
Anschluss 1 blitz 3 Hitler 32 41,52 (Hitler's) 34,65 (Hitler) Auschwitz 4 Holocaust 3 Reich 26 115,33 Puppet (regime) 21 103,29 Ustasha 15 163,71 Chetnik 3 19,5 TOTAL 414
The number of words which were identified as “key”, i.e. the number of words which appear unusually frequently in the corpus when compared to the general corpus, indicates that historical references play a relevant role in contextualizing the described events and the conflicts within Yugoslavia. The activated discourse aroused typical images of World Wars and the “old” rivalries between the Allies and the forces of the Axis. The element of interdiscursivity does not end here. The results of the qualitative analysis also indicate that the reporters not only engage in reminiscing about the events of the first half of the century, but establish direct relations between the then and the now. The events of 1991 become a potential “1914”, “1941”, or “1943”. The symbolism of 1914 is used to refer to the events which triggered World War I, which started in the Balkans (14 and 15).
(12) “Nearly a half-century after World War II, Germany is now facing emotional denunciations from a small number of harsh critics who argue that its current foreign policy resembles that of Adolf Hitler's Nazi regime” (Washington Post, 22)
(13) “Europe has seen nothing like this since World War II. The ancient ethnic hatreds on both sides make the fighting sickeningly brutal.” (Washington Times, 5)
(14) “The optimists point out that this is not 1914, when the Balkans set Europe alight. But neither, in Yugoslavia, has 1991 properly arrived: the Yugoslavs are not behaving like late-century Europeans” (Economist, 3)
(15) “All of this seems at times to evoke less the bright optimism of 1992 than the darkness of 1914, when the eruption of fighting in these same fields and mountains set off World War I” (New York Times, 44) When explicitly engaging in comparisons with the events of World War II, reporters tend to use mitigation strategies, which are in any case common in journalism. Mitigation in this case refers to moderating the intensity of illocutionary acts. Instead of explicitly expressing their own point of view, journalists are citing the words of politicians, or declaring a “general state of concern”. In the above listed examples, the sources of opinion seem to be, quite vaguely, a small number of harsh critics (12) and optimists (14). Examples (14) and (15) use the entailment of the established historical metaphor BALKANS ARE A POWDER KEG in
43
“Balkans set Europe alight”, and “the eruption of fighting”, additionally; the Yugoslav nations are described as uncivilised, and as engaging in “ancient hatreds”. The interdiscursive relation established between the historical narrative of World Wars and 1991 results in integrating several ideologies in the representation of the events, or in terms of CMT, cross- domain mappings. By arguing that 1991 IS 1914, or respectively 1991 IS 1940s, the World War scenario is applied in current events.
8.3. Corpus-based conceptual metaphor analysis
It has previously been noted that the number of metaphors found in the corpus exceeds a presentable sample. An indiscriminate sample would not, in any case, be of interest for the purposes of this study. In the following chapter, I address metaphors from the sphere of politics which were found relevant in portraying political media discourse. The conceptual metaphors are presented in tables which indicate the source and the target domain, together with the number of lexemes found in the source domain. The analyses of the identified conceptual metaphors are elaborated on and contextualised when they have been the object of research conducted by other scholars. Before individual analyses of particular domains, a partial list of the metaphors found in the corpus is presented.
Table 4 Selected metaphors from the corpus
REFUGEES ARE WATER
POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HUMAN BODY
NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A COUNTRY IS A BIRTH OF A CHILD POLITICAL POWER IS A SET OF MUSCLES
POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HOUSE
POLITICAL ENTITY IS A DRAWING ON A MAP
POLITICAL ENTITY IS A SOLID OBJECT
POLITICAL ENTITY IS A BOAT
PEACE IS A DELICATE OBJECT
WAR IS A SPREADING SUBSTANCE
44
WAR IS BLOODSHED
WAR IS A VOLCANO
WAR IS AN EXPLOSION
CONFLICT IS A PHYSICAL GAP
VERBAL ARGUMENTS ARE PHYSICAL CONFLICTS
ACTIONS ARE MOTIONS
POSITIVE EMOTIONS ARE WARMTH
TIME IS SPACE
TIME IS A MOVING OBJECT
MARKET CHANGES ARE PHYSICAL MOVEMENTS
ECONOMY IS A BUILDING
ECONOMY IS A LIVING BEING
Most of the here presented metaphors have their target domains in the fields of POLITICS, WAR, and ECONOMY, the fields of interest of this study. However, some of the metaphors made up a large group of primary, embodied metaphors, potential candidates for the “universal metaphor category” (Kövecses 2010), such as ACTIONS ARE MOTIONS, POSITIVE EMOTIONS ARE WARMTH, TIME IS SPACE, and TIME IS A MOVING OBJECT. These metaphors were classified as inactive, and not of particular interest for investigating the pragmatic role of metaphor.
8.3.1. REFUGEES ARE WATER
The conceptual metaphor IMMIGRANTS/REFUGEES ARE WATER has been addressed in critical analyses in several studies in recent years (Santa Ana 2002; Baker 2006, Ch.4; Charteris-Black 2006; KhosraviNik 2008). Analysts agree that this metaphor is often found in the context of right-wing nationalist discourse (Baker 2006: 88; Charteris-Black 2006: 569). According to Charteris-Black (2006: 569), liquid metaphors were used as implicit rhetorical devices in the discourse of the right-wing parties. In his research on the representation of immigrants in British election campaigns, Charteris-Black found that country was represented as a container, most containers contain liquids, and most natural disasters are related to water
45
(2006: 569). Consequently, by activating the conceptual domain WATER the domain NATURAL DISASTERS is activated as well. The metaphor is instrumentalised for causing fears of possible container overflow, or, in concrete terms, of a dangerously high immigrant influx. Other researchers are more wary of establishing a direct relation between the discourses of refugees in the (British) media with negative, ideological representations. According to Law et al. (cited in Baker 2006: 88), media today have a new, positive function in exposing racist attitudes and engaging in the discourse of inclusion by emphasizing the immigrants’ contribution to a multi-cultural society.
Types identified as belonging to the target domain REFUGEE were not lexeme specific, although the lexemes refugee/refugees made up more than half of the examples; other expressions from the target domain are migration, immigrants, migrants and peoples.
Table 4 REFUGEES ARE WATER
TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
flood (of refugees) (2)
REFUGEES WATER flow of migrants/immigration (3)
refugee influx (6)
spill (1)
to stream (out/toward) (2), stream of refugees (1)
tidal wave (of refugees) (2)
tide (of immigrants/peoples) (2)
wave (of migration/refugees/people) (5)
Total 24
The results of the qualitative analysis showed that in the majority of cases this metaphor is used in negative representations of (Yugoslav) refugees as moving forces entering other countries and causing destabilization.
The significance of the refugee/immigrant discourse in this corpus has implications that go beyond the concerns about the Yugoslav refugees who were headed for the EC
46 countries. After the Fall of the Berlin Wall, a fear emerged of a great general movement of the Eastern European, and Eastern German refugees towards the West.
(16) “Upheaval in the East could spark a wave of migration to Germany so massive that it would destabilize Europe's largest and richest country” (Washington Post, 17)
(17) “Fears about a tidal wave of East bloc refugees are particularly acute in Germany, but the immigration debate has become a hot political issue as well for France and other Southern European countries” (Washington Post, 7) The existing research on the use of this metaphor has focused on media and political discourse of the country which was the destination of immigrants and refugees. Yugoslav immigrants are in this case not seen as a “threat” to the UK or the US, but to Yugoslavia’s neighbouring countries, Germany, or occasionally the EC. The refugees are only indirectly affecting the countries reporting on the events. Although the immediate result of creating the conceptual frame in question is not evoking emotions of fear among the US and UK citizens, the negative image of refugees as sources of political and economic destabilization seems nevertheless well established in the general political/media discourse.
Looking beyond the metaphor analysis, it is worth mentioning that the corpus showed high collocation of refugee* with quantification premodifiers in examples such as “hundreds of thousands of refugees”, “Every day hundreds of refugees, mainly from the former Habsburg part of Romania, try to cross into Austria”. These findings are in line with previous research on the role of quantification in the refugee/immigrant discourse (Baker 2006: 79). Although Baker claims that some of the attempts of quantifying refugees suggest an underlying discourse of fear about the refugees’ growing numbers, the results of this analysis have shown different tendencies. Quantification premodifiers of the lexemes refugee, migrant and immigrant were used in different contexts and for different purposes than the conceptual metaphor REFUGEES ARE WATER. Reporters mentioned numbers of refugees in reporting on the alarming consequences of warfare, along with mentioning the number of deaths and in describing material losses. Sometimes such reports were embedded in the reporters’ humanitarian pleas.
(18) “The Croats, and two-thirds of their Serbian minority, had voted overwhelmingly for independence. They were then assaulted by the Yugoslav national army, the largest between the Rhine and the Bug: half-a-million refugees, 20,000 corpses, ancient monuments and churches were bombarded. Why did (and does) the army behave in this way?” (Guardian, 32)
(19) “the dispute between the Germans and Americans boiled down to a difference in tactics on how to stop the bloodshed in a war that has claimed more than 10,000 lives - most of them Croats - created a half-million refugees and destroyed about half of Croatia's industrial capacity.” (Washington Post, 33)
47
The differences in the use of conceptual metaphors and quantification show patterns in two seemingly opposite discourses. Here is where the notion of framing comes in: the same scenarios can be presented in completely different terms depending on the goals of the speaker. Whereas refugees on the one hand can be seen as a threat, and as a factor of political and economic destabilization, on the other hand, refugees are described as victims of warfare in humanitarian pleas. These findings imply that linguistic choices highly reflect the underlying intentions of speakers.
8.3.2. POLITICAL ENTITIES ARE HUMAN BODIES
Metaphors which are established from the source domain HUMAN BODY are of special relevance for CMT, as the theory strongly relies on the concept of embodiment. Kövesces claims: “The human body is an ideal source domain, since, for us, it is clearly delineated and (we believe) we know it well.” (2010: 18). In the same discussion, the author claims that there are certain empirical bases for arguing the relevance of this conceptual domain, in a study of a collection of approximately 12,000 metaphorical idioms (George Nagy “Figurative Idioms”), it has been concluded that almost 2,000 are related to the human body. In discussing extra- linguistic realisations of conceptual metaphors, Kövecses claims that the relevance of the domain can be observed in children's drawings which are often realisations of the metaphor INANIMATE OBJECTS ARE PEOPLE (2010: 64). Going one step further, according to the CMT proponent, bodily experiences account for universality in metaphor (Kövecses 2005: xii). On the example THE ANGRY PERSON IS A PRESSURIZED CONTAINER (2005: 39), Kövecses demonstrates that the common bodily experiences account for patterns found in many typologically unrelated languages; it should be noted though, that there are limitations to these claims, the concrete realisations of these metaphors are shaped by local cultural knowledge. Whereas, for example in English, Hungarian, Japanese, and Wolof an angry person's body is a conceptualised in terms of a container of a fluid or gas, Chinese does not (Kövecses 2005: 41).
The use of the conceptual mapping from the BODY domain onto the POLITICAL INSTITUTION domain has a long history; it is presumably as old as the public sphere. Some researchers trace its origins back to the Greek polis (Hale, cited in Musolff 2004: 83)17. The
17 “Originating as an expression of the unity of the Greek polis, it became in turn an important concept in the arsenal of the Stoic philosophers, Christian theologians, and spokesmen for the rising monarchies of the late medieval Europe. [. . .] The English Renaissance witnessed the final flourishing of the idea of the body politic, 48 metaphor of the BODY POLITIC redefined the understanding of the social sphere in the time of Renaissance (Musolff 2004: 84), and in philosophical work it is best represented in the classical work of Thomas Hobbes, “The Leviathan”, where every part of society is related to the functioning of a particular part of the human body. The results presented here indicate that the metaphor is still commonly activated today in the sphere of political discourse.
The metaphor has been employed for ideological purposes in the times of National Socialism in Germany, as an instrument in creating dehumanising images of the Jewish community. Some historians use the term “applied biology” and “organicist metaphor” for the discourse of Nazis (Jackson and Weidman 2004: 123). Society was described as an organism and each group within society had to accept its own place in it in order for the organism to function properly. The metaphor was realised as an image of an upright body standing on the map of Europe, where Nordics would be the leaders, the brain, the Alpine and Mediterranean races would be the workers, the hands and the feet. Jews were associated with “parasites” on the Aryan body. This metaphor directly justified the “need” to eliminate the parasites.
Another seminal work which describes the relevance of bodily metaphors in the public (medical) discourse is Susan Sontag’s “Illness as Metaphor” (1978) (later also “Aids and its Metaphors” [1989]) in which the author critically addresses the metaphors surrounding cancer and tuberculosis. According to Sontag, illnesses carry the stigma of contamination and infection, regardless of the issue is they are actually transmittable or not. Such concepts of illnesses justify discrimination against the people suffering from illnesses (Musolff 2004: 84).
In a more recent study by Musolff (2004: 83ff), the use of the body metaphor was applied in its relation to the EC (EU) discourse. In another study, Fabsziak finds that by mapping the conceptual domain of STATE to the HUMAN BODY domain in international politics, a framework is established through which interactions between countries become speech acts or physical interactions between people (2007: 125).
Table 5 POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HUMAN BODY
TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
hand (31)
POLITICAL ENTITY HUMAN BODY head (25)
while at the same time it produced [. . .] challenges to the anthropomorphic view of the universe.” (Hale, cited in Musolff 2004: 83)
49
heart (18)
shoulder (3)
brain (3)
knees (2)
back (2)
neck (1)
feet (1)
spine (1)
lips (1)
nose (1)
cripple (2)
wound (1)
amputate (2)
corpse (1)
Total 95
8.3.2.1. POWER (OF A POLITICAL ENTITY) IS A HAND
The most frequent lexeme in the table hand is found in two contexts in the corpus, with the first meaning “to be in the control/jurisdiction of a political entity”, and in the second as an abstract symbol of political power.
(20) “America's hand always lay over Britain's on the control button for our nuclear deterrent, while France's much-vaunted independent stance was more posture than practicality.” (The Sunday Times, 63)
(21) “The ceasefire which leaders of Croatia and Serbia and the Yugoslav presidency agreed to yesterday has strengthened the hand of the Netherlands and Germany, the two leading EC advocates of a peacekeeping force.” (Guardian, 17)
In the first sense, the metaphor POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HUMAN BODY is extended to the entailment POWER (OF A POLITICAL ENTITY) IS A HAND. In the first example the idiomatically established mapping is extended, and the tension between the domains has been reactivated by constructing a scenario in which the US influence over the British (and the
50
European) decision to engage in nuclear interventions is described in terms of holding a hand over the British hand. In the second example, the metaphor is similarly used in structuring the article as a whole, which focusses on the progress and endorsement of peacekeeping in Yugoslavia. The strengthening of the hand here refers to the attempts of the German and the Dutch government who strongly advocated the necessity of conflict management and peacekeeping on the territory of Yugoslavia, as opposed to the British warnings about the high risks of involvement.
(22) “Kohl, like Vatican officials who recognised the new nations two days ago, said the recognition connoted no enmity toward Serbia, whose Orthodox majority suffered greatly at the hands of Germans and Catholic Croatians before and during World War II.” (Boston Globe, 19)
(23) “While Bosnia moved to separate itself from the collapsed federation, the last federal post not in Serbian hands fell when Ante Markovic, a Croat, resigned after almost three years as prime minister” (Guardian, 46)
The POWER/HAND mapping realised in the expression being in the hands of, in (22-23) the term has rather negative implications, reminding the reader that the fascist German rule in World War II in the Balkans was imposed and undemocratic, and similarly, that Serbia has expansionist ambitions in Yugoslavia. These embodiment metaphors can be related to legacy of the political thought from the period of Enlightenment, where each body part corresponds to a specific government institution. Hand in this case refers to the country's military power. The embodiment metaphor is constituted hierarchically, with head in a dominant position with the attributed role of leadership, decision making, and governance.
8.3.2.2. GOVERNMENT OF A STATE IS THE HEAD
Head of state or government is probably the most common idiomatic expression realising the embodied perception of political institutions; this explains the number of lexical realisations of the type “head” in the corpus. The preposition “of” is the closest collocation of the word “head”, and “state” co-occurs significantly frequent with the word “head”. Most of the corpus occurrences follow the pattern “head of + name of the political entity”18.
(24) “head of state”, “head of Germany's tiny Jewish community”, “head of Iranian intelligence”, “head of the Office of the Republic of Slovenia in Washington”, “head of the Serbian Orthodox Church”, “head of the Defense Ministry's arms section”, “head of the Croatian bureau in Stuttgart” The word head is highly polysemous, and its previously metaphoric relation to the concept of leadership has become conventionalised to that extent that it is part of dictionary
18 For an elaborate discussion on the embodied metaphor of state, with references to historical and philosophical 51 entries for the word. The “dead metaphor” example head of state is not very intriguing for CMA, since the choice of metaphor in these cases cannot be explicitly related to one’s intentions, because the author/speaker is merely following a prescribed linguistic pattern. The related lexeme brain, on the other hand, yielded more interesting results.
8.3.2.3. GOVERNMENT OF A STATE IS THE BRAIN
In the conceptual metaphor (GOVERNING) POLITICAL INSTITUTION IS THE BRAIN (OF THE POLITICAL ENTITY) the cognitive aspect and the element of decision-making is emphasized in referring to the leading institution, thus somewhat activating the “sleeping metaphor” (GOVERNING) POLITICAL INSTITUTION IS THE HEAD (OF THE POLITICAL ENTITY). The metaphor is systematically used as an element of cohesion in a Times article entitled “Germany's divided mind conjures up demons of Nazism”, where the author expresses scepticism about the processes of the German unification:
(25) “But Germany has been misleading its neighbours. Herr Kohl had given the impression that unification would merely be a digestion problem. In fact, it involves a surgical operation, akin to a brain transplant. The Europeanised federal republic has had the strangest of post-totalitarian societies grafted upon it. Colonial solutions exporting western governors, codes of law and privatisers to the east may help modernise eastern Germany, but in fact compound the basic psychological problems. The federal republic thoroughly and sometimes painfully processed its wartime past; the east Germans have never made such a passage. As a result, the two lobes of the German brain are functioning quite differently on the question of national identity. Integrating the two Germanys will be a long, gruelling process.” (Times, 11)
The embodiment metaphor is used throughout the text as a cohesive device. In the beginning of the article, the author addresses several problems Germany is facing or causing at the time. These stretch from Germany’s foreign policy bullies, Bundesbank bullies, to the rise of the far right. These last paragraphs offer explanations for the changes in Germany’s policy. Conceptual metaphors POLITICAL UNIFICATION IS DIGESTION and POLITICAL UNIFICATION IS A BRAIN TRANSPLANT are used in portraying the unification of Germany.
Another metaphor which was coined by cartoonists in German and foreign press in 1989 was that of a shotgun wedding (Lewis 1995)19. During the pre-unification period, the
sources see Musolff (2004). 19 “The notion of German union as a shotgun wedding between an overbearing, masculinized West Germany and a vulnerable, feminized East Germany captured the imagination of cartoonists on both sides of the Channel in a number of different permutations: Helmut Kohl as Henry Higgins educating an East German Eliza Doolittle; a West German devil tempting an East German Eve with the snake of the Deutschmark; German union as a menage à trois presided over by a male NATO; and finally in the tageszeitung the German couple was prophesied a vigorous sexual future in the caption "coitus germaniae non interruptus".” (Lewis 1995: 52 conceptual metaphor ACTIONS ARE MOTIONS was coined in the German public discourse for describing the common future path of the previously separated parts of the country. The public figures talked about “Germans following the path of unity”, “dashing toward unity”, and about the “train of German unity” (Radden 1992: 525). Depending on the goals of the speakers, whether they want to emphasize the economic, political, ideological differences (EAST AND WEST GERMANY ARE TWO LOBES OF A BRAIN), or the country's common future, different source domains can be chosen in relation to the conceptual domain of UNIFICATION.
8.3.2.4. CENTRAL PART OF A POLITICAL ENTITY IS THE HEART
The HEART domain has been the object of several studies in cognitive linguistics (Musolff 2004, Niemeier, cited in Musolff 2004: 102). Niemeier has done an elaborate classification of the heart metaphors, identifying four underlying conceptual metaphors: HEART IS A LIVING ORGANISM (“two hearts that beat as one”), HEART IS A CONTAINER (“She poured her heart out.”), HEART IS AN OBJECT OF VALUE (“to win somebody's heart”), and HEART as a metonymy for a PERSON (“She set all hearts on fire.”) (Niemeier, cited in Musolff 2004: 102). In the current study, the results were identical to the categories established in Musoloff (2004: 102-103).
(26) “This is happening at the heart of Europe ... It is in Europe's sphere of influence” (Sunday Times, 23)
(27) “Every day men, women and children are being killed in the heart of Europe” (Guardian, 23)
(28) “David Hearst drives past the roadblocks, shotguns, hears of ethnic unrest in Yugoslavia, and uncovers some malignant palpitations in Europe's ailing heart.” (Guardian, 12)
(29) “Serbia, historically at odds with Roman Catholic Croats, insists that it was Croatia's unilateral declaration of independence and its quick recognition by Germany that triggered the torrent of events now bleeding the heart of the Balkans.” (Washington Times, 2)
The word heart, similarly to other words from the semantic field of the human body, occurs in the corpus only in metaphorical expressions. The results of the collocation analysis show that heart appears frequently in patterns the heart of Europe, and, in some cases, in patterns the heart of the Balkans/Yugoslavia. The HEART domain is in political discourse related to the aspect of CENTRALITY (2004: 103), and in this study, geographical centrality. The two examples (26-27) illustrate possible instrumentalisation of this particular metaphor. The authors of the texts are reporting on alarming facts. They are trying to raise reader
135) 53 awareness, and express the need for intervention in some cases (“It is in Europe's sphere of influence.”). The location of the conflict has a special significance for Europeans, because the violence is spreading in their immediate neighbourhood, in the very core of the “democratic world”.
In the second conceptual framing (28-29), HEART is seen as a body part which is prone to ILLNESS (28) and INJURY (29) (as reported in Musoloff 2004: 103). The injuries inflicted on the heart may respectively cause a collapse of the entire political entity. In (28) the author extends the mapping between violence and a specific type of a heart condition, palpitation. The entire article entitled “The pain of old wounds” activates the embodiment metaphor, and is used as a conceptual. Interestingly, the author describes the conflicts as ethnic unrest. In (29) the metaphor is used after naming the events which contributed to the escalation of violence, in the opinion of the author. In this example, the choice of the metaphor is instrumentalised for the purposes of emphasizing the consequences of Germany's questionable political actions.
8.3.2.5. POLITICAL POWER IS A SET OF MUSCLES
The mapping of the MUSCLES domain to the POLITICAL POWER domain was used 16 times in the corpus, and it was identically realised in each of the occurrences. The domain RISE OF THE POLITICAL POWER was conceptualised in terms of MUSCLE FLEXING, equally frequent in the British and the US newspaper reports. The metaphor emerged in the discourse of the German recognition and it was used in framing the recognition process as a metaphor for the rise of Germany's political power.
(30) “As Germany steamrollered its 11 partners into immediate recognition of Croatia and Slovenia in all but name, the French foreign minister, Roland Dumas, looked queasily aware that he was watching a new power flexing its muscles.” (Times, 22)
(31) “By flexing their [German] newly found muscles, they can affect international policy significantly.” (Washington Times, 5)
(32) “Germany flexed its new diplomatic muscle Monday by recognizing the independence of two breakaway Yugoslav republics, Slovenia and Croatia.” (Houston Chronicle, 5)
(33) “GERMANY'S victory in forcing the EC Twelve to commit themselves to early diplomatic recognition of Croatia and Slovenia - for that is the real meaning of the fudge formula adopted by the EC Foreign Ministers in Brussels yesterday - amounts to an assertion of German muscle that has alarmed even its closest allies.” (Guardian, 24) The consistency in the use of this specific metaphor across different newspapers on both sides of the Atlantic, shows that the criticism of Germany was not a product of individual
54 reporters, but rather that a discourse of “new” Germany emerged simultaneously in different media sources across the Western sphere. The metaphor spread from its initial creator to general discourse at the time of the recognition. This discourse-specific metaphor arose at the time of the recognition, and it systematically appears in articles dating from December 18, 1991 until January 7, 1991. The emphasis on MUSCLE FLEXING diverts the attention away from the reasons behind the recognition and its role in conflict management. Instead of focusing on the countries being recognised, Germany’s foreign policy becomes the main topic of discussion. The conceptual domain of MUSCLE FLEXING additionally diminishes the element of necessity of political actions and curbing the conflict in Yugoslavia, but rather illustrates the event as an arbitrary action. Germany is directly opposing other political actors merely because of its wish to exercise its political power.
8.3.3. NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE
The conceptual metaphor NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE is another entailment of the political embodiment metaphor. Political entity as a BODY is prone to disease and illness, a characteristic also related with the previously described HEART metaphor.
Table 6 NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE
TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (no. of tokens)
NATIONALISM DISEASE virus (5)
virulent (1)
infect (1)
fever(1)
Total 8
As Table (6) shows, the NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE metaphor is often realised with lexemes describing particular types of diseases: virus and fever. Nationalism is described in terms of a VIRAL DISEASE, which introduces the domain of INFECTION and DISSEMINATION, implying that the phenomenon is not an acute or appearing in particular groups; it can in given time “infect” an entire population.
(34) “After a bloody civil war, Marshal Josip Broz Tito re-established the multi-ethnic state, but to preserve Communist rule, he largely suppressed smouldering resentments. In 1974, he made concessions to Hungarian and Albanian ethnic nationalism by making the provinces of 55
Vojvodina and Kosovo in Serbia 'constituent parts' of Yugoslavia, on the same footing with Serbia. This added to Serbian resentment, which, after Tito's death in 1980, eventually led to the emergence of Slobodan Milosevic's virulent brand of nationalism.” (New York Times, 54)
(35) “Today, even if the forces of human rights and the media appear to be safeguards against the more horrific deeds of the forces of anti-Semitism, there is no reason not to be on guard against the message inherent in the rightist movements in Europe - or in the voice of a David Duke in the United States. Even if the international community today appears not to tolerate the growth of the old virus, the use of political and economic sanctions can be a deterrent to its further evolution.” (Washington Times, 4)
(36) “So the rot festers on; very likely infecting neighbouring countries, such as Czechoslovakia and Bulgaria with the ethnic virus and compounding the economic problems of the whole region” (Guardian, 23) In (34), the author contextualises the rise of nationalism by giving an overview of historical events dating from the time of Tito’s Yugoslavia. It is implied that the spread of nationalism began with its emergence in Serbia, and with the rise of Slobodan Milosevic's political power.20 The Yugoslav nationalism is a special type of nationalism, as it is able to spread and INFECT the entire POLITICAL ENTITY. The Washington Times example puts the events in Yugoslavia in perspective of the spread of nationalism on the European continent, and in the North American context, with is symbolised in the person of the Ku Klux Klan activist and former Louisiana Senator, David Duke. Nationalism is not only infecting a single country, or a continent, it is a general phenomenon.
8.3.4. ESTABLISHMENT OF A COUNTRY IS A BIRTH OF A CHILD
The metaphor EXISTANCE OF A POLITICAL ENTITY IS A LIFE CYCLE, is established on a notion that political entities have a life cycle beginning with birth and ending in death. Although the articles describe the dissolution of a country, the most frequently established mapping is that between the FORMING OF A COUNTRY and BIRTH, hence the number of lexical items in Table 7 from the conceptual domain of BIRTH.
Table 7 (EXISTENCE OF A) POLITICAL ENTITY IS A LIFE CYCLE TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
(EXISTANCE OF A) LIFE CYCLE be born (2) POLITICAL ENTITY birth (2)
20Some other sources also relate the beginnings of the spread of nationalism in Yugoslavia with the Kosovo crisis and the influence of Slobodan Milosevic (The Fall of Yugoslavia). However, these events merely triggered the faster spread of nationalism which was already on the rise in Serbia and Croatia.
56
death (2)
offspring (1)
stillborn (1)
umbilical cord (1)
Total 9
(37) “For others, the dream [of the Republic of Croatia] was a nightmare, the birth of the country bathed in Balkan blood and more broadly signalling the launch of an assertive German mission to couple its economic power with political clout and dominate the new Europe. 'It's a great day for Croatia, and it's a very fine day for the Federal Republic of Germany,' said Mr Klaiber, fresh from creating the other new mini-state of Slovenia to the west.” (Guardian, 47)
(38) “The Yugoslavian army's tactics, if it has any, appear to be aimed at destroying rather than conquering Croatia, in order to make secession impossible or to cripple an independent state at birth.” (Guardian, 42)
(39) “Mr Peterle admitted that independence was not yet real: 'We feel like the baby that was born some time ago, but nobody wants to cut the umbilical cord'” (Independent, 5)
(40) “Croatian leaders agreed with their foes that the decision signified the death of the Balkan federation.” (Houston Chronicle, 4)
In the examples (38-40), there are series of smaller scenarios within the mapping ESTABLISHING A COUNTRY IS BIRTH: the scenario of a difficult birth, resulting in blood (of the victims of the Yugoslav war), crippling at birth, and remaining postnatally connected with the umbilical cord. In (38), the author uses several conceptual metaphors in portraying the rise of the new German political power; VIOLENT DEATH IS SPILLING OF BLOOD, ESTABLISHING A COUNTRY IS BIRTH, ACTIONS ARE MOTIONS and the metonymic relation between Klaiber whose support for the independence of Slovenia is equalled with creating the entire country. The number of metaphors, and a selection a highly suggestive citation, implies that these devices are used for the purpose of reader persuasion and direct criticism of Germany. Such elaborate scenarios can be contrasted with (40), where the lexical choice does not function as a distinct rhetorical device, and does not elaborate on the DEATH scenario.
8.3.5. POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HOUSE
The conceptual metaphor EUROPE(AN UNION) IS A HOUSE has been in general use since the speech given by Mikhail Gorbachev to the Council of Europe in 1989. Throughout the speech, the Soviet President addressed the idea of European unity in terms of different mini-scenarios of the underlying HOUSE METAPHOR: 57
“In our recent meetings with European leaders questions were raised about the architecture of our 'common home', on how it should be built and even on how it should be 'furnished' (...) I do not claim to carry a finished blueprint of that home in my pocket.”(Gorbachev 1989, Jul. 6). The use of the metaphor evoked many concerns at the time due to culturally differing framings and uses of the metaphor in the English and the Russian speaking world (Kövecses 2010: 254). In the Russian context, this metaphor is related to scenarios of shared responsibilities and a common structure with separated living units. In the English language, the metaphor is associated with no separations within the house, and walls built around which isolate it from the outside world. This misunderstanding caused suspicions in the US, as it was understood as opting for a policy of isolation of Europe from the US and NATO.
The HOUSE metaphor has nevertheless been adopted (though sometimes ironically) and in this corpus it is used both in referring to separate countries and the European Community as a whole.
The metaphor is a realisation of another possibly underlying mapping POLITICAL ENTITIES ARE BUILDINGS, or, more generally, ABSTRACT SYSTEMS ARE BUILDINGS (Musollf 2004: 174). The BUILDING metaphor is also used in other types of discourses, such as in economy, as was mentioned in the introduction to this chapter.
Table 8 POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HOUSE
TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
POLITICAL ENTITY HOUSE house (47)
door* (19)
window (4)
doorstep (2)
roof (1)
73
The house is not just a metaphor used for the purposes of internal relations, but also in describing relations with the neighbours next door, opening windows of cooperation, and having contact with those who come knocking at your door. (41) “Inside the ''European house'' Europeans are killing each other in the first Euro war in mainland Europe since 1945.” (Guardian, 14)
58
(42) “Yugoslavia, however, is a genuine, lacerating crisis, and not so much on Europe's doorstep as inside the entrance hall.” (Independent, 6)
(43) “Long-closed horizons to the East have reopened, but the doors have let in a tide of disaffected immigrants.” (Sunday Times, 63)
(44) “Yet Germany, which for decades opened its doors to political refugees from communism and totalitarianism, is now leading European efforts to slam those doors shut.” (Boston Globe 16)
In (41), the reference to the EUROPEAN HOUSE is put in quotation marks and used ironically. The title of the article “HOUSE OF THE DEAD. Why doesn't the 'New World Order' extend to Europe?”, makes use of the existing Gorbachev's mapping, and introduces sub-mapping whereupon the optimistic vision of unity is replaced with the image of death and violence. In (42), different parts of the house are related to geographical positions, similarly to the function of the CENTRALITY concept of the HEART metaphor. Examples (43-44) show how the HOUSE metaphor can be related to the refugee discourse. In other instances, which were not listed here, the refugees are in countries’ backyard, knocking on doors, or having the doors shut in their faces. COUNTRY is thus conceptualised in terms of PRIVATE PROPERTY whose rightful tenants represent its citizens, and refugees and immigrants are uninvited occupants who are trying to find ways of inhabiting the house. This metaphor, combined with other findings in the corpus (REFUGEES ARE WATER), provides evidence of general negative representations of refugees. Although at times the refugee discourse serves as a tool for indicating the serious consequences of conflicts, inherent negative attitudes are exposed when the possibility of refugees entering the EC becomes realistic.
8.3.6. BALKANS ARE A POWDER KEG
The POWDER KEG metaphor has been in common use since the beginning of the 20th century as a conceptual frame for the Balkan region in varying contexts, from history textbooks (Rutar 2004) to political discussions (Paris 2002). It is a prime example of how ideological views may be not only transmitted by conceptual metaphors; they can also be conserved through conceptual metaphors in languages for decades. Already in 1947, members of the International Court of Justice stated that the Balkans had been “so often described as the ‘powder-keg’ of Europe” (Basdevant et al., cited in Paris 2002: 434).
59
Table 9 BALKANS ARE A POWDER KEG TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
BALKANS POWDER KEG explosive (7)
set alight (4)
powder keg (4)
explosion (2)
bomb (2)
blow up (1)
explode (1)
implode (1)
spark (1)
Total 23
Contrary to the expectations, the metaphor BALKANS IS A POWDER KEG did not occur particularly frequently in the corpus. The exact phrase “powder keg” has only 4 hits in the entire corpus. Nevertheless, there is evidence that the metaphor was activated in later phases of the disintegration of Yugoslavia, during the Kosovo crisis (Paris 2002: 434). Another explanation for the results is that the articles collected for the purposes of this study did not focus on armed conflicts, but on the process of recognition. A corpus of articles focusing on Yugoslav war reporting would provide more insight regarding the use of this metaphor. The articles which do include the conceptual metaphor usually focus on Bosnia, and describe it as EXPLOSIVE, and a TIME BOMB. The special focus on Bosnia was related to its role in the events which triggered World War I, but also to the fact that it is an ethnically mixed country, where the potential conflicts would be more difficult to settle and regulate.
(45) “Within Yugoslavia, the likelihood has increased that war will spread to Bosnia, an ethnic powder-keg, and to Macedonia, which has already declared independence.” (Economist, 7)
60
8.3.7. POLITICS IS THEATRE
The conceptual domain of POLITICS shares many cross-conceptual networks with the domain of THEATRE. Political functions are related to theatrical role playing, and the political scene to a stage. Arcimavičienė (2010) claims that, in the English language, the first aspect of the THEATRE metaphor is DRAMA. Politics is a scripted performance with politicians as stage actors. Representations of such mappings have also been found in this corpus, for example it serves a relevant function in the portrayal of Gorbachev’s retirement from politics:
(46) “The exit of Mikhail Gorbachev from centre stage in the post-Soviet political drama was a foregone conclusion from the moment he misread the signs on his return to Moscow after August's failed coup.” (Sunday Times, 63)
Table 10 POLITICS IS THEATRE TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
POLITICS THEATRE puppet regime/state/government (21)
play a role (20)
lead/ing role (10)
stage (10)
drama (6)
to stage (4)
play a part (3)
world stage (3)
set the stage (3)
center/re stage (3)
spotlight (2)
Total 81
61
Some of the identified occurrences of the metaphor in the corpus include idiomatic, fixed expressions, such as puppet regimes (47) and political world stage (48). The high frequency of occurrence of the idiom puppet regime in the corpus is related to the relevant semantic field of World War, which was commented on earlier.
(47) “Serbia, the largest Yugoslav republic and, in Germany's view, the aggressor in the war, says Germany is using Croatia as a puppet as it forges a 'Fourth Reich' reaching from the Baltic to the Adriatic.” (Washington Post, 33)
(48) “Germany was criticized by its Western allies for its reluctance to assert itself on the world stage. But in recent months, German leaders have become convinced that there is a dangerous vacuum in Europe, and they have stepped forward to fill it.” (New York Times, 13)
The lexemes spotlight and centre stage are used to refer to complex developments in international politics, such as the post-Soviet political drama, the Yugoslav drama, the drama in the East. The underlying DRAMA the reporters are referring to are the processes of disintegration of states and the post-communist redrawing of the map of Europe. With the research questions in mind, the THEATRE metaphors are used in the discourse of Germany when Germany’s reunification and changes in foreign policy are described in terms of the country re-entering the political stage of world politics.
(49) "It's not right that Germany has to take a leading role, but after all those nations intervened in the Gulf War, nobody was doing anything in Yugoslavia. This is Europe! We must do something." (Boston Globe, 18)
In (49), the words of a German political are cited, where he describes the necessity of taking responsibility and acting on the violent conflicts of Yugoslavia. Thus, Germany is described as wanting to remain in line with actions of its allies, but is forced to take the leading role.
8.3.8. POLITICS IS WAR
There are several structural similarities between the conceptual domains POLITICS and WAR. Political parties correspond to armies, politicians to soldiers, debates to battles, and the success or failure in establishing political goals to victory or defeat. The metaphor surfaces in idiomatic expressions such as attacks against the opposition, the cut and thrust of debates, pitting policy against policy and defending the party’s right to criticise (Malan 2008: 74). The 62 novel mapping which is realised in the articles about the recognition is the metaphor GERMANY’S RECOGNITION OF CROATIA AND SLOVENIA IS A DIPLOMATIC TRIUMPH. (50) “The action by the European Community marked an important diplomatic victory for Germany, which has vigorously supported Slovenian and Croatian independence.” (New York Times, 3)
(51) “THE European Community granted diplomatic recognition to independent Croatia and Slovenia yesterday on a note of triumphalism from Germany and coolness from Britain and France.” (Guardian, 26)
Similarly to the conceptual metaphor of MUSCLE FLEXING, by portraying the recognition of Croatia and Slovenia in terms of a victory, the reporters are emphasizing that the German attitude on the recognition was primarily related to the country’s wish to re-establish its position as a world power. No consideration is given to the possible motivation in resolving an armed conflict; the German political action is denoted as arbitrary and not well thought through.
Table 11 POLITICS IS WAR TARGET DOMAIN SOURCE DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
POLITICS WAR win* (29)
victory (19)
battle (9)
triumph* (8)
lose (3)
triumphalism (1)
Total 68
8.3.9. GERMANY IS A COERCER
The conceptual metaphor GERMANY IS A COERCER yielded the most prolific results in the political metaphors category. Twenty-four lexemes from the source domain COERCER were identified and a total of 108 tokens. The mapping from the domain GERMANY to the domain COERCER is in line with the results of the semantic classification of premodifiers (the category Assertiveness) and lexical verbs (the list of the most frequent lexical verbs with the noun Germany in subject position).
63
Table 12 GERMANY IS A COERCER
SOURCE DOMAIN TARGET DOMAIN TYPES (tokens)
GERMANY COERCER pressure (17)
break/broke ranks (11)
threaten/ed/ing (10)
push/ed (9)
press/ed (8)
assertive (7)
assertiveness (7)
force (5)
prod/ded (5)
throw/ing its weight around/about (4)
push (4)
bulldozer (4)
assert/asserted (3)
steamroller (2)
strong-arm tactics (2)
assertion/s (2)
struck (1)
bullying (1)
64
muscle (1)
railroaded (1)
conquer (1)
self-willed (1)
diktat (1)
invade (1)
Total 108
There are several sub-mappings which constitute this category, such as VERBAL PERSUASION IS AN ACT OF PHYSICAL FORCE (push [n.], push [v.], press, prod, strong-arm tactics, strike), POLITICAL POWER IS WEIGHT (throw/ing its weight around/about), POLITICAL COERCION IS BULLYING (bullying), POLITICAL ENITIES ARE POWERFUL MACHINES (bulldozer, steamroller). Although the source domains differ, the decision to unite all of the metaphors in one category was based on the observation that these metaphors are related almost exclusively to Germany in the corpus, and on the unifying element of coercion and forceful establishment of dominance. Similar notions are also established in the earlier analysed MUSCLE FLEXING metaphor. Here are some corpus examples:
(52) “This was the month in which newly-united Germany, acting on its own initiative, first threw its full weight into the European political scales, to decisive effect” (Times, 53)
(53) “From political pygmy to the bully of Europe.” (…) “Fear of the master-race concept has motivated comments ranging from ''bunkum'' over Chancellor Kohl's demand that German be added to the European Community's languages, to serious concern about Bonn ‘bulldozing’.” (…) “US officials are worried about German ‘strong-arm tactics’ against its EC partners and the way Bonn has ignored Washington's warnings.” (Guardian, 25)
The Guardian reporter activates several of the sub-mappings of the identified conceptual metaphor GERMANY IS A COERCER, signalling that all of the individual conceptual metaphors do share underlying relations. The author first modifies the established metaphor attributed to Germany in the Cold War Era, political dwarf, economic giant, replacing the economic giant concept with bully. Then the author sets out on a mitigation quest, reporting on “fears” of the master-race concept. Finally, she engages in elaborating the “outside perspective”, the view 65 of the US on the political situation who are worried, yet again, by the German strong-arm tactics.
(54) “Hurd had the bad manners to argue into the early hours of yesterday to try to stem the German steamroller” (Guardian, 24)
The same author repeatedly uses the COERCION metaphor through some of her other articles. Although she is not the only one to use these metaphors, such elaborate implementations of similar conceptual metaphors in the public discourse, suggests explicit attempts of persuasion.
9. Discussion
In the first part of analysis, bottom-up tools of CL were used for identifying common collocations with the lexeme Germany. First, the adjectival premodifiers of the noun Germany were isolated and each occurrence was semantically classified in categories of Change (54), Geography (27), Ideological Anthroponyms (11), and Assertiveness (11). Except for the semantic category Geography, it was concluded, and qualitative analysed via concordancing tools that the adjectives used to portray Germany were either related to its fascist past (Ideological Anthroponyms), wish for domination in international politics (Assertiveness), or, most frequently, to the change of its status from “political dwarf”, to the “coercer” in international relations.
In the second part of the bottom-up CL analysis, the verbs which were categorised as lexical in POS tagging were distributed in twelve semantic domains: Change (8.28%), Cognition (12.15%), Communication (42.44%), Competition (2.76%), Contact (2.2%), Creation (1.1%), Emotion (8.28%), Motion (6.07%), Perception (1.1%), Possession (1.1%), Social (6.62%), and Stative (8.84%). The results of the analysis indicate that metonymic relations play a relevant role in political (media) discourse. Countries are perceived as political actors, and the communication between politicians is portrayed with their actions being attributed to the countries themselves. Similarly, the verbs from the categories Cognition and Emotion constitute a relevant number of the total lexical verbs attributed to the noun Germany, which implies that the pars pro toto relation is extended, and that a conceptual metaphor COUNTRY IS A LIVING ENTITY is activated in political (media) discourse. From the list of the ten most frequent lexical verbs which collocate with the lexeme Germany (say, want, push, flex muscles, argue, announce, threaten, insist, dominate, grant [recognition]) it has been concluded that they all share semantic similarities, and overlap with
66 the semantic category of Assertiveness which was used in the classification of the adjectival premodifiers.
The hypothesis that the World War discourse is embedded in the print media accounts of the Germany’s recognition was analysed by with the CL tool key words. The words which were isolated from the frequency word list as lexemes belonging to the semantic field World War were compared with the frequency of their use in the general corpus of the English language, the BNC. Many of the lexemes were identified as key words, indicating that the World War discourse, which is often related to ideological anthroponyms (puppet, Nazi, Hitler, Ustasha, fascist), re-emerged in the media discourse of 1991. The results also indicate that the World War scenarios were used as framing devices in the events of 1991 and 1992. Nineteen fourteen was at times compared directly with the events of 1991, resulting in a conceptual metaphor 1914 IS 1991.
The third part of the analysis, corpus-based CMA combined both quantitative and qualitative methods for identifying the conceptual metaphors in the discourse. The initial qualitative analysis consisted of manually tagging the conceptual metaphors and categorising them according to their source and target domains. For the purposes of this study, the presented results consisted of metaphors from the sphere of political discourse. Whereas the study partially supported the previous findings of studies based on naturally occurring conceptual metaphors, novel discourse-specific conceptual metaphors were discovered which were elaborated on in terms of their context and pragmatic implications.
A highly productive metaphor is, not surprisingly, the BODY POLITIC metaphor, or the conceptual metaphor POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HUMAN BODY. Five of its entailments were analysed in more detail: POWER (OF A POLITICAL ENTITY) IS A HAND, GOVERNMENT OF A STATE IS THE HEAD, GOVERNMENT OF A STATE IS THE BRAIN, CENTRAL PART OF A POLITICAL ENTITY IS THE HEART, POLITICAL POWER IS A SET OF MUSCLES, and marginally two other metaphors based on the concept of embodiment NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE and ESTABLISHMENT OF A COUNTRY IS A BIRTH OF A CHILD. Each of the metaphors had a relevant pragmatic function in the discourse; however, certain domains generated discourse- specific realisations which greatly contributed to the representations of the events.
Some of the most relevant innovations in the sphere of the BODY metaphors were the introduction of the metaphor POLITICAL POWER IS A SET OF MUSCLES which spread quickly on both sides of the Atlantic and, at that time, became the symbol for Germany’s recognition.
67
The metaphor which was used for illustrating Yugoslavia’s geographical position and the conflict was CENTRAL PART OF A POLITICAL ENTITY IS THE HEART. The metaphor ESTABLISHMENT OF A COUNTRY IS A BIRTH OF A CHILD was redefined in the scenarios which reflected the problems in establishing the new republics of Slovenia and Croatia, birth became difficult, potentially crippling and the child was not properly separated from the womb. The metaphor NATIONALISM IS A DISEASE was used in portraying the special type of viral nationalism in the Balkans.
Two metaphors were used in the refugee discourse: REFUGEES ARE WATER and REFUGEES ARE UNINVITED GUESTS. The negative representations of refugees as potential destabilising factors in European economies and political systems coexist with the discourse of humanitarian pleas, showing ambivalent attitudes towards the status of refugees. They are seen as victims of the war, however, only when they are not trying to enter the European COMMON HOUSE. The historical metaphor BALKANS IS A POWDER KEG was activated in the Bosnia discourse, signalling potential eruption of violence in this country.
The conceptual metaphors POLITICS IS THEATRE and POLITICS IS WAR appeared in the descriptions of the “new” Germany, who was re-entering the world stage and winning the political war over Croatia and Slovenia’s recognition.
Finally, the conceptual metaphor GERMANY IS A COERCER consisted of several subcategories of conceptual metaphors, such as VERBAL PERSUASION IS AN ACT OF PHYSICAL FORCE, POLITICAL POWER IS WEIGHT, POLITICAL COERCION IS BULLYING and POLITICAL ENITIES ARE POWERFUL MACHINES. The number of metaphors and their realisations in the corpus confirm the biased representations of Germany’s recognition. Instead of providing any explanations for Germany’s foreign policy actions, the reporters are describing the political event in terms of Germany exercising its newly gained political power.
There are three areas from which linguistic evidence can be drawn for arguing the biased representations of Germany in the English-speaking world’s media discourse: the first is the lexical choice in descriptions of Germany and its actions. The second is the highly significant semantic domain of World War and its use in creating parallel scenarios between World War I/II and the events of 1991. The third evidence comes from conceptual metaphors which were used for framing Germany’s political actions.
68
10. Conclusion
This thesis was conceived as a historically, politically and theoretically informed linguistic analysis of the UK and the US print media reports on Germany’s recognition of Croatia and Slovenia in 1991. The study was also an attempt at using methodologies from different fields of linguistics, namely CDA, CMA and CL. Since the historical events portrayed in the media reports occurred more than twenty years ago, there are a plethora of available political and historical studies on the events which were used as reference and measures of objectivity of the newspaper articles. Socio-philosophical and discourse analytic contextualization here served as the theoretical foundation of the conducted linguistic analysis. The results of the linguistic analysis of the study imply that we can profit greatly by applying different methodological tools. In this study, the results of the bottom-up CL analysis confirmed and complemented the results of the in-depth qualitative study of conceptual metaphors. The findings indicate how a complex phenomenon such as conceptual framing can be identified on a micro-level of discourse. The conceptual relations between discourses of two historical periods can be traced by, for example testing key words against reference corpora. Nevertheless, the quantitative results are inherently related to interpretations and qualitative analysis. The results of this study show that the bias in the US and the UK print media reports is linguistically realised through the use of conceptual metaphors and interdiscursivity. Conceptual metaphors and framings via familiar scenarios have a great impact on our understanding of the world and our value system. The research of these spheres has been in motion for decades, however, what I have found in the course of this study is that by drawing on findings from different disciplines and by using different methodological tools more informed and prolific results can originate.
69
Summary Germany’s recognition of Slovenia and Croatia on December 23, 1991, was the first test of the common foreign EC policy and is still considered to be one of the likely triggers of the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina to date. This thesis focuses on the representation of these events in mass print media, on a corpus of more than 300 broadsheet newspaper articles published in the USA and the UK in the beginning of the 1990s. By combining the methodological approaches of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA), this study clarifies the media representations of the new political role Germany asserted in international foreign policy post-unification after decades of being portrayed as “an economic giant, but a political dwarf”. The linguistic analysis is embedded in historical, political, socio-philosophical media studies and theoretical accounts of discourse analysts on the role of the media in the Habermasian public sphere. Germany's support for the recognition of Croatia – which, today, is explained by political scholars as a tool of conflict management – was, at the time, portrayed in the British and the US media in terms of re-establishing the power divisions of the World Wars. Such interdiscursive relations are seen as a consequence of one-dimensional analysis by the reporters, of the instrumentalisation of historical narratives due to disagreement on foreign policy actions, and of the attitudes of the respective countries' political figures whose public releases were often indiscriminatingly included in the articles. The corpus-based analysis of the semantic field “World Wars” shows that the lexemes belonging to this category were used significantly more often when compared to a general reference corpus of the English language. The collocation analysis confirms that Germany was portrayed in terms of its “change” of policy, contrary to the accounts of contemporary political scholars who argue that the country has resumed the policy of multilateralism since reunification. The second part of the analysis focuses on the conceptual metaphors in the corpus which were individually manually tagged and classified according to the source and target domains. Because more than 3,000 uses of conceptual metaphors were identified in the corpus, metaphors relevant for political discourse were isolated and elaborated on in more detail in the study. The analysis of the metaphors reflects the findings of other (corpus-based) studies of metaphors in political discourse. Whereas general consistency with the previous findings has been found in terms of the use of metaphors such as POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HUMAN BODY, POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HOUSE, POLITICS IS WAR, POLITICS IS THEATRE, it has been observed that the authors of the articles engage in creating sub-scenarios of the existing metaphors (POLITICAL ENTITY IS THE HOUSE OF THE DEAD, EXERCISING POWER IS MUSCLE STRETCHING), and generating novel metaphors (GERMANY IS A COERCER) for pragmatic purposes. In certain cases the metaphors generated in political discourse become widely accepted in the media (Germany stretched its newly-discovered muscles when recognising Croatia), and in others they may even be preserved through history and used as framing devices for an entire political region (BALKANS ARE A POWDERKEG). The advantages of studying media representations of now historical events are that the emerged discourses may be compared with the findings of the thorough political and historical analyses. The results of this study indicate that the British and the US media provided a simplified version of events which significantly relied on the World Wars discourse and images of the division between world powers. Since conceptual metaphors play an essential role in forming our coherent view of reality, their significance goes beyond semantics into the sphere of the rhetorical and pragmatic. This study reveals not only the patterns of metaphor use in political news reporting, but also provides an example of how corpus-based CMA may reveal the intentions of the text producer and identify the nature of particular ideologies.
70
Zusammenfassung Die Anerkennung von Slowenien und Kroatien durch die Bundesrepublik Deutschland am 23. Dezember 1991 war der erste Test einer gemeinsamen Außenpolitik der Staaten der Europäischen Gemeinschaft. Bis heute wird dieser Schritt als ein möglicher Auslöser für den bewaffneten Konflikt in Bosnien Herzegowina eingestuft. Die vorliegende Arbeit fokussiert auf die Darstellung dieser Ereignisse in Printmedien, basierend auf einem Korpus von mehr als 300 Zeitungsartikeln, die in den USA und im Vereinigten Königreich zu Beginn der 90er Jahre des vorigen Jahrhunderts erschienen sind. Durch Kombination der methodischen Ansätze der Kritischen Diskursanalyse und der Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA) beleuchtet diese Studie die Mediendarstellung der neuartigen politischen Rolle Deutschlands in der internationalen Politik nach der Wiedervereinigung. Über Jahrzehnte wurde diese Rolle als „wirtschaftlicher Riese, jedoch politischer Zwerg“ beschrieben. Die linguistische Analyse ist eingebettet in Medienanalysen aus historischer, politischer und sozialphilosophischer Sichtweise sowie theoretische Ansätze von DiskurslinguistInnen zur Rolle der Medien im Konzept der Öffentlichkeit nach Jürgen Habermas. Deutschlands Unterstützung für die kroatische Anerkennung wird heute von PolitikwisschafterInnen als Werkzeug zur Konfliktregelung erklärt. In den britischen und US- amerikanischen Medien jedoch wurde dies dargestellt als Wiedererrichtung der Machtaufteilung der Weltkriege. Solche diskursiven Relationen sind eine Folge einseitiger Analyse von BerichterstatterInnen sowie Instrumentalisierung von historischen Narrationen, die aufgrund unterschiedlicher Zustimmung zu außenpolitischen Maßnahmen entstehen. Desweiteren sind sie eine Folge der Haltungen der politischen HandlungsträgerInnen, deren offizielle Pressemitteilungen oft unkritisch übernommen wurden. Die Korpusanalyse des semantischen Feldes “Weltkriege” zeigt, dass die Lexeme in dieser Kategorie bedeutend öfter verwendet wurden verglichen mit einem allgemeinen Referenzkorpus der englischen Sprache. Die Kollokationsanalyse bestätigt, dass Deutschland unter dem Aspekt der Veränderung seiner außenpolitischen Rolle dargestellt wurde. Dies steht im Widerspruch zur Darstellung aktueller PolitikwissenschafterInnen, die argumentieren, dass Deutschland seit der Wiedervereinigung die Politik des Multilateralismus wiederaufgenommen hat und “bestimmt” war im Bezug auf seine politischen Handlungen. Der zweite Teil der Analyse beschäftigt sich mit konzeptuellen Metaphern im Korpus. Diese wurden manuell markiert und klassifiziert nach Quelle und Zielbereich. Mehr als 3000 Verwendungen von konzeptuellen Metaphern wurden im Korpus identifiziert. Anschließend wurden diese isoliert und detailliert analysiert. Die Metaphernanalyse spiegelt Ergebnisse von anderen (Korpus-)Analysen von Metaphern in politischen Diskursen wider. Ein hoher Grad an Übereinstimmung mit früheren Untersuchungen ist bei Metaphern wie z.B. POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HUMAN BODY, POLITICAL ENTITY IS A HOUSE, POLITICS IS WAR, POLITICS IS THEATRE zu finden. Die Autoren der Artikel entwerfen jedoch auch Unterkategorien der existierenden (POLITICAL ENTITY IS THE HOUSE OF THE DEAD, EXERCISING POWER IS MUSCLE STRETCHING) und generieren neue (GERMANY IS A COERCER) für pragmatische Zwecke. In einigen Fällen finden die Metaphern des politischen Diskurses Akzeptanz im Mediendiskurs (Germany stretched its newly-discovered muscles when recognising Croatia), in anderen Fällen können sie geschichtlich gesichert und als Rahmen für ganze politische Regionen verwendet werden (BALKANS ARE A POWDERKEG). Die Vorteile der Analyse von Mediendarstellungen historischer Ereignisse ist, dass die daraus entstandenen Diskurse verglichen werden können mit den Ergebnissen der politischen und historischen Analyse. Die Resultate dieser Studie zeigen, dass die britischen und US- amerikanischen Medien eine vereinfachte Version der Ereignisse brachten. Diese basierten stark auf Diskursen aus den Weltkriegen und Bildern der Aufteilung zwischen den Weltmächten. Da konzeptuelle Metaphern eine wichtige Rolle spielen bei der Formung eines 71 kohärenten Weltbildes, geht ihre Bedeutung über den Bereich der Semantik hinaus, hinein in das Feld der Rhetorik und Pragmatik. Diese Studie legt nicht nur die Muster der Metaphernverwendung in der politischen Zeitungsberichterstattung offen, sondern bietet darüber hinaus ein Beispiel wie Korpusanalyse und CMA die Intentionen der Textproduzenten enthüllen und die Beschaffenheit von Ideologien identifizieren kann.
72
Bibliography Anthony, Laurence (2007). AntConc 3.2.1. [Computer program]. Tokyo, JP: Waseda University. Arcimavičienė, Liudmila (2010). “Morality models through metaphors in public discourse: a cross-linguistic analysis.” Diss. U. Of Vilnius. Audit Bureau of Circulations (2011). “US Newspaper.” [Online] http://abcas3.accessabc.com/ecirc/newstitlesearchus.asp [2011, Aug. 29]. Baker, Paul (2006). Using Corpora in Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum. BBC News (2004, Oct.29). “Times in tabloid transformation.” [Online]. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3966681.stm [2011, Aug. 30]. Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid Khosravinik, Michał Krzyżanowski, Tony McEnry, and Ruth Wodak (2008). “A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK press.” In: Discourse & Society 19.3. 273-306. Bearce, David H. (2002). “Institutional Breakdown and International Cooperation: The European Agreement to Recognize Croatia and Slovenia.” In: European Journal of International Relations 8.4. 471-497. Billig, Michael, and Katie MacMillan (2005). “Metaphor, idiom and ideology: the search for 'no smoking guns' across time.” In: Discourse & Society 16.4. 459.480. Billig, Michael: Homepage (2012). [Online] http://www.lboro.ac.uk/departments/ss/staff/billig.html [2012, Apr. 10]. Bourdieu, Pierre (1988). Homo academicus. Collier, Peter, trans. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, Pierre (1998). On Television. Priscilla Parkburst Ferguson, transl. New York: The New Press. Brock, Peter (1993-94). “Dateline Yugoslavia: The Partisan Press.” In: Foreign Policy 93. 152-172. Brown, Stuart C. (1992). “I.A. Richards' New Rhetoric: Multiplicity, Instrument and Metaphor.” In: Rhetoric Review 10.2. 218-231. Burke, Kenneth (1969). A Rethoric of Motives. Berkely & Los Angeles: University of California Press. Cameron, Lynne, and Alice Deignan (2006). The Emergence of Metaphor in Discourse. Applied Linguistics 27.4. 671-690. Caplan, Richard (2005). Europe and the Recognition of the New States in Yugoslavia. Cambridge et al.: CUP. Charteris-Black, Jonathan, and Timothy Ennis (2001). “A comparative study of metaphor in Spanish and English financial reporting”. In: English for Specific Purposes 20.3. 249-266. [Online] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889490600000090 [2012, Feb.22]. Charteris-Black, Jonathan. (2004a). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Charteris-Black, Jonathan (2004b). “Why ‘an angel rides in the whirlwind and directs the storm’: A corpusbased comparative study of metaphor in British and American political discourse.” In: Advances in Corpus Linguistics: Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 2)3. Eds. Bengt Altenberg and Karin Aijmer. Amsterdam and New York: Rodopi. Charteris-Black, Jonathan (2006). “Britain as a container: immigration metaphors in the 2005 election campaign”. In: Discourse & Society 17.5. 563-581. Chourliaraki, Lilie and Norman Fairclough (2001). Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
73
Chourliaraki, Lilie (2005). “The soft power of way: Legitimacy and community in Itaq war discourses.” In: Journal of Language and Politics 4.1. 1-10. Cicero: De Oratore (1967). Sutton, E.W., and H. Rackham H., transl. London: William Heinemann Ltd. Crawford, Beverly (1996). “Explaining Defection from International Cooperation: Germany´s Unilateral Recognition of Croatia”. In: World Politics 48. 482-521. Deckers, Wolfgang (2002). “Germany and the Balkans: reflections on an uneasy relationship.” In: Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans 4.2. 157-170. [Online]. http://www.freewebs.com/ovsiste/germany%20and%20the%20balkans.pdf [2011, Aug. 25] Deignan, Alice (2008). “Corpus Linguistics and Metaphor.” In: Raymond W. Gibbs Jr., ed. Metaphor and Thought. CUP: Cambridge and New York: 280-307. Druckman, James, N. (2001). “Evaluating framing effects.” In: Journal of Economic Pschology 22. 91-101. [Online] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487000000325 [2012, Feb. 20]. Engel, Matthew (1996). Tickle the Public: One Hundred Years of the Popular Press. London: Gollancz. Fabiszak, Małgorzata (2007). A Conceptual Metaphor Approach to war discourse and its implications. Poznan: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM. Fairclough, Norman (1995). Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. London: Longman. Fairclough, Norman (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. Fairclough, Norman (2005). “Discourse Analysis in Organizational Studies: The Case for Critical Realism.” In: Organization Studies 26.6. 915-939. Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner (1998). “Conceptual integration networks.” In: Cognitive Science 22.2. 133-187. Galtung, Johan (1991). “The Problems of Recognition.” YugoFax 9.1. [Online] http://peacemagazine.org/archive/v08n2p22.htm [2012, May 3]. Gintis, Herbert (2009). Game Theory Evolving: A Problem-Centered Introduction to Modelling Strategic Interaction. (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Glover, Jonathan (2001). Humanity: A Moral History of the Twentieth Century. New Heaven and London: Yale University Press. Groseclose, Tim and Jeff Milyo (2004). “A Measure of Meida Bias.” UCLA. [Online] http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm. [2011, Aug. 30] Glucksberg, Sam (2003). “The psycholinguistics of metaphor.” In: Trends in Cognitive Science 7.2. 92-96. Gorbachev, Mikhail (1989, Jul. 6). Address to the Council of Europe. Centre Virtuel de la Connaissance sur l'Europe. [Online] http://www.cvce.eu/viewer/-/content/4c021687-98f9- 4727-9e8b-836e0bc1f6fb/en [2012, Jun. 5]. Grady, Joseph, E., Todd Oakley, and Seana Coulson (1999). “Blending and Metaphor.” In: G. Steen and R. Gibbs, eds. Metaphor in cognitive linguistics. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Habermas, Jürgen (1991). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Burgeois Society. Thomas Burger, transl. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Habermas, Jürgen (1997). “The Public Sphere.” In: Robert E.Goodin and Philip Pettit, eds. Contemporary Political Philosophy: An Anthology. 105-108. Hardt-Mautner, Gerlinde (1995). “Only connect: critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics.” UCREL Technical Paper 6. Lancaster: University of Lancaster. [Online] http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/tech_papers.html [2011, Jun. 5]. Hart, Christopher. (2008). “Critical Discourse Analysis and Metaphor: Toward a Theoretical Framework.” In: Critical Discourse Studies 5.2. 91-106.
74
Highbeam Research (2012). [Online] http://www.highbeam.com/ [2011, Oct. 10]. Heer, Hannes and Ruth Wodak (2007). “Collective Memory, National Narratives and the Politics of the Past – the Discursive Construction of History.” In: Hannes Heer, Walter Manoschek, Alexander Pollak, and Ruth Wodak, eds. The Discursive Construction of History: Remembering the Wehrmacht's War of Annihilation. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 1-13. Herring, Susan C. (2004). “Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior.” In: Sasha A. Barab, Rob Kling, and James H. Gray, eds. Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. 338-376. Hilbert, Martin and Priscila López (2011). “The World's Technological Capacity to Store, Communicate, and Compute Information.” In: Science 332. 60-65. Hodge, Robert (2012). Critical Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis. [Online]. http://ccr.uws.edu.au/bobhodge/index.php/critical-linguistics-and-critical-discourse-analysis/ [2012, Jan. 25]. Holly, Werner (2008). “Tabloidisation of political communication in the public sphere.” In: Ruth Wodak, and Veronika Koller, eds. Handbook of Communication in the Public Sphere. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 317-341. Ipsos Mori (2005). “Voting intention by newspaper readership. [Online] http://www.ipsos- mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/755/Voting-Intention-by-Newspaper- Readership.aspx [2011, Aug. 30]. Jackson, John P. and Nadine M. Weidman (2004). Race, Racism, and Science: Social Impact and Interaction. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. Johnson, Maureen (1991, Dec. 18). “British Fears of German Domination Roused Over Yugoslavia.” The Associated Press. Jones, Peter (2004). “Discourse and the Materialist Conception of History: Critical Comments on Critical Discourse Analysis.” In: Historical Materialism 12.1. 97-125. Jones, Peter E. (2007). “Why there is no such this as ‘critical discourse analysis’.” In: Language & Communication 27. 337-368. Jørgensen, Marianne and Louise Phillips (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London et al.: Sage. Katzenstein, Peter K. (1997). "United Germany in an Integrating Europe." In: Peter Katzenstein, ed. Tamed Power: Germany in Europe. New York: Cornell. 1-48. Khosravinik, Majid (2009). “The representation of refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants in British newspapers during the Balkan conflict (1999) and the British general election (2005).” In: Discourse & Society 20.4. 477-498. Koch, Ed (2006, June 1). “The New York Times´ Anti-Israel Bias.” Real Clear Politics. [Online] http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2006/06/the_new_york_times_antiisrael.html. [2011, Aug. 30] Koller, Veronika (2002). “'A Shotgun Wedding': Co-occurrence of War and Marriage Metaphors in Mergers and Acquisitions Discourse”. In: Metaphor and Symbol 17.3. 179–203. Kövecses, Zoltán (2005). Metaphor in Culture: Universality and Variation. Cambridge et al.: CUP. Kövecses, Zoltán (2010). Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. New York: OUP. Kövecses, Zoltán (2011). “Methodological issues in conceptual metaphor theory.” In: Sandra Handl, and Hans-Jörg Schmid, eds. Windows to the Mind: Metaphor, Metonymy and Conceptual Blending. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter. 23-39. Krieger, Wolfgang (Spring,1994). “Toward a Gaullist Germany?: Some Lessons from the Yugoslav Crisis.” In: World Policy Journal 11.1. 26-38. Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: The University 75 of Chicago Press. Landau, Mark J., Daniel Sullivan, and Jeff Greenberg (2009). “Evidence That Self-Relevant Motives and Metaphoric Framing Interact to Influence Political and Social Attitudes.” In: Psychological Science 20.11. 1421-1427. Létourneau, Paul and Marie-Elisabeth Räkel (1997). “Germany. To Be or Not to Be Normal?” In: Philippe G. Le Prestre, ed. Role Quests in the Post-Cold War Era: Foreign Policies in Transition. Quebec City: McGill-Queen´s Press. 111-130. Lewis, Alison (Winter, 1995). “Unity Begins Together: Analyzing the Trauma of German Unification.” In: New German Critique 64. 135-159. [Online] http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/488467?uid=3738200&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid =4&sid=47699095635207 [2012, Apr. 5]. List of newspapers in the United States by circulation (2011). Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia. [Online] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_States_by_circulation [2011, Aug. 30]. Litosseliti, Lia, ed. (2010). Research Methods in Linguistics. London and New York: Continuum. Lukač, Morana (2011). “Down to the bone: A corpus-based critical discourse analysis of pro- eating disorder blogs.” In: Jezikoslovlje 12.2. 187-208. Malan, Saskia (2008). “Conceptual metaphors in South African political speeches.” In: Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics 38. 73-106. Marko, Georg (2008). Penetrating Language: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Pornography. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Mautner, Gerlinde (2008). “Analysing newspapers, magazines and other print media.” In: Ruth Wodak and Michał Krzyżanowski, eds. Qualitative discourse analysis in the social sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 30-53. Musolff, Andreas (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse: Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillian. Musolff, Andreas (2007). “Is There Such a Thing as Discourse History? The Case of metaphor.” In: Christoper Hart, and Dominik Lukeš, eds. Cognitive Linguistics in Critical Discourse Analysis: Application and Theory. Newcastle: CUP. 1-27. Mautner, Gerlinde (2009). “Checks and balances: how corpus linguistics can contribute to CDA.“ In: Ruth Wodak, Michael Meyer, eds. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. 122–144. Müller, Cornelia (2008). Metaphors dead and alive, sleeping and waking: a dynamic view. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Musolff, Andreass (2004). Metaphor and Political Discourse Analogical Reasoning in Debates about Europe. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Nuttall, Simon (1994). “The EC and Yugoslavia – Deux ex Machina or Machina sine Deo?” Journal of Common Market Studies 32. 11-25. Ortony, A. (1975). “Why Metaphors Are Necessary and Not Just Nice.” In: Educational Theory 25. 45-53. Pancake, Ann S. (1993). “Taken by Storm: The Exploitation of Metaphor in the Persian Gulf War.” In: Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 8.4. 281-295. [Online] http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327868ms0804_2 [2012, Jan. 11]. Paris, Roland (2002). “Kosovo and the Metaphor War.” In: Political Science Quarterly 117.3. 423-450. Percy, Norma, Executive producer (1995). The Death of Yugoslavia. [Documentary]. BBC.
76
Pinker, Steven (2007). The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature. New York et al.: Viking. Radden, Günter, and Zoltán Kövecses (1999). “Towards a theory of Metonymy”. In: Klaus Uwe Panther and Günter Radden, eds. Metonymy in Language and Thought. Amsteradam: John Benjamins. 17-59. Recknagel, Charles (2009). Paper: Thatcher Opposed German Reunification. [Online] http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Security-Watch- Archive/Detail/?lng=enandid=105921 [2011, Aug.24] Prentice, Sheryl (2010). “Using automated semantic tagging in Critical Discourse Analysis: A case study on Scottish independence from a Scottish nationalist perspective.” In: Discourse & Society 21.4. 405-437. [Online] http://han.uni- graz.at/han/5007/das.sagepub.com/content/21/4/405.full.pdf+html [2011, Dec. 9]. Preston, Paschal and Monika Metykova (2009). “Media, Political Communication and the European Public Sphere.” In: Anna Triandafyllidou, Ruth Wodak, and Michał Krzyżanowski, eds. The European Public Sphere and the Media: Europe in Crisis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 34-49. Radden, Günter (1992). “The cognitive approach to natural language” In: Martin Pütz, ed. Thirty Years of Linguistic Evolution. Amserdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing. 513-542. Rayson, Paul (2009). Wmatrix 3. [Computer program]. Computing Department, Lancaster University. Reisigl, Martin and Ruth Wodak (2001). Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and anti-semitism. London: Routledge. Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak (2009). “The discourse historical approach.” In: Michael Meyer, and Ruth Wodak, eds. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: SAGE. 87- 121. Rich, Roland (1993). “Recognition of States: the Collapse of Yugoslavia and the Societ Union.” In: European Journal of International Law 4.1. 36-65. Ricoeur, Paul (2004). The rule of metaphor. Robert Czerny, transl. London: Routledge. Rittberger, Volker, and Wolfgang Wagner (2001). “German Foreign Policy Since Unification – Theories Meet Reality.” [Online] http://www.deutsche- aussenpolitik.de/resources/conferences/rittberger.pdf [2011, Aug. 24]. Ross, Jan (2012, Jun.14). “Alle wollen nur das eine.” Die Zeit. Rutar, Sabine (2004). “Beyond the powder keg? Representations of the former Yugoslav countries in Italian history textbooks of the 1990s.” In: Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans 6.2. 183-204. Santa Ana, Otto (2002). Brown tide rising: Metaphors of Latinos in contemporary American public discourse. Austin: University of Texas Press. Sadkovich, James J. (1998). The U.S. Media and Yugoslavia, 1991-1995. Westport, CT: Praeger. Sauga, Michael; Stefan Simons, and Klaus Wiegrefe (2010, Sept.30). “Was the Deutsche Mark Sacrificed for Reunification.” Spiegel Online International. [Online] http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,719940-3,00.html [2011, Aug. 24]. Scott, Michael (2008). Wordsmith Tools. Version 5. [Computer program]. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software. Semino, Elena and Michela Masci (1996). “Politics is football: metaphor in the discourse of Silvio Berlusconi in Italy.” In: Discourse and Society 7.2. 243-269. Skorczynska, Hanna, and Alice Deignan (2006). “Readership and Purpose in the Choice of Economics Metaphors.” In: Metaphor and Symbol 21.2. 87–104.
77
Sparks, Colin (1999). “The Press.” In: Jane Stokes, and Anna Reading, eds. The Media in Britain: Current Debates and Developments. London: Macmillan. 41-59. Stefanowitsch, Anatol (2006a). “Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy.” In: Anatol Stefanowitsch, and Stefan Th. Gries, eds. Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 1-16. Stefanowitsch, Anatol (2006b). “Words and their metaphors: A corpus-based approach.” In: Anatol Stefanowitsch, and Stefan Th. Gries, eds. Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 63-105. Stokes, Jane (1999). “The Structure of British Media Industries.” In: Jane Stokes, and Anna Reading, eds. The Media in Britain: Current Debates and Developments. London: Macmillan. 1-10. Straehle, Carolyn, Gilbert Weiss, Ruth Wodak, Peter Muntigl, and Maria Sedlak (1999). “Struggle as Metaphor in European Union Discourses on Unemployment.” In: Discourse and Society 10.1. 67-99. ter Wal, Jessika, Anna Triandafyllidou, Chiara Steindler, and Maria Kontochristou (2009). “The Fall of the Berlin Wall: European and Value-Oriented Dimensions in the News Discourse.” In: Anna Triandafyllidou, Ruth Wodak, and Michał Krzyżanowski, eds. The European Public Sphere and the Media: Europe in Crisis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 198-218. Times (2009, Sept. 10). “Thatcher, Gorbachev, Bush: read the secret Kremlin records.” [Online]. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article6829416.ece?token=nullandoffset=0and page=1 [2011, Aug. 24]. Thussu, Daya Kishan (2007). News as Entertainment: The Rise of Global Infotainment. London: Sage. Spohr Readman, Kristina (2004). Germany and the Baltic Problem after the Cold War: The Development of a New Ostpolitik 1989-2000. London and New York: Routledge. van Dijk, Teun A. (2002). “Political discourse and political cognition.” In: Paul A. Chilton and Christina Schäffner, eds. Politics as Text and Talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamin. 203-237. van Dijk, Teun A. (2006). “Discourse and Manipulation.” In: Discourse & Society 17.2. 359- 383. [Online] http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/Discourse%20and%20manipulation.pdf [2012, Mar. 22]. van Dijk, T. A. (2008). “Critical Discourse Analysis.” In: Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen and Heidi E. Hamilton, eds. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Malden, MA: Blackwell. 352-371. Vološinov, V.N. (1973). Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Ladislav Matejka, and I.R.Titunik, transl. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Widdowson, Henry (1995). “Discourse analysis: a critical view.” In: Language and Literature 4.3. 157-172. Wells, Matt (2003, Nov.26). “The best of Times?” Mediaguardian. [Online] http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2003/nov/26/pressandpublishing.uknews [2011, Aug. 30]. Wemple, Erich (2011, July 22). “A world without Rupert Murdoch”. Washington Post. [Online] Opinions. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/imagining-a-world-without- rupert-murdoch/2011/07/21/gIQAe5UbTI_story.html [2011, Aug. 30]. Wodak, Ruth (2001a). “What CDA is about – a summary of its history, important concepts and its developments.” In: Ruth Wodak, and Michael Meyer, eds. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London et al.: Sage. 1-13. Wodak, Ruth (2001b). “The discourse-historical approach.” In: Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, eds. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London et al.: Sage. 63-94.
78
Wodak, Ruth (2002). “Aspects of Critical Discourse Analysis.” In: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 36. 5-31. Wodak, Ruth (2011, Jun.6). Critical Discourse Analysis: Some important concepts and considerations. Lecture presented at Karl Franzens University. Graz, AUT. Wodak, Ruth (2011, Jun.9). Media and Critical Discourse Analysis. Lecture presented at Karl Franzens University. Graz, AUT. Woodward, Susan L. (1995). Balkan Tragedy: Chaos and Dissolution after the Cold War. Washington: Bookings Institution Press. Žanić, Joško (2011). Značenje, stvarnost i konceptualna struktura: Ogled o temeljima semantike i njihovim ontološkim impliacijama. Zagreb: Kruzak.
79
Sources Chicago Sun-Times
(1) Drozdiak, William (1991, Jul. 6). "EC to halt economic aid, ban arms to Yugoslavia." Chicago Sun-Times. (2) Evans, Rowland, and Robert Novak (1991, Jul. 8). "James Baker trips up on Yugoslavia." Chicago Sun-Times. (3) Evans, Rowland, and Robert Novak (1991, Dec. 20). "Germany asserts its independence." Chicago Sun-Times. (4) Fisher, Marc. (1991, July 8). "Yugoslav strife renews distrust of Germany."Chicago Sun- Times. (5) Forbes, Donald (1991, Nov. 29). "UN chief hopes to send troops soon to Croatia." Chicago Sun-Times. (6) Heneghan, Tom (1991, Nov. 8). "Europe hits Yugoslavia with sanctions." Chicago Sun-Times. (7) McManus, Doyle (1992, Mar. 10). "U.S. edges toward ties with ex-Yugoslav states." Chicago Sun-Times. (8) Montalbano, William D. (1991, Sept. 6). "EC tells Serbs, Croats to honor cease-fire pact." Chicago Sun-Times. (9) Spielmann, Peter James (1991, Dec. 15). "Germany blocks UN plan for mission to Yugoslavia." Chicago Sun-Times. (10) Spielmann, Peter James (1991, Dec. 16). "UN OKs monitors for Yugoslavia // Council paves way for peace force." Chicago Sun-Times. (11) Unknown (1991, Aug. 25). "Croatia gets German boost // Support seen for breakway states if army-led `bloodbath' continues." Chicago Sun-Times. (12) Unknown (1991, Dec. 4). "EC ready to recognize Croatia and Slovenia." Chicago Sun-Times. (13) Unknown (1998, Jul. 1). "Upstart Croatia sneaks into quarterfinals." Chicago Sun-Times. (14) Willams, Carol J. (1991, Jul. 2). "Yugoslavia near war; Slovenia seeks aid." Chicago Sun- Times. (15) Willams, Carol J. (1991, Aug. 28). "Cease-fire rumored as Croatia mobilizes." Chicago Sun- Times. (16) Wolberg-Stok, Andres (1991, Dec. 17). "EC may back Croatia and Slovenia by mid-January." Chicago Sun-Times.
Evening Standard (London)
(1) Unknown (1992, Feb. 7). "Peacemakers put pressure on Serbs." Evening Standard. (2) Unknown (1992, May 18). "Containing Serbia." Evening Standard. (3) Unknown (1992, Jul. 24). "Plea to rescue Bosnia refugees." Evening Standard. (4) Yarranton, Lesley (1992, Jan. 3). "EC must speak more German, says Kohl." Evening Standard.
The Boston Globe
(1) Associated Press (1991, Aug. 25). "Croatia's defense minister threatens to arm all civilians." The Boston Globe. (2) Associated Press (1991, Oct. 23). "Defense minister rejects EC plan for Yugoslavia." The Boston Globe. (3) Associated Press (1991, Dec. 14). "Yugoslav army extends duty for troops Fierce battlefield resistance reported." The Boston Globe. (4) Associated Press (1991, Dec. 27). "A smaller Yugoslavia is planned; Serbia may annex seized lands." The Boston Globe. (5) Canellos, Peter S. (1994, Mar. 6). "THIS LAND IS MY LAND What's in a name? A lot, if it's Macedonia." The Boston Globe. (6) Curtius, Mary (1991, Jun. 28). "Few options for US, Europeans in Yugoslav crisis." The 80
Boston Globe. (7) Curtius, Mary (1991, Jul. 4). "US, allies eye halting arms to Yugoslavia Discuss recognizing republics if federal army won't withdraw." The Boston Globe. (8) Curtius, Mary (1992, Apr. 8). "US gives backing to 3 Yugoslav republics." The Boston Globe. (9) Dell'Apa, Frank (1998, Jul. 4). "The older, the better." The Boston Globe. (10) Kaufman, Jonathan (1991, Jul. 7). "Yugoslav strife spoils Europe's unity party." The Boston Globe. (11) Kaufman, Jonathan (1991, Aug. 28). "Amid East's Balkanization, Germany reasserts itself." The Boston Globe. (12) Kaufman, Jonathan (1991, Sept. 4). "EC makes bid for peace talks." The Boston Globe. (13) Kaufman, Jonathan (1991, Sept. 5). "The growing European stake in Yugoslavia's struggles." The Boston Globe. (14) Kaufman, Jonathan (1991, Oct. 22). "West tires of Yugoslav war Hands-off policy is adopted as fighting goes on." The Boston Globe. (15) Kaufman, Jonathan (1991, Dec. 9). "As Europeans talk of unity, Germans quietly dominate." The Boston Globe. (16) Kaufman, Jonathan (1992, Jan. 5). "As the Continent tilts toward Germany." The Boston Globe. (17) Radin, Charles A. (1991, Dec. 17). "EC nations agree to recognize Slovenia, Croatia Jan. 15." The Boston Globe. (18) Radin, Charles A. (1992, Jan. 9). "EC halts monitoring of Yugoslav civil war Move follows copter downing." The Boston Globe. (19) Radin, Charles A. (1992, Jan.16). "EC recognizes Croatia, Slovenia independence Serbia assails blow to Yugoslav union." The Boston Globe. (20) Starcevic, Nesha (1991, Aug. 27). "Yugoslav attacks reportedly kill 8." The Boston Globe.
The Economist (US)
(1) Unknown (1991, Jul. 13). "Into the unknown: the mysteries of a 20-member European Community." The Economist. (2) Unknown (1991, Jul. 27). "A German idea of Europe. (Helmut Kohl)." The Economist. (3) Unknown (1991, Aug. 10). "Not 1914, but not 1991 either. (Yugoslav civil war)." The Economist. (4) Unknown (1991, Aug. 31). "From the Atlantic to where? (affects of Soviet Union breakup on European Community)." The Economist. (5) Unknown (1991, Sept. 14)."United versus rovers. (European Community)." The Economist. (6) Unknown (1991, Nov. 23). "The road to Maastricht: what John Major ought to say at next month's European summit." The Economist. (7) Unknown (1991, Dec. 21). "Hail, Croatia. (recognition of independence)." The Economist. (8) Unknown (1992, Jan. 18). "Wreckognition: Yugoslavia." The Economist. (9) Unknown (1995, May 5). "Who ya gonna call? The European Union and America.(Atlantic alliance)." The Economist.
The Guardian
(1) Aitken, Ian (1991, Dec. 20). "Points of Order: PM's clanger of the year: Mr Lamont." The Guardian. (2) Bow, David (1992, Mar. 24). "Genscher to go on and on." The Guardian. (3) Cassese, Antonio (1991, Sept. 6). "RIGHTS AND REALPOLITIK. There is a way for Europe to reconcile itself tothe independence of Slovenia and Croatia." The Guardian. (4) Eyal, Jonathan (1992, Jan. 20). "EC blunders in Balkan power game. Pressured by Greece and Germany,Brussels made a bad decision." The Guardian. (5) Finkielkraut, Alain (1992, Sept. 4). "Power but no glory." The Guardian. (6) Gow, David (1991, Sept. 10). "Bonn ends its effort to save Soviet Union." The Guardian. (7) Gow, David (1991, Sept. 12)."Guest workers in Germany off to Zagreb." The Guardian. 81
(8) Gow, David (1991, Dec. 13). "Bonn shows way on Yugoslavia." The Guardian. (9) Gow, David (1991, Dec. 18). "Germans assert leadership role. Kohl shows his diplomatic muscle over Yugoslavia." The Guardian. (10) Gow, David; Traynor, Ian; Chazan, Yigal In De, and Hella Pick. (1991, Dec. 18) "Kohl 'victory' on Croatia." The Guardian. (11) Gow, David (1991, Dec 19). "Bonn calls for ties with Russia." The Guardian. (12) Hearst, David (1991, Jul. 12). "PAIN OF OLD WOUNDS. David Hearst drives past the roadblocks, shotguns, hears of ethnic unrest in Yugoslavia, and uncovers some malignant." The Guardian. (13) Hearst, David (1991, Jul. 19). "Yugoslav leaders pull federal army out of Slovenia." The Guardian. (14) Joffe, Josef (1991, Nov. 29). "HOUSE OF THE DEAD. Why doesn't the 'New World Order' extend to Europe? Andif it doesn't, can the Europeans stop the killing in what is still called." The Guardian. (15) Kettle, Martin (1991, Jul. 5) "The west sees the light. Until the shooting started politicians found it hard to focus on Slovenian independence. Martin Kettle traces the progress." The Guardian. (16) Kettle, Martin (1992, Dec. 31). "The year of living dangerously." The Guardian. (17) Palmer, John, and Hella Pick (1991, Sept. 18). "European ministers set to endorse peacekeepers. Meeting will draftcontrols to ensure forces are not drawn into combat." The Guardian. (18) Palmer, John (1991, Dec. 16). "German plan to recognise Croatia puts EC in turmoil." The Guardian. (19) Palmer, John (1991, Dec. 17). "EC agrees on Yugoslavia compromise." The Guardian. (20) Palmer, John (1992, Jan. 11). "EC set to recognise Yugoslav republics. Germany seeks to pre- empt report's recommendations." The Guardian. (21) Palmer, John (1991, Oct. 9). "Paris falls out with Bonn over EC unity." The Guardian. (22) Pick, Hella (1991, Jul. 3). "Doing the splits over Belgrade. Hella Pick on a crisis that's dividing Europe." The Guardian. (23) Pick, Hella (1991, Nov. 11). "Uneasy new age alliance. Nato may have lost an enemy but it has yet tofind a role for itself. Hella Pick examines the prospects." The Guardian. (24) Pick, Hella (1991, Dec. 18). "A ride on a bulldozer. Hella Pick on the rift between London and Bonn overrecognition of Croatia and Slovenia:" The Guardian. (25) Pick, Hella (1992, Jan. 10). "A master Germany wants to lose. From political pygmy to the bully of Europe. Hella Pick explains how criticism of Bonn has turned full circle." The Guardian. (26) Pick, Hella, and Ian Traynor (1992, Jan. 16). "Disquiet as EC recognises Croatia. Serb leaders warn German-led move couldignite new fighting." The Guardian. (27) Pick, Hella, and John Palmer (1992, Feb. 4). "Confident Croatia loses interest in truce." The Guardian. (28) Pick, Hella (1992, Jun. 1). "Hot blood and cold feet. The West at last has reacted to the Yugoslavcrisis with sanctions but is this too little and too late?" The Guardian. (29) Pick, Hella (1992, Feb. 28)."Fading fortunes of rich world's leaders." The Guardian. (30) Pick, Hella (1992, Apr. 28). "Genscher's going greeted with worldwide dismay. Sudden resignation intensifies European fears of rudderless Germany." The Guardian. (31) Stephen, Chris (1991, Dec. 7). "Shells rain on Dubrovnik." The Guardian. (32) Stone, Norman (1992, Jan. 20). "The unyoking of the Balkans. What future Yugoslavia? Will the Croats and Slovenes recant or are further splits on the way?" The Guardian. (33) Thompson, Mark (1992, Jun. 26). "THE TWILIGHT ZONE. Mark Thompson begins the chronology of a war from before the first shots a year ago." The Guardian. (34) Tomforde, Anna (1991, Dec. 6). "Washington and Bonn clash over German plan to recognise breakaway Yugoslav republics." The Guardian. (35) Tomforde, Anna (1991, Dec. 20)."Bonn keeps its promise to Croatia." The Guardian. (36) Traynor, Ian (1991, Aug. 29). "Croatia and Yugoslav army agree new truce." The Guardian. (37) Traynor, Ian (1991, Oct. 11). "Slovenia and Croatia may win international recognition." The Guardian. 82
(38) Traynor, Ian (1991, Oct. 23). "Army chief denounces EC plan." The Guardian. (39) Traynor, Ian (1991, Dec. 4). "Croatia and Slovenia put case to Bonn." The Guardian. (40) Traynor, Ian (1991, Dec. 5)."Bonn launches campaign to isolate Serbia." The Guardian. (41) Traynor, Ian, and John Palmer (1991, Sept. 7). "Yugoslavs pin hopes on talks. Rivals gather for EC conference amid renewed fighting." The Guardian. (42) Traynor, Ian (1991, Dec. 9). "A German finger in the Yugoslavian pie. Catholic Croatian ties that arebinding Bonn." The Guardian. (43) Traynor, Ian (1991, Dec. 9). "UN mission fails to secure Yugoslav peace." The Guardian. (44) Traynor, Ian (1991, Dec. 11). "'Fascist spectre' haunts Milosevic." The Guardian. (45) Traynor, Ian (1991, Dec. 12)."Recognition of Croatia 'must wait'." The Guardian. (46) Traynor, Ian, and Palmer John (1991, Dec. 21). "Key Yugoslav republic seeks EC recognition. Community wants UN peacekeepers in 'explosive' Bosnia-Herzegovina." The Guardian. (47) Traynor, Ian (1992, Jan. 16). "Independence is top of the Zagreb hit parade. Eyewitness." The Guardian.
(48) Unknown (1991, Sept. 5)."To have and to hold." The Guardian. (49) Unknown (1991, Nov. 9). "Sanctions on Serbia." The Guardian. (50) Unknown (1991, Nov. 13). "EC has last try at peace." The Guardian. (51) Unknown (1991, Dec. 24). "Bonn gives lead on Croats." The Guardian. (52) Unknown (1992, Jan. 8). "When hope is blown out of the skies." The Guardian. (53) Unknown (1992, Mar. 10). "Hope and the blue berets." The Guardian. (54) Unknown (1992, May 4). " High price of German unity." The Guardian. (55) Unkown (1992, Jun. 25). "The need to fight to make the peace." The Guardian. (56) West, Richard (1991, Oct. 18). "An apologist for Hitler. Richard West on how Jews are responding to the Croatian president's anti-Semitism." The Guardian. (57) West, Richard (1992, Jan. 20)."The unyoking of the Balkans: A catastrophe for Croatia. Slovenia maysurvive economically but the Croats face ruin." The Guardian. (58) Wolf, Julie (1991, Jul. 6). "EC countries stop short of recognition." The Guardian.
The Houston Chronicle
(1) Cohen, Roger (1992, Sept. 3). "Embittered Serbs mad at the world." The Houston Chronicle. 2 STAR ed.: A20. (2) Kinzer, Stephen (1992, Aug. 27) "Rebel of another kind; Serb stoutly maintains U.S., Europe sparked Balkan war." The Houston Chronicle. 2 STAR ed.: A18. (3) McManus, Doyle (1992, Mar. 10). "U.S. relents, may recognize Yugoslav republics." The Houston Chronicle. 2 STAR ed.: A6. (4) Unknown (1991, Dec. 18). "Serbia protests recognition of republics." The Houston Chronicle. 3 STAR ed.: A30. (5) Unknown (1991, Dec. 23). "Slovenia, Croatia buoyed by quick German recognition." The Houston Chronicle. 2 STAR ed.: A6. (6) Unknown (1991, Jan. 11). "Germany sticking to its Yugoslav plan." The Houston Chronicle. 2 STAR ed.: A23. (7) Unknown (1992, Jan. 15). "EC nations recognize Slovenia, Croatia; Action could be the fatal blow to preservation of the Yugoslav federation." The Houston Chronicle. 4 STAR ed.: A12. (8) Unknown (1992, Apr. 7). "U.S. recognizes 3 republics breaking from Yugoslavia." The Houston Chronicle. 4 STAR ed.: A6.
The Independent
(1) Barber, Tony (1991, Jul. 9). "Yugoslavia in Crisis: Peace deal fails to calm fears of war." The Independent. (2) Barber, Tony (1991, Dec. 13). "Germany exhorted to delay recognition of Croatia." The 83
Independent. (3) Barber, Tony (1995, Jun. 4). "Five steps into the quagmire." The Independent. (4) Bridge, Adrian, and Marcus Tanner (1991, Dec. 18). "Yugoslavia: Serbia says EC erased Yugoslavia from map; Serbs reject plan to recognise states." The Independent. (5) Crawshaw, Steve (1991, Nov. 28). "Slovenia 'close to Western recognition'." The Independent. (6) Hodgson, Godfrey (1991, Aug. 3). "Discord in the European concert; The Community's press reflects divisions affecting policy towards Yugoslavia." The Independent. (7) Jenkins, Peter (1991, Dec. 18). "Dangerous consequences of a bad night's work." The Independent. (8) Lambert, Sarah, and Marcus Tanner (1992, Jan. 15). "EC gives green light to Yugoslav break- up." The Independent. (9) Tanner, Marcus (1992, Jan. 17). "Serbia's President is bowed but unbroken." The Independent. (10) Wise, Michael, and Sarah Helm (1991, Jun. 28). "Yugoslavia: First test for new Europe." The Independent.
The New York Times
(1) Binder, David (1991, Jul. 3). "CONFLICT IN YUGOSLAVIA; Some Western Nations Spilt Off on Yugoslavia." The New York Times. Late ed.: A6. (2) Binder, David (1991, Dec. 14). "U.N. Fights Bonn's Embrace of Croatia." The New York Times. (3) Binder, David (1992, Jan. 7). "As Bonn Talks Louder, Some in the U.S. Wince." The New York Times. Late ed.: A2. (4) Binder, David (1992, Jun. 14). "Haunted by What the U.S. Didn't Do in Yugoslavia." The New York Times. (5) Binder, David (1992, Jul. 28). "THE 1992 CAMPAIGN; Bush's Policy on Republics Has Fluctuated." The New York Times. (6) Cohen, Roger (1999, Mar. 26). "CONFLICT IN THE BALKANS: IN GERMANY; Half a Century After Hitler, German Jets Join the Attack." The New York Times. Late ed.: A12. (7) Cowell, Alan (1992, Jan. 14). "Vatican Formally Recognizes Independence of Croatia and Slovenia." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (8) Crossette, Barbara (1992, May 24). "European Nations Preparing for Penalties Against Serbia." The New York Times. (9) Engelberg, Stephen (1991, Jul 3). "CONFLICT IN YUGOSLAVIA; Warily, Croats Move Toward Slovene Side." The New York Times. Late ed.: A6. (10) Engelberg, Stephen (1991, Dec. 23). "Brutal Impasse: The Yugoslav War A Special Report. Yugoslav Ethnic Hatreds Raise Fears of a War Without an End." The New York Times. Late ed.: A1. (11) Friedman, Thomas L. (1995, Oct. 11). "Foreign Affairs;Proceed With Caution." The New York Times. (12) Gelb, Leslie H. (1992, May 11). "To Be Father and Bride." The New York Times. Late ed.: A15. (13) Kinzer, Stephen (1992, Jan. 16). "Europe, Backing Germans, Accepts Yugoslav Breakup." The New York Times. Late ed.: A10. (14) Kinzer, Stephen (1991, Jun. 28). "Germans in Warning on Yugoslav Economy." The New York Times. Late ed.: A10. (15) Kinzer, Stephen (1991, Dec. 24). "Slovenia and Croatia Get Bonn's Nod." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (16) Kinzer, Stephen (1992, Apr. 28). "Genscher, Bonn's Foreign Minister 18 Years, Resigns." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (17) Kinzer, Stephen (1991, Dec. 8). "Germans Follow Own Line on Yugoslav Republics." The New York Times. (18) Kinzer, Stephen (1992, Aug. 26)."A Sort of 'Super Serb' Defends Serbian Policy." The New York Times.
84
(19) Lewis, Paul (1991, Dec 16). "U.N. Yields to Plans by Germany To Recognize Yugoslav Republics." The New York Times. Late ed.: A1. (20) Lind, Michael (1991, Dec. 27). "Recognize the Power of the New Germany." The New York Times. Late ed.: A33. (21) Longman, Jere (1998, Jul. 5). "WORLD CUP '98; Croatia Stuns Germany With the Aid Of a Red Card." The New York Times. (22) Montgomery, Paul L. (1991, Sept. 7). "Europeans Pursue Talks on Yugoslavia." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (23) Riding, Alan (1991, Jul. 4). "CONFLICT IN YUGOSLAVIA: A Toothless Europe?; Community Is Stung by Yugoslav Strife As Truces Unravel Before Ink Is Dry." The New York Times. (24) Riding, Alan (1991, Jul. 7). "CONFLICT IN YUGOSLAVIA; Separatists in Europe Indirectly Reinforce Unity in Yugoslavia." The New York Times. (25) Riding, Alan (1991, Sept. 15). "The New Europe: Will It Look East, or Inward?" The New York Times. (26) Riding, Alan (1991, Sept. 22). "THE WORLD; Europeans' Hopes For a Yugoslav Peace Turn to Frustration." The New York Times. (27) Riding, Alan (1991, Nov. 9). "European nations declare sanctions against Belgrade." The New York Times. (28) Rosenthal, A.M. (1993, Sept. 10). "Bosnia: Empty Promises." The New York Times. Late ed.: A27. (29) Rosenthal, A.M. (1994, Feb. 23)"Diplomats See a New Chance to End Bosnia War." The New York Times. Late ed.: A8. (30) Rosenthal, A.M. (1994, Dec. 23). "On My Mind; Lighting Bosnia's Fire." The New York Times. Late ed.: A35. (31) Rosenthal, A.M. (1995, Dec. 22). "On My Mind; The Missing Report." The New York Times. Late ed.: A39. (32) Simons, Marlise (2004, Sept. 1). "Milosevic Opens His Defense Case by Going on the Offensive." The New York Times. Late ed.: A7. (33) Sudetic, Chuck (1991, Jun. 26). "2 Yugoslav states vote independence to press demands." The New York Times. (34) Sudetic, Chuck (1991, Jul. 3). "Conflict in Yugoslavia; Yugoslav troops battle Slovenes, ending cease-fire." The New York Times. Late ed.: A1. (35) Sudetic, Chuck (1991, Aug. 26). "New Croatia Strife After Bonn Warning." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (36) Sudetic, Chuck (1991, Dec. 21). "Yugoslav breakup gains momentum." The New York Times. (37) Sudetic, Chuck (1992, Jan. 1)."U.N. Envoy Wins Yugoslav Peace Move." The New York Times. (38) Sudetic, Chuck (1992, Jan. 2)."Warring Yugoslavs Accept U.N. Plan." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (39) Sudetic, Chuck (1992, Jan. 17). "Serbs Denounce Breakup of Yugoslavia." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (40) Sudetic, Chuck (1992, Feb. 16)."It's Time to Ask Croations Whether Peace Is at Hand." The New York Times. (41) Tagliabue, John (1991, Jul. 3). "CONFLICT IN YUGOSLAVIA; The Yugoslavia Blowup: The Center Comes Apart." The New York Times. Late ed.: A6. (42) Tagliabue, John (1991, Aug. 8). "Kohl Threatens Serbia Over Cease-Fire Violations" The New York Times. Late ed.: A8. (43) Tagliabue, John (1991, Sept. 5). "Renewed Fighting Wounds Yugoslav Economy." The New York Times. (44) Tagliabue, John (1991, Oct. 13). "Old Tribal Rivalries In Eastern Europe Pose Threat of Infection." The New York Times. (45) Tagliabue, John (1991, Dec. 15). "Moving Defiantly on Yugoslavia, Bonn Threatens Rift With Allies." The New York Times. (46) Tagliabue, John (1991, Dec. 16). "Bold New Germany: No Longer a Political 'Dwarf'." The New York Times. Late ed.: A12. (47) Tagliabue, John (1991, Dec. 17). "European Ties for Slovenia and Croatia." The New York 85
Times. Late ed.: A3. (48) Tagliabue, John (1991, Dec. 18). "Kohl to Compromise on Yugoslavia." The New York Times. Late ed.: A3. (49) Tagliabue, John (1992, Jan. 11). "Kohl Seeks to Fend Off Criticism Of His Assertive German Policies." The New York Times. (50) Unknown (1992, Jan. 18). "Italian President Visits Croatia and Slovenia." The New York Times. (51) Unknown (1992, Jan. 19). "Breaking Up Yugoslavia; Two Countries Emerge as Another Dies." The New York Times. (52) Unknown (1992, Feb. 16). "Speed the Peace in Yugoslavia." The New York Times. (53) Unknown (1994, Jul 18). "The German Special Relationship." The New York Times. Late ed.: A14. (54) Whitney, Craig R. (1993, Apr. 11). "Meddling in the Balkans: The Burden of Centuries." The New York Times. (55) Whitney, Craig R. (1993, Aug. 1). "Reluctant Giant: Germany Balks at Leading Europeans to Unity." The New York Times.
The San Francisco Chronicle (1) Unknown (1991, Aug. 6). "Yugoslav Peace Mission Fails." The San Francisco Chronicle. Final ed.: A14. (2) Unknown (1991, Dec.12). "Croatia to Get Its Wish." The San Francisco Chronicle. Final ed.: A17. (3) Vivano, Frank (1992, Sept. 12). "For Serbs, the Burden Of History Weighs Heavy Bitter past behind war with Croats, Muslims." The San Francisco Chronicle. Final ed.: A1.
The Times/The Sunday Times
(1) Allen-Mills, Tony (1991, Jul. 14). "Belgrade fans fears of German `reich';Yugoslavia" The Times. (2) Binyon, Michael (1991, Dec. 2). "Europe ponders isolating Serbia;Yugoslavia." The Times. (3) Binyon, Michael (1991, Dec. 19). "Shevardnadze withdraws from key Nato meeting." The Times. (4) Binyon, Michael (1992, Apr. 28). "Political guile helped Genscher survive;Germany." The Times. (5) Bone, James, and Dessa Trevisan (1991, Nov. 26). "UK backtracks on Yugoslav embargo." The Times. (6) Bone, James (1991, Dec. 14). "UN peace observers expected in Croatia;Yugoslavia." The Times. (7) Bone, James, and Ian Murray (1991, Dec. 16). "Bonn threat clouds UN peace mission;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (8) Boyes, Roger (1993, Jun. 22). "Bonn fights back as allies try to pin blame for war; EC Copenhagen summit." The Times. (9) Boyes, Roger (1991, Jul. 6). "EC imposes total arms embargo on Yugoslavia." The Times. (10) Boyes, Roger (1991, Jul. 27). "Austria swims against history's stream; Danube." The Times (11) Boyes, Roger (1992, Sept. 7). "Germany's divided mind conjures up demons of Nazism." The Times. (12) Boyes, Roger (1991, Sept. 5). "Can he silence the Balkan guns?" The Times. (13) Boyes, Roger (1991, Nov. 27). "Peacekeeping is forever." The Times. (14) Bremner, Charles; Judah, Tim, and Dessa Trevisan (1992, Jan. 6). "UN presses on with Croatia buffer plans;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (15) Brock, George and Tim Judah (1991, Aug. 30)."EC gives Serbia weekend deadline for a ceasefire; Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (16) Brock, George and Ian Murray (1991, Jul. 10). "Balkan turmoil brings France's fears to surface;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (17) Brock, George (1992, Apr. 24). "German diplomacy's poor timing helped to trigger Sarajevo 86
conflict; Bosnia." The Times. (18) Brock, George (1992, May 4). "Balkan word games baffle EC; Portugal." The Times. (19) Brock, George (1992, Dec. 11). "European leaders look to past in facing the future;EC Edinburgh summit." The Times. (20) Brock, George (1993, Apr. 24). "Lumbering Europe renounces dream of superpower status." The Times. (21) Brock, George (1991, Dec. 17). "EC set to recognise Yugoslav republics." The Times. (22) Brock, George (1991, Dec. 18). "Kohl hijacks Brussels policy." The Times. (23) Burnet, Alastair (1993, Apr. 18). "Europe pays high price for Germany's grand delusions." The Sunday Times. (24) Davies, Gerard (1991, Aug. 10). "CSCE sets deadline for Yugoslav talks." The Times. (25) Fletcher, Martin (1991, Dec. 7). "US cuts Yugoslav trade; Attempt to end civil war in Yugoslavia." The Times. (26) Fletcher, Martin (1992, Apr. 30). "German president assures Bush on US role in Europe." The Times. (27) Fletcher, Martin (1991, Dec. 17). "US urges caution over recognition;Croatia and Slovenia." The Times. (28) Glover-James, Ian (1991, Dec. 15). "Bonn splits EC on Yugoslavia." The Times. (29) Judah, Tim, and Mary Dejevsky (1991, Aug. 3). "EC steps up calls for intervention as more Croats die; Yugoslavia." The Times. (30) Jacobson, Philip, and Ian Murray (1991, Sept. 18)."France will support peace force only if warring sides agree;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (31) Judah, Tim, and Dessa Trevisan (1991, Aug. 26). "Bonn tells Belgrade it must call a halt to army bloodshed; Yugoslavia." The Times. (32) Judah, Tim (1992, Jan. 14). "Belgrade attacks Vatican for recognising breakaway states; Yugoslavia." The Times. (33) Johnson, Daniel (1992, Aug. 5). "Europe's bloodstained lies." The Times. (34) Macrae, Norman (1991, Dec. 8). "On with the Maastricht farce, a show that could really bomb out." The Sunday Times. (35) Macrae, Norman (1993, Apr. 4). "Hard cash will get Russia out of the red." The Sunday Times. (36) Massie, Allan (1991, Dec. 22). "Sobstacles on road to promised land;Scotland." The Sunday Times. (37) McElvoy, Anne (1991, Aug. 8). "Serbia casts Germany as the villain;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (38) McElvoy, Anne (1991, Aug. 27). "Bonn and Vienna demand an end to Yugoslav fighting." The Times. (39) McElvoy, Anne (1991, Sept. 7). "Events lead Genscher astray;Yugoslavia." The Times. (40) McElvoy, Anne (1991, Dec. 12). "Slovenes hope for recognition before Christmas;Yugoslavia." The Times. (41) McElvoy, Anne (1991, Dec. 19). "Blundering in the Balkans." The Times. (42) Millar, Peter (1993, Jun. 20). "Leaving Bosnia in the lurch." The Sunday Times. (43) Munchau, Wolgang (1991, Dec. 21). "Bundesbank fights a lone battle." The Times. (44) Murray, Ian (1991, Nov. 16). "Paris and Bonn set unity course." The Times. (45) Murray, Ian (1991, Nov. 8). "Germany wants sanctions imposed against Serbia." The Times. (46) Murray, Ian; Brock, George, and Tim Judah (1991, Dec. 5). "Germany cuts off links to Serbia; Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (47) Murray, Ian (1991, Dec. 18). "Kohl to recognise Yugoslav states in the new year." The Times. (48) Murray, Ian (1991, Dec. 20). "Kohl forces European pace on Yugoslav break-up." The Times. (49) Murray, Ian (1991, Dec. 24). "Bonn recognises Croats;Germany;Independence of Croatia and Slovenia." The Times. (50) Murray, Ian (1992, Jan. 9). "Genscher offers vision of future to EC and Nato;Germany." The Times. (51) Trevisan, Dessa, and Eve-Ann Prentice (1991, Sept. 16). "Croats threaten to pull out of EC peace talks;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (52) Oakley, Robin (1992, May 16). "Thatcher attacks move to create federal superstate." The Times. 87
(53) O'Brien, Conor Cruise (1992, Jan. 1). "German domination of Europe will make political union a much less attractive idea." The Times. (54) Prentice, Eve-Ann (1993, Jun. 23). "Force of history condemns Bosnia to a hostile peace." The Times. (55) Riddell, Peter (1991, Dec. 20). "Following the Germany star; A Week in Politics." The Times. (56) Trevisan, Dessa (1991, Dec. 13). "UN chief fights to hold off recognition." The Times. (57) Trevisan, Dessa (1991, Dec. 21). "Markovic resigns over war budget;Yugoslavia." The Times. (58) Trevisan, Dessa, and Tim Judah (1991, Dec. 26). "Serbs vow to build a new Yugoslavia." The Times. (59) Unknown (1991, Aug. 26). "Recognising The Inevitable." The Times. (60) Unknown (1991, Sept. 17). "Patience Not Panic." The Times. (61) Unknown (1991, Nov. 13). "Recognition near;Yugoslavia unrest." The Times. (62) Unknown (1991, Dec. 23). "Russia and Germany." The Times. (63) Unknown (1991, Dec. 29). "Accident waiting to happen." The Sunday Times. (64) Unknown (1992, Feb. 14). "Peace-keeping perils." The Times. (65) Unknown (1993, May 14). "The German responsibility." The Times. (66) Walker, Tom (1992, Jan 11). "Doubts emerge on EC recognition of breakaway Croatia; Yugoslavia." The Times.
The Washington Post
(1) Atkinson, Rick (1993, Dec. 17). "Germany, 5 Others Anger Greece by Recognizing Macedonia." The Washington Post. (2) Coll, Steve (1994, Apr. 20). "Yugoslavia-Minding: A Trail of Missteps; Dilemma in Responding to Initial Breakup Continues to Bedevil an Uncertain West." The Washington Post. (3) Drozdiak, William (1991, Jun. 29). "West Europeans Send Envoys, Debate Yugoslav Crisis." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A18. (4) Drozdiak, William (1991, Jul. 2). "Germany Criticizes European Community Policy on Yugoslavia." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A16. (5) Drozdiak, William (1991, Jul. 5). "Conflicts Over Yugoslav Crisis Surface in Europe;Debate Pits Principle of Self-Determination Against Preserving National Boundaries." The Washington Post. (6) Drozdiak, William (1991, Jul. 6). "EC Halts Aid, Bans Arms Sales To Yugoslavia; Cease-Fire Breach Could Cause Position Change on Independence." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A1. (7) Drozdiak, William (1991, Sept. 3). "Turmoil in the East Challenges EC's Future Identity." The Washington Post. (8) Drozdiak, William (1991, Sept. 5). "Lack of an Armed Option Limits EC's Yugoslav Peace Initiative." The Washington Post. (9) Drozdiak, William (1991, Sept. 24)."EC's Superpower Ambitions Jarred by Yugoslav Strife; 12 European Nations Appear Unable To Maintain Unity in Face of Adversity." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A1. (10) Drozdiak, William (1991, Dec. 17)."EC Envoys Agree on Recognition Of Croatia, Slovenia Next Month; Compromise on Yugoslav Republics Follows 10-Hour Deadlock." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A15. (11) Drozdiak, William (1991, Dec. 18). "Europeans' Balkan Stance Attests to Rising German Influence". The Washington Post. Final ed.: A25. (12) Drozdiak, William (1992, Jan. 11). "Germany Vows Balkan Recognition; EC's Criteria for Ties Not Binding, Genscher Tells Foreign Ministers." The Washington Post. (13) Drozdiak, William (1992, Jan. 16)."12 West European Countries Recognize Croatia, Slovenia." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A21. (14) Falk, Richard (1999, Sept. 19). "Mission Implausible; Caught Between National Interests And Nationalism." The Washington Post. Final ed.: B01. (15) Fisher, Marc (1991, Jul. 7). "Yugoslav Violence Puts Focus on Germany; Bonn's Support for Slovenia, Croatia Draws Comparisons With Expansionist Past." The Washington Post.
88
(16) Fisher, Marc (1991, Aug. 7). "EC Stumbles on Mediation Role in Yugoslavia." The Washington Post. (17) Fisher, Marc (1991, Sept. 18). "Germany's New Destiny; Reunited Country Seeks An Expanded World Role." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A21. (18) Fisher, Marc (1991, Nov. 16). "France, Germany See EC's Last Chance; Kohl, Mitterrand Step Up Pressure for British Concessions at Summit." The Washington Post. (19) Fisher, Marc (1992, Jan. 23). "Germany's Role Stirs Some Concern in U.S.; Top Officials Supportive, but Others Wary." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A17. (20) Fisher, Marc (1992, Feb. 23)."Germany Gropes Toward New Military Role; Nazi Past Colors Debate Over Nation's Responsibilities in Conflicts Beyond Its Borders." The Washington Post. (21) Fisher, Marc (1992, May 16). "Trepidation Over Balkans; Europeans Fear Yugoslav War Could Spread." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A11. (22) Fisher, Marc (1992, Mar. 31). "Germany Facing Harsher Criticism; Reunited Nation's Assertiveness Evokes Comparisons to its Past." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A11. (23) Goshko, John M. (1991, Jul. 3). "U.S. Shifts Emphasis Away From Preserving Yugoslav Unity." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A25. (24) Goshko, John M. (1991, Jul. 4). "Baker Warns of 'Full-Fledged Civil War'" The Washington Post. A19. (25) Goshko, John M. (1991, Dec. 16). "U.N. to Send Observers to Yugoslavia;Small Advance Team Could Prepare Way For Large Peace Force." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A1. (26) Harden, Blaine (1991, Jun. 30). "Yugoslav Crisis Raises Questions About Nature of National Unity." The Washington Post. (27) Harden, Blaine (1991, Jul. 20). "Slovenia Nears Independence as Croatia Faces Civil War; Slovenes Call Army Pullout Crucial Step in Secession." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A1. (28) Harden, Blaine (1991, Aug. 6). "Serbia Wields Power In Balkan Struggle; Croats Retreat Before Guerrilla Drive." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A8. (29) Harden, Blaine (1991, Aug. 28). "Croatia Girds Its Dump Trucks; Welders Prepare for War With Serbs; Talks Yield Army Promises." The Washington Post. (30) Harden, Blaine (1991, Oct. 5). "Yugoslav Sides Accept Peace Pact; Serbia, Croatia Agree To 'Loose Association'." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A1. (31) Harden, Blaine (1991, Nov. 26). "Yugoslav Cease-Fire Holds Amid New Peace Pledges; Croats, Serbs Adopt Conciliatory Tone." The Washington Post. (32) Harden, Blaine (1991, Dec. 18). "EC's Yugoslav Move Spurs Serbian Rage; Recognition Policy Seen Fueling Conflict." The Washington Post. Final ed.: A25. (33) Harden, Blaine (1991, Dec. 24). "Balkans Entangle Big Powers - Again; Germany, U.S. Accused of Manipulating Rivalry for Their Own Gain." The Washington Post. (34) Harden, Blaine (1992, Jan. 5). "Latest Cease-Fire Plan Breaks Pattern of Yugoslav Civil War." The Washington Post. (35) Harden, Blaine (1992, Jan. 15). "Unarmed U.N. Officers Begin Yugoslav Mission; Test for Peace Keepers Looms in Serbian Enclave." The Washington Post. (36) Harden, Blaine (1992, Jan. 16). "Croatians Celebrate Their Independence; Recognition by EC Comes After Heavy Toll in Yugoslav Strife." The Washington Post. (37) Harden, Blaine (1992, Feb. 10). "Croatian President Renews Objections to U.N. Peace- Keeping Plan." The Washington Post. (38) Hoagland, Jim (1991, Dec. 19). "As Europe Forges Its Future …" The Washington Post. Final ed.: A21. (39) Hoffman, David (1992, Apr. 8). "U.S. Recognizes 3 Ex-Yugoslav States." The Washington Post. (40) Silber, Laura (1991, Sept. 4). "EC Observers Admit Failure In Croatia;Serbs' Forces Threaten Adriatic Ports." The Washington Post. (41) Unknown (1991, Aug. 25). "Croatian Minister Warns of Widespread Call to Arms; Ethnic Fighting in Yugoslavia Flares; Germany Threatens to Recognize Secessionists." The Washington Post. (42) Unknown (1991, Aug. 27). "To End Yugoslavia's War." The Washington Post. (43) Unknown (1991, Dec. 15). "Germany Considers a Misstep." The Washington Post. Final ed.: C6. 89
(44) Unknown (1991, Dec. 20). "Slovenia Waits for Recognition." The Washington Post. (45) Unknown (1991, Dec. 24). "Recognizing Croatia and Slovenia." The Washington Post. (46) Vogel, Steve (1992, May 16). "Allies Oppose Bonn's Iran Links; U.S. Says Germany's Intelligence Contacts Weaken Tehran's Isolation." The Washington Post. (47) Vogel, Steve (1993, Nov. 6). "Allies Oppose Bonn's Iran Links; U.S. Says Germany's Intelligence Contacts Weaken Tehran's Isolation." The Washington Post.
The Washington Times
(1) Borowiec, Andrew (1992, Nov. 14). "Yugoslav army readies return; 70,000 Croats in Bosnia said to be targets" The Washington Times. Final ed.: A6. (2) Borowiec, Andrew (1993, May 12). "Croats reported 'cleansing' Muslims in territorial expansion." The Washington Times. Final ed.: A9. (3) Kenney, George (1995, Aug. 16). "Bosnia as a failure of recognition." The Washington Times. Final ed.: A17. (4) Perlmutter, Amos (1991, Dec. 24). "Dark side of the new nationalism." The Washington Times. Final ed.: F3. (5) Unknown (1991, Dec. 18). "Germany takes the lead on Yugoslavia." The Washington Times. Final ed.: F2. (6) Unknown (1992, Aug. 9). "Partisan politics rears its head in last week's debate on Bosnia." The Washington Times. Final ed.: B2.
USA Today
(1) Katz, Lee Michael (1991, Aug. 28). "Civil war days away, Croatia leader warns." USA Today. (2) Neuman, Johanna (1991, Jun. 20). "Europe group flexes muscle." USA Today. (3) Neuman, Johanna (1991, Jun. 26). "Dropout republics see greener grass." USA Today. (4) Neuman, Johanna (1991, Jul. 5). "Violence ebbs in Yugoslavia." USA Today. (5) Neuman, Johanna (1992, Apr. 8). "Yugoslav republics recognized // U.S. shifts gears as violence spreads." USA Today. (6) Unknown (1991, Dec. 24)."Croatia is recognized as fighting continues." USA Today. (7) Unknown (1991, Aug. 27). "Yugoslavian crisis worsens." USA Today.
90