Dialogue & Discourse 8 (2) 2017 129-148 doi: 10.5087/dad.2017.206 Boon or Bane? Discursive Construction of the Shale Gas Controversy Zeynep Cihan Koca-Helvacı
[email protected] School of Foreign Languages, Dokuzçeşmeler Yerleşkesi, Dokuz Eylul University 35160/ Buca Izmir/TURKIYE Editor: David Traum Submitted 11/2016; Accepted 06/2017; Published Online 11/2017 Abstract This study explores strategies in pro and anti-shale organizations’ discourse by combining the Discourse-Historical Approach (Wodak, 2001) with corpus linguistics. With the help of keyword lists, collocations, concordances, and key semantic domains, the representations of shale gas extraction, relevant actors and argumentation schemes in opposing discourses of the pro-shale Marcellus Shale Coalition and anti-shale Americans Against Fracking were analysed. The findings of the study show that the advocates presented shale gas as a bonus for the crisis-struck American society through discourse of altruism and solidarity. The opponents, on the other hand, represented shale gas as a threat to the American ecosystem and public health through an alarming and scientific discourse. The empirical findings of this study add to a growing body of literature on discursive strategies employed by opposing camps of environmental controversies. Keywords: shale gas, environmental issues, the Discourse-Historical Approach, corpus linguistics, discursive strategies 1 Introduction Depletion of conventional energy resources, growing demand for energy, and advanced drilling technologies have led many energy companies to steer towards unconventional sources of fossil fuel like shale gas. The extraction process involves horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing which means drilling and injecting chemical solvent at high pressure into the hole to crack the rock formations so that trapped methane gas in the miniscule pores of shale deposits can be released (Finewood & Stroup, 2012).