Linguocultural specifics of artificial intelligence representation in the English language media discourse: corpus-based approach
Автор: Kochetova L.A.
Журнал: Вестник Волгоградского государственного университета. Серия 2: Языкознание @jvolsu-linguistics
Рубрика: Главная тема номера
Статья в выпуске: 5 т.22, 2023 года.
Бесплатный доступ
The article deals with the discursive construction of artificial intelligence (AI) in the English-language media discourse. Corpus methods establish semantic, figurative-perceptual and axiological specificity in the media representation of AI in various media segments, such as tabloids and broadsheet papers. Corpus-assisted discourse analysis includes: 1) identification of unique semantic domains that determine discourse interpretations of this socially significant phenomenon, followed by an analysis of their dispersion in narratives about AI; 2) analysis of the figurative-evaluative and value content of its media representation; 3) investigation of the specifics of broadsheet media and tabloid media representations of the AI concept. It was found that AI receives multiple media representations, in which its conceptual features represented by the lexical items of the semantic fields “Knowledge”, “Ability”, “Information and Computer Technologies” are supplemented and enriched by the lexical units of the semantic fields “Safety/Danger”, “Transformation”, “Ethics”. In media narratives about AI, the concept of “imitation of human abilities” is often associated with fake news, plagiarism, warfare, crime, climate change, and unemployment. Corpus data revealed that in the narratives about AI in broadsheet media, the lexical items of the semantic field “Robots” emphasize the similarity of AI with anthropomorphic entities; the semantic field “Competition” represents the idea of a rivalry between a human and a machine, as well as between countries, governments and companies; the semantic field “Warfare” actualizes the pragmatics of warning related to collective security and expressing public concern about the possible negative consequences of the development of AI. Popular media emphasize the androgenic nature of AI, its entertainment potential (“Games”), practical values related to health care (“Medicines and Treatment”); and the pragmatics of warning related to individual safety (“Crime”). The evaluative media representation of AI is formed mainly by ethical and practical, often negative, evaluative features transmitted through metaphoric images, intertextual references, and cultural models that determine the behavioural patterns of the discursive community members.
Corpus-assisted discourse analysis, keyword analysis, artificial intelligence, concept, metaphoric model, evaluation, cultural specifics
Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/149145092
IDR: 149145092 | DOI: 10.15688/jvolsu2.2023.5.1
Список литературы Linguocultural specifics of artificial intelligence representation in the English language media discourse: corpus-based approach
- Bareis J., Katzenbach C., 2021. Talking AI into Being: The Narratives and Imaginaries of National AI Strategies and Their Performative Politics. Science, Technology, & Human Values, vol. 47, iss. 5. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1177/01622439211030007
- Carter R., 2001. Working With Texts: A Core Introduction to Language Analysis. New York, Routledge. 291 p.
- Chong D., Druckman J.N., 2007. Framing Theory. Annual Review of Political Science, vol. 10, pp. 103-126. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci. 10.072805.103054
- Cutcliffe S.H., Pense C.M., Zvalaren M., 2012. Framing the Discussion: Nanotechnology and the Social Construction of Technology – What STS Scholars Are Saying. NanoEthics, vol. 6, iss. 2, pp. 81-99. DOI: 10.1007/s11569-012-0149-z
- Darling K., 2015. ‘Who’s Johnny?’ Anthropomorphic Framing in Human-Robot Interaction, Integration, and Policy. Lin P., Bekey G., Abney K., Jenkins R., eds. ROBOT ETHICS 2.0, Oxford University Press. 22 p. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2588669
- De Vreese C.H., 2005. News Framing: Theory and Typology. Information Design Journal, vol. 13, iss. 1, pp. 51-62. DOI: 10.1075/idjdd.13.1.06vre
- Entman R.M., 1993. Framing. Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, vol. 43, iss. 4, pp. 51-58. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x
- Fast E., Horvitz, E., 2017. Long-Term Trends in the Public Perception of Artificial Intelligence. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, vol. 31, no. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v31i1.10635
- Gabrielatos C., 2018. Keyness Analysis: Nature, Metrics and Techniques. Taylor Ch., Marchi A., eds. Corpus Approaches to Discourse: A Critical Review. New York, Routledge, pp. 225-258.
- Garvey Sh., Maskal Ch., 2020. Sentiment Analysis of the News Media on Artificial Intelligence Does Not Support Claims of Negative Bias Against Artificial Intelligence. Omics: A Journal of Integrative Biology, vol. 24, iss. 5. DOI: 10.1089/omi.2019.0078
- Groves T., Figuerola C.G., Groves M.A., 2015. Ten Years of Science News. A Longitudinal Analysis of Scientific Culture in the Spanish Digital Press. Public Understanding of Science, vol. 25, iss. 6, pp. 691-705. DOI: 10.1177/0963662515576864
- Gries St.Th., 2020. Analyzing Dispersion. Paquot M., Gries St.Th., eds. A Practical Handbook of Corpus Linguistics. Berlin, New York, Springer, pp. 99-118.
- Guzman A.L., Jones S., 2014. Napster and the Press. Framing Music Technology. First Monday, vol. 19, no. 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i10.5545
- Hardie A., 2012. CQPweb – Combining Power, Flexibility and Usability in a Corpus Analysis Tool. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, vol. 17, iss. 3, pp. 380-409. DOI: 10.1075/ijcl.17.3.04har
- Holliman R., 2004. Media Coverage of Cloning: A Study of Media Content, Production and Reception. Public Understanding of Science, vol. 13, iss. 2, pp. 107-130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662504043862
- Klushina N.I., 2014. Mediatizatsiya sovremennoy kultury i russkiy natsionalnyi stil [Mediatization of Modern Culture and Russian National Style]. Russkaya rech [Russian Speech], no. 1, pp. 66-73.
- Kolianov A.Yu., 2022. Semiozis iskusstvennogo intellekta i sotsialnoe razvitie [Semiosis of Artificial Intelligence and Social Development]. Diskurs [Discourse], vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 88-97. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2022-8-2-88-97
- Kondratyeva O.N., Ignatova Yu.S., 2021. Strategii mediatizatsii yuridicheskikh kontseptov v rossiyskikh massmedia XXI veka (na primere kontsepta LEGITIMNOST) [Strategies for the Mediatization of Legal Concepts in Russian Mass Media of 21st Century (Concept LEGITIMACY)]. Nauchnyi dialog [Scientific Dialogue], no. 3, pp. 69-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2021-3-69-85
- Lakoff G, Johnson M., 2003. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 256 p.
- Lehrer A., 1985. The Influence of Semantic Field on Semantic Change. Fisiak J., ed. Historical Semantics. Historical Word-Formation. Berlin, New York, Amsterdam, Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 283-296.
- Lupton D., 2017. Feeling Your Data: Touch and Making Sense of Personal Digital Data. New Media & Society, vol. 19, iss. 10, pp. 1599-1614. URL: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817717515
- McCombs M.E., Shaw D.L., 1972. The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media. The Public Opinion Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 176-187.
- Nguyen D., 2022. The News Framing of Artificial Intelligence: A Critical Exploration of How Media Discourses Make Sense of Automation. AI & Society, 2022, 23 June. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00146-022-01511-1
- Pentzold N., Landinez L., Baaken Th., 2019. Disruptive Innovation from a Process View: A Systematic Literature Review. Creativity and Innovation Management, vol. 28, iss. 2, pp. 157-174. DOI: 10.1111/caim.12313
- Shmeleva T.V., 2015. Mediatizatsiya kak fenomen sovremennoy kultury i obyekt issledovaniya [Mediatization as the Ph enomen on of Modern Culture and Object of Research]. Vestnik Novgorodskogo gosudarstvennogo uni vers ite- ta i m. Ja rosl ava Mudr ogo [Vestnik of Novgorod State University], no. 7 (90), pp. 145-148.
- Tucker C., 2012. Using Social Network Analysis and Framing to Assess Collective Identity in the Genetic Engineering Resistance Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand. Social Movement Studies, vol. 12, iss. 1, pp. 81-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14742837.2012.679065