Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Low carbon diet: Reducing the complexities of climate change to human scale

  • Brigitte Nerlich (a1), Vyvyan Evans (a2) and Nelya Koteyko (a3)

Abstract

For many years, cognitive linguists, such as Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner, have studied meaning construction through language based on intricate mental mapping operations. Their research suggests that conceptual metaphor and conceptual blending permit human beings to reduce very complex issues to human scale. Climate change is such a complex issue. We ask: How is it linguistically reduced to human scale and, in the process, made amenable to thinking and acting? To address these questions, we have analysed the emergence of lexical compounds around a recent key word in debates about climate change in the English speaking world, namely ‘carbon’. One such compound and metaphor/blend is ‘low carbon diet’. In this article we study how the use of the compound ‘low carbon diet’ in an advertising campaign, a book, and by a catering company in the United States permitted US newspapers to reduce climate change to human scale. We have combined and compared metaphor and blending analysis with media and discourse analysis to shed light on the linguistic framing of a real-world problem, that is, we engaged in applied blending analysis.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Correspondence addresses: brigitte.nerlich@nottingham.ac.uk

References

Hide All
Aitchison, J. 2003. Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Alexander, R. 2008. Framing discourse on the environment: A critical discourse approach. New York: Routledge.
Benczes, R. 2006. Creative compounds in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Brône, G. & Coulson, S.. 2010. Processing deliberate ambiguity in newspaper headlines: Double grounding. Discourse Processes 47. 212236.
Brône, G. & Feyaerts, K.. 2005. Headlines and cartoons in the economic press: Double grounding as a discourse supportive strategy. In Erreygers, G. & Jacobs, G. (eds.), Language, communication and the economy, 7399. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cameron, L. & Deignan, A.. 2003. Combining large and small corpora to investigate tuning devices around metaphor in spoken discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 18. 149160.
Charteris-Black, J. 2005. Politicians and rhetoric. The persuasive power of metaphor. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.
Coulson, S. 2001. Semantic leaps: Frame-shifting and conceptual blending in meaning construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, V. 2009. How words mean: Lexical concepts, cognitive models and meaning construction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Evans, V. & Green, M.. 2006. Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R.. 1997. Critical discourse analysis. In van Dijk, T. (ed.), Discourse as social interaction, 258284. London: Sage.
Fauconnier, G. 1994. Mental spaces. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G. 1997. Mappings in thought and language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M.. 1998. Principles of conceptual integration. In König, J.-P. (ed.), Discourse and cognition, 269283. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M.. 2002. The way we think. New York: Basic Books.
Feyaerts, K. & Brône, G.. 2005. Expressivity and metonymic inferencing: Stylistic variation in nonliterary language. Style 39. 1236.
Giddens, A. 1976. New rules of sociological method: A positive critique of interpretive sociologies. London: Hutchinson.
Gore, A. 2006. An inconvenient truth. New York: Rodale Press.
Hulme, M. 2008. Amid the financial storm: redirecting climate change. http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/amid-the-financial-storm-redirecting-climate-change (accessed 12 December, 2008).
Hulme, M. 2009. About climate change. Interview with Rorotoko. http://www.rorotoko.com/index.php/article/mike_hulme_book_disagree_climate_change_controversy_inaction_opportunity/ (accessed 13 June, 2010).
Koteyko, N. 2010. Mining the Internet for linguistic and social data: An analysis of ‘carbon compounds’ in web feeds. Discourse and Society 21(6). 655674.
Koteyko, N., Thelwall, M. & Nerlich, B.. 2010. From carbon markets to carbon morality: Creative compounds as framing devices in online discourses on climate change mitigation. Science Communication 32(1). 2554.
Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M.. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar, Volume 2. Standford: Stanford University Press.
MacKay, D. J. C. 2009. Sustainable energy—Without the hot air. Cambridge: UIT Cambridge Ltd. http://www.withouthotair.com/ (accessed 13 June, 2010).
Moder, C. L. 2008. It's like making a soup: Metaphors and similes in spoken news discourse. In Tyler, A., Kim, Y. & Takada, M. (eds.), Language in the context of use: Cognitive approaches to language and language learning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nerlich, B. 2010. Climategate: Paradoxical metaphors and political paralysis. Environmental Values 19(4). 419442.
Nerlich, B. & Clarke, D. D.. 2001. Ambiguities we live by: Towards a pragmatics of polysemy. Journal of Pragmatics 31(1). 120.
Nerlich, B. & Koteyko, N.. 2009a. Compounds, creativity and complexity in climate change communication: The case of ‘carbon indulgences’. Global Environmental Change 19. 345353.
Nerlich, B. & Koteyko, N.. 2009b. Carbon reduction activism in the UK: Lexical creativity and lexical framing in the context of climate change. Environmental Communication 3(2). 206223.
Nerlich, B. & Koteyko, N.. 2010a. Low carbon diet: Reducing the complexities of climate change to human scale. In Soares da Silva, A.et al. (eds.). Comunicação, Cognição e Media 1. 141156. Braga: Publicações da Faculdade de Filosofia Universidade Católica Portuguesa.
Nerlich, B. & Koteyko, N.. 2010b. Carbon compounds: Lexical creativity and discourse formations in the context of climate change ESRC End of Award Report, RES-062-23-1256. Swindon: ESRC.
Nisbet, M. 2009. Communicating climate change. Why frames matter for public engagement. Environment Magazine 51(2). 1223.
Poletta, F. 2008. Culture and movements. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 619. 7896.
Pragglejaz Group. 2007. MIP: A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22. 139.
Ryder, M. E. 1994. Ordered chaos: The interpretation of English noun-noun compounds. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Sweetser, E. 1999. Compositionality and blending: Semantic composition in a cognitively realistic framework. In Redeker, G. & Janssen, T. (eds.), Cognitive linguistics: Foundations, scope and methodology, 129162. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Turner, M. 2009. The scope of human thought. http://onthehuman.org/2009/08/the-scope-of-human-thought/ (accessed 3 January, 2010).
Warren, B. 1978. Semantic patterns of noun-noun compounds. Goteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed