This chapter reports on a data-driven contrastive study of Greek men’s and
women’s lifestyle magazines. Integrating methodologies of corpus linguistics and
critical discourse analysis, it explores the hypothesis that, despite their apparently
dichotomic gender-oriented differentiation, these two types of publication bear
fundamental discoursal and ideological similarities. The initial quantitative
(n-gram-based) analysis of the two corpora reveals an equally striking prominence
of the power-expressing feature of deontic modality in both men’s and women’s magazines.
The in-depth qualitative (concordance-based) analysis of the instances of deonticity
demonstrates that magazine texts systematically simulate and creatively rearticulate a
multitude of recognizable voices of authority of the public and private spheres
(e.g. official institutions, professional experts, educators, parents and older relatives,
lovers, friends), seamlessly incorporating the relevant styles and registers
(e.g. information leaflet, instructions manual, self-help book, teacher scolding,
parent counseling, lover’s reprimand, friend’s mock-impolite criticism, etc.) in the
magazines’ proposed life scripts. The relentlessly regulative tone is invariably
mitigated by the implication that the rules posed are for the benefit of the reader.
It appears that the extensive appropriation of canonistic discourses and their skillful
and imaginative hybridisation with other replicated non-regulative genres and registers
renders deontic modality a powerful rhetorical instrument for effectively conveying gender-differential and other crucial (e.g. consumerist/commercial, political) messages in both
types of lifestyle magazines.
2016. (Un)doing feminism in (post)-Yugoslav media spaces. Feminist Media Studies 16:6 ► pp. 1093 ff.
Fragaki, Georgia & Dionysis Goutsos
2015. Women and Men Talking About Men and Women in Greek. In Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2015 [Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics, 3], ► pp. 89 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.