Chapter published in:
Representing the Other in European Media DiscoursesEdited by Jan Chovanec and Katarzyna Molek-Kozakowska
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 74] 2017
► pp. 81–102
Chapter 3The European “stranger” in Le Monde’s headline discourse
Using systemic functional grammar, a qualitative/quantitative, top-down/bottom-up, three-pronged approach of Le Monde’s print and online headline discourse on “Europe” during 2014 revealed the existence of three groups of “Other Europeans”: non-EU member states, “visible” because of their political, economic or strategic weight, “quasi-invisible” States who joined the EU in 2004 or later, and non-EU members, invisible for their lack of political, economic or strategic weight. These various degrees of visibility, combined with the foregrounding of the European Union, point to the construction of “strangers within”, whose quasi-invisibility and quality of “neither foe nor friend” may result in them being perceived as potentially “dangerous”.
Keywords: Europe, the “Other”, the “stranger”, invisibility,
Le Monde
, headlines, qualitative/quantitative, top-down/bottom-up, systemic functional grammar
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Polysemy of “Europe / European” in official designations
- 3.Methodology
- 3.1Corpus
- 3.2A three-pronged approach
- 3.3Systemic functional grammar
- 4.First step: Polysemic use of “Europe” / “Européens” in Le Monde
’s headlines
- 4.1Functions of “Europe”
- 4.1.1 “Europe” as part of a designation (in LM: 1.99%; in LM.fr: 3.67%)
- 4.1.2 “Europe” as an entity (in LM: 31.07%; in LM.fr: 27.75%)
-
4.1.3“Europe” as a participant
- 4.1.3.1 “Europe” as an agent (in LM: 22.8%; in LM.fr: 18.29%)
- 4.1.3.2 “Europe” as a patient (in LM: 15.13%; in LM.fr: 14.28%)
- 4.1.3.3 “Europe” as a beneficiary (in LM: 3.98%; in LM.fr: 4.89%)
- 4.1.4 “Europe” as a circumstantial other than place (in LM: 3.98%; in LM.fr: 4.89%)
- 4.1.5 “Europe” as a place circumstantial (in LM: 21.11%; in LM.fr: 26.12%)
- 4.2“Europeans”: Inhabitants of which Europe?
- 4.1Functions of “Europe”
- 5.Second step: Foregrounding of the European Union
- 6.Third step: Various degrees of visibility of individual States
- 7.Discussion: Three categories of “Other Europeans”
- 8.Conclusion: The quasi-invisibility of the “stranger within”
-
Acknowledgements -
Notes -
References
Published online: 23 November 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.74.04le
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.74.04le
References
Andrew, Blake C.
Bell, Allan
Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann
Dor, Daniel
Halliday, M. A. K. and Christian Matthiessen
Hart, Christopher
Holsanova, Jana, Kenneth Holmqvist and Henrik Rahm
Molek-Kozakowska, Katarzyna
Pew Research Center
(June 2015) Faith in European Project Reviving. Retrieved on 29 June 2015 from http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2015/06/Pew-Research-Center-European-Union-Report-FINAL-June-2-20151.pdf
(May 2014) The EU Elections on Twitter: Mixed Views about the EU and Little Passion for the Candidates. Retrieved on 29 June 2015 from http://www.journalism.org/files/2014/05/2014-05-22_The-EU-Elections-on-Twitter.pdf
(2010) Nielsen Analysis. Retrieved on 4 October 2012 from The State of the News Media: http://stateofthemedia.org/2010/special-reports-economic-attitudes/nielsen-analysis/
Potter, Jonathan
Ravin, Yael and Claudia Leacock
SEPM, M&P
(2012) Print + Digital 2012. Retrieved on 10 July 2015 from http://www.staminic.com/blog/presse-evolutions-audiences-web-print
Shoemaker, Pamela J. and Akiba A. Cohen
Sweeney, Mark
(1 June 2015) Time spent reading newspapers fell more than 25% in four years. The Guardian. Retrieved on 29 June 2015 from http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jun/01/global-newspaper-readership-zenithoptimedia-media-consumption
Tajfel, Henri and John C. Turner
TNS, opinion & social
(2013) Les habitudes médiatiques dans l’Union européenne. Eurobaromètre Standard 80 – Automne 2013. Étude coordonnée par la Commission européenne, Direction générale Communication. Retrieved on 10 July 2015 from http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb80/eb80_media_fr.pdf
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
No author info given
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 2022. 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.