Chapter published in:
Persuasion in Public Discourse: Cognitive and functional perspectives
Edited by Jana Pelclová and Wei-lun Lu
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 79] 2018
► pp. 127–148

Reframing as a persuasive device in public speech

Beyond globalized biodiversity

This chapter shows how reframing operates as a persuasive device in public discourse to reorient the audience’s existing beliefs according to the speaker’s viewpoint. The study considers the empirical case of a public speech reframed by a socio-ecological expert to persuade her audience of alternative perspectives on biodiversity. The main aim is to analyze the different types of frame changes intentionally used by the speaker for effective persuasive appeals, and to investigate how these were indexed by linguistic devices and strategies to influence the audience. Qualitative findings reveal a network of linguistic elements at play in evoking frame changes combined with linguistic markers of emotional appeals to influence the audience’s preference for the speaker’s viewpoint.
Keywords: reframing, persuasion, frame changes, frame competition, public speech, rhetorical appeals, biodiversity
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 08 August 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.79.07pla
References

References

Bakhtin, Mikhail
1981 “Discourse in the Novel”. In The Dialogic Imagination: Four essays, ed. by Michael Holquist, 259–422. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael N.
1999 “Culture, Strategy and Foreign Policy Change: Israel’s Road to Oslo”. European Journal of International Relations 5 (1): 5–36.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benford, Robert, and David A. Snow
2000 “Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology 26: 611–639.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chong, Dennis, and James N. Druckman
2007 “A Theory of Framing and Opinion Formation in Competitive Elite Environments.” Journal of Communication 57: 99–118.Google Scholar
Dancygier, Barbara, and Lieven Vandelanotte
2016 “Discourse Viewpoint as Network”. In Viewpoint and the Fabric of Meaning: Form and Use of Viewpoint Tools across Languages and Modalities, ed. by Barbara Dancygier, Wei-lun Lu, and Arie Verhagen, 13–40. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Barbara and Eric S. Knowles
1999 “A Disrupt-Then-Reframe Technique of Social Influence.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 76 (2): 192–199.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N.
2001 “On the Limits of Framing Effects: Who Can Frame?” The Journal of Politics 63: 1041–1066.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., and Arthur Lupia
2000 “Preference Formation.” Annual Review of Political Science 3: 1–24.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Druckman, James N., and Kjersten R. Nelson
2003 “Framing and Deliberation.” American Journal of Political Science 47: 728–744.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Eder, Klaus
1996 The Social Construction of Nature. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Entman, Robert M.
1993 “Framing: Towards Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm.” Journal of Communication 43 (4): 51–58.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., and Colin Baker
2010 “A Frames Approach to Semantic Analysis.” In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, ed. by Bernd Heine, and Heiko Narrog, 313–340. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gamson, William A., and Kathryn Lasch
1983 “The Political Culture of Social Welfare Policy.” In Evaluating the Welfare State: Social and Political Perspectives, ed. by Spiro E. Shimon, and Ephraim Yuchtman-Yaar, 397–415. New York: Academic Press.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving
1974 Frame Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, Hank
1995 “A Methodology for Frame Analysis: From Discourse to Cognitive Schemata.” In Social Movements and Culture, ed. by Hank Johnston, and Bert Klandermans, 217–246. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
2011 States and Social Movements. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Sandra, and Janet Smith
1999 “Framing and Reframing in Land Use Change Conflicts.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 16 (2): 164–180.Google Scholar
Kaufman, Sandra, Michael Elliott, and Deborah Shmueli
2013 “Frames, Framing and Reframing.” In Beyond Intractability, ed. by Guy Burgess, and Heidi Burgess, Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado http://​www​.beyondintractability​.org​/essay​/framingGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, George
2006 Whose Freedom? The Battle Over America’s Most Important Idea. New York: Farra, Straus & Giroux.Google Scholar
2014 Don’t Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.Google Scholar
Macgilchrist, Felicitas
2007 “Positive Discourse Analysis: Contesting Dominant Discourses by Reframing the Issues.” Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines 1 (1): 74–94.Google Scholar
Maxwell, Richard, and Robert Dickman
2007 The Elements of Persuasion: Use Storytelling to Pitch Better, Sell Faster & Win More Business. New York: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Menzel, Susanne, and Susanne Bögeholz
2009 “The Loss of Biodiversity as a Challenge for Sustainable Development: How do Pupils in Chile and Germany Perceive Resource Dilemmas?” Research on Science Education 39: 429–447.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Osborn, Michael, and Suzanne Osborn
1997 Public Speaking, 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Plastina, Anna Franca
2015 “The Counter-Hegemonic Discourse of Biodiversity: CDA of Vandana Shiva’s Honorary Doctorate Acceptance Speech.” In Languaging Diversity: Identities, Genres, Discourses, ed. by Giuseppe Balirano, and Maria Cristina Nisco, 99–11. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Pleyers, Geoffrey
2010 Alter-Globalization: Becoming Actors in the Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Potter, Jonathan
1996 Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: Sage.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ryan, Charlotte and William Gamson
2006 “The Art of Reframing Political Debates.” Contexts 5 (1): 13–18.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Stephen M., and Richard E. Petty
1996 “Message Framing and Persuasion: A Message Processing Analysis.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 22 (3): 257–268.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sniderman, Paul M., and Sean M. Theriault
2004 “The structure of political argument and the logic of issue framing.” In Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes, Measurement Error, and Change, ed. by William E. Saris, and Paul M. Sniderman, 133–165, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Snow, David A., and Robert D. Benford
1988 “Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization.” International Social Movement Research 1 (1): 197–217.Google Scholar
1992 “Master Frames and Cycles of Protest.” In Frontiers in Social Movement Theory, ed. by Aldon D. Morris, and Carol McClurg Mueller, 133–155, New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sutinen, Jon G.
1997 “A Socioeconomic Theory for Controlling Marine Debris: Is Moral Suasion a Reliable Policy Tool?” In Marine Debris. Sources, Impacts, and Solutions, ed. by James M. Coe, and Donald B. Rogers, 161–170, New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah
1979 “What’s in a Frame? Surface Evidence for Underlying Expectations.” In New Directions in Discourse Processing, ed. by Roy Freedle, 137–181. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman
1981 “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice.” Science 211 (4481): 453–458.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A.
1980 Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in Discourse, Interaction and Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Watzlawick, Paul, John H. Weakland, and Richard Fisch
1974 Change: Principles of Problem Formulation and Problem Resolution. New York: Norton.Google Scholar