Making intelligence more transparent
A critical cognitive analysis of US strategic intelligence reports on Sino-US relation
This paper attempts to make a critical cognitive analysis of US strategic intelligence reports and aims at investigating language strategies and cognitive biases that occur in the reports and how the reports create the “realities” that may influence policymakers’ decisions. The data for analysis include seven reports released by US Intelligence Community which analyze, more or less, the Sino-US relations currently and in the foreseeable future as well as the implications of a rising China on US policies. The analytic framework is built up by integrating Critical Metaphor Analysis, Conceptual Blending Theory and Discourse Space Theory, each of which deal with different aspects of the discourse and on the whole provide a comprehensive analysis of it. The critical cognitive analysis of intelligence reports could disclose the views that analysts hold on particular issues, providing valuable reference for understanding or evaluating their reports’ contents, and reveal the ideology inherent in US strategic thinking, helping to estimate US strategic policies in the long term.
References
Beer, A. Frabcis and Christ’l De Landtsheer
2004 Metaphorical World Politics. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press.
Berkowitz, Bruce D., and Alan E. Goodman
1989 Strategic Intelligence for American National Security. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Bruce, James B.
2008 “
Making analysis more reliable: Why epistemology matters to intelligence.” In
Analyzing Intelligence: Origins, Obstacles, and Innovations, ed. by
George, Roger Z., and
James B. Bruce, 171–190. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Charteris-Black, Jonathan
2004 Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chilton, Paul
2004 Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
Chilton, Paul
2005 “
Vectors, viewpoint and viewpoint shift: Toward a Discourse Space Theory.” In
Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by
Francisco Jose Ruiz de Mendoza, 78–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chilton, Paul
1996 Security Metaphors: Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common House. New York/Berlin: Peter Lang.
Croft, William and Alan Cruse
2004 Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, Vyvyan, and Melanie Green
2006 Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fauconnier, Gilles
1994 Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, Gilles
1997 Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner
2002 The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and The Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Filardo Llamas, Laura
2010 “
Discourse worlds in Northern Ireland: The legitimization of the 1998 Agreement.” In
Political Discourse and Conflict Resolution: Debating Peace in Northern Ireland, ed. by
Hayward, Katy and
Catherine O’Donnell, 210–229. London: Routledge.
Filardo Llamas, Laura
2012 “
To live in the heart (and mind) of others: The construction of memory in Northern Irish Commemorative Plaques.”
CADAAD 5(2): 152–170.
Filardo, Laura
2008 “
A comparative study of the discursive legitimation of the agreement by the four main Northern Irish Political parties throughout time.”
Ethnopolitics, 71: 21–42.
Frawley, William
1992 Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goatly, Andrew
1997 The Language of Metaphor. London: Routledge.
Hansen, Lene
2006 Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War. London: Routledge.
Hart, Christopher
2007 “
Critical discourse analysis and conceptualization: Mental spaces, blended spaces and discourse spaces in the British National Party.” In
Cognitive Linguistics in Critical Discourse Analysis: Application and Theory, ed. by
Christopher Hart &
Dominik Lukes, 106–130. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hart, Christopher
2008 “
Critical discourse analysis and metaphor: toward a theoretical framework.”
Critical Discourse Studies 5(2): 91–106.
Hart, Christopher
2010 Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hart, Christopher
2012 “
Moving beyond metaphor in the Cognitive Linguistic approach to CDA: Construal operations in immigration discourse.” In
Critical Discourse Studies in Context and Cognition, ed. by
Christopher Hart, 171–192. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hart, Christopher
2015 “
Discourse.” In
Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, ed. by
Eva Dabrowska and
Dagmar Divjak, 331–346. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Heuer, Richards
1999 Psychology of Intelligence Analysis. Washington, D.C.: Center for the Study of Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency.
Johnson, Lock. K.
(ed.) 2007 Strategic Intelligence, Volumes 1-5. Westport: Praeger Security International.
Kent, Sherman
1949 Strategic Intelligence for American World Policy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Kovecses, Zoltan
2002 Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, George
1993 “
The contemporary theory of metaphor.” In
Metaphor and Thought, 2nd edition, ed. by
Andrew Ortony, 202–251. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakoff, George, and Mark Johnson
1980 Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George, & Mark Turner
1989 More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Saeed, John. I.
1997 Semantics. Oxford: Blackwell.
Schaffner, Christina and Anita L. Wenden
1995 Language and Peace. Aldersot: Dartmouth.
Steen, Gerard, Aletta, G. Dorst, J. Berenike Herrmann, Anna, A. Kaal, Tina Krennmyr and Trijntje Pasma
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Yuan, Guorong & Yi Sun
2023.
A bibliometric study of metaphor research and its implications (2010–2020).
Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 41:3
► pp. 227 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 march 2024. 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.