909031237 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code P&bns 355 Eb 15 9789027243836 06 10.1075/pbns.355 13 2026009804 DG 002 02 01 P&bns 02 0922-842X Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 355 01 pbns.355 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/pbns.355 1 B01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 01 eng 329 vi 323 LAN009030 v.2006 CFG 2 24 JB Subject Scheme COMM.GEN Communication Studies 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.DISC Discourse studies 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.PRAG Pragmatics 24 JB Subject Scheme SOC.GEN Sociology 06 01 The goal of this volume is to explore and make sense of the overall scope, implications and consequences of shifting discourses of war, peace and neutrality across time and space, in relation to conflict-ridden geopolitical environments characterized by power struggles, political polarizations, divergent goal settings and ideological confrontations (from the Russo-Japanese war, 1904–1905, to Russia’s war against Ukraine, 2022-present). Through a broad range of cutting-edge case studies (Finland, Germany, India, Japan, Poland, Romania, Russia/Soviet Union/Russian Federation, Slovakia, Sweden, The Netherlands, Ukraine, USA), the authors go beyond mainstream studies on war and peace by challenging existing paradigms and undergoing in-depth scrutiny of discourse argumentation strategies, historical metanarratives, reflective storytelling and visual mediatization. <br />Readers are called upon to reflect on, evaluate and discuss issues raised by questions like the following: To what extent are dogmatic and power-based discourse practices consequential in the evolution of political language and the language of international diplomacy regarding processes of war, peace and neutrality? In what ways have the mainstream and alternative news media changed the war reporting style, the audience-oriented verbal and visual communication strategies, and the emotion-triggering narratives?<br />Reaching beyond the boundaries of pragmatics and discourse analysis, this book should be a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners of rhetoric, argumentation, media studies, history, social and political sciences. 05 Utilizing the tools of language and culture analysis, this carefully edited volume offers new insights on the often contested definitions of war and peace. Misleading, over-simplified binaries are challenged in this sophisticated attempt to chart new theoretical waters. The collection is particularly valuable because the treatments include both telling historical examples and the contemporary war in Ukraine. Paul Joseph, Tufts University 05 This outstanding edited volume offers a timely and incisive exploration of how war, peace, and neutrality are constructed and contested in public discourse. Bringing together leading scholars, it challenges the traditional war–peace dichotomy and illuminates the grey zones of hybrid warfare and “unpeace,” providing a powerful and original framework for understanding today’s global disorder. Essential reading for scholars of discourse, international relations, political communication, and conflict studies, it compellingly demonstrates that struggles over words are inseparable from struggles over worlds. Ofer Feldman, Doshisha University & Kyoto University 05 A timely volume which brings essential analytical rigour to the question of how language shapes our understanding of conflict at a moment when the boundary between war and peace has never been more blurred. Mark Leonard, Director of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/pbns.355.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027234322.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027234322.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/pbns.355.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/pbns.355.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/pbns.355.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/pbns.355.hb.png 10 01 JB code pbns.355.prelim i iv 4 Prelim pages -1 10 01 JB code pbns.355.toc v vi 2 Table of contents 0 10 01 JB code pbns.355.01ili 1 27 27 Chapter 1 1 A01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 10 01 JB code pbns.355.p1 Section header 2 10 01 JB code pbns.355.02dun 30 62 33 Chapter 3 1 A01 Patricia L. Dunmire Dunmire, Patricia L. Patricia L. Dunmire Kent State University 20 experiential meaning 20 future 20 peace 20 semi-war 20 State of the Union address 20 Systemic Functional Linguistics 01 As numerous scholars have documented, the United States has had an active military presence around the globe since the end of World War II which has enabled it to intervene in numerous countries and regions. It is within this context that I examine how <i>peace</i> has been conceptualized in the State of the Union addresses delivered by postwar US presidents. Grounded in a Systemic Functional Linguistic framework, my analysis reveals that <i>peace</i> is conceptualized primarily through aspirational, goal-oriented language which renders it as a potential condition that could/might/will be realized at some future moment. The futurity of peace is conveyed through a range of linguistic and discursive features which place peace at a remove from the present moment. The temporal deferral of peace, I argue, suggests that rather than pursuing a Kantian “perpetual peace” postwar US presidents have proposed actions and policies oriented to a perpetual <i>quest</i> for peace. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.03ili 63 95 33 Chapter 4 1 A01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 20 argumentation 20 defence 20 keyword 20 neutrality 20 non-alliance 20 post-neutrality 20 security 20 Sweden 01 The increasingly blurred distinction between <i>war</i> and <i>peace</i> described by Leonard (2021) as an alternation of two interrelated labels, i.e. ‘unpeace’ and ‘unwar’, is crucially relevant to the need to reevaluate the interdependence of the closely related concepts of <i>neutrality, non-alignment</i> and <i>security</i> in political and legal discourses. Sweden is a case in point: having been a ‘nation of peace’ during its long-standing neutrality (Parker 2017), it turned into a ‘militarily non-aligned country’ in the post-neutrality period, and it eventually became a NATO member in 2024, having abandoned its neutrality after Russia’s brutal, illegal and unprovoked war on Ukraine in the quest for security. The aim of this chapter is to scrutinise the major paradigm shifts that have marked the political statements delivered by top Swedish politicians in the post-cold war period, by analysing keyword recontextualisation and reconceptualisation processes, as well as reframed argumentation strategies. Using a pragmatic approach to keywords (Ilie 2007, 2013; Wierzbicka 1997) and an argumentation framework of analysis (Ilie 2018, 2021; Rigotti and Rocci 2005; Walton, Reed, and Macagno 2008), the focus has been on context-based (re)definitions of political concepts used by Swedish politicians in order to persuade domestic and international audiences about the justification and legitimacy of Sweden’s paradoxical and apparently contradictory positions: on the one hand, persevering in upholding its neutrality and non-aligned status during the post-cold war period, and, on the other, abandoning its long-standing neutrality status to join NATO after Russia’s invasion and war on Ukraine. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.04bha 96 123 28 Chapter 5 1 A01 Aditi Bhatia Bhatia, Aditi Aditi Bhatia The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 20 collective memories 20 Discourse of Illusion 20 habitus 20 Hindu nationalism 20 ideology 20 metaphor 20 social categorization 01 In India, since Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) rise to power, socio-political discourse has increasingly been reconfigured through the lens of <i>Hindutva</i> (a conflation of religious and national identity). This includes the revision of history books to diminish India’s Mughal influence and rearticulate its national identity as more muscular against the enemy Other. This chapter explores how India has seen conceptualizations of war move beyond traditional border clashes towards the terrain of ideological thought, and where competing groups use language to redefine the nation’s identity. To do so, the analysis employs Bhatia’s (2015) Discourse of Illusion theoretical framework that demystifies how subjective notions of the imagined nation (Anderson 2010), within which India is reconceptualized as a pure Hindu nation, are legitimized. Data analysis occurs from three aspects: historicity (drawing on the past to make sense of the present or future); linguistic and semiotic action (subjective conceptualizations made apparent through metaphorical rhetoric); and degree of social impact (rise of delineating categorizations). 10 01 JB code pbns.355.05kow 124 154 31 Chapter 6 1 A01 Rotem Kowner Kowner, Rotem Rotem Kowner 2 A01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 20 discourse of defeat 20 Japan 20 public-private discourse 20 Russia, Soviet Union 20 Russo-Japanese War 20 thematic roles 20 war memory 01 Shortly before the Russo-Japanese War broke out in 1904, Russia’s Interior Minister, Viacheslav von Plehve, sought means to unify the country. He is often credited with advocating for a “short, victorious war” to achieve this end. Contrary to expectations, the war, lasting 19 months, ended in a resounding defeat for Russia. This chapter examines the discourses of Russian defeat following the war up to the present day, focusing on two crucial events: the surrender of the fort of Port Arthur and the defeat in the naval battle of Tsushima. By employing a combined discourse-analytical and pragma-rhetorical approach, it investigates the mechanisms and motives underlying the evolution of discourses over time, with a particular focus on domestic politics and international relations. The analysis addresses key questions, including: What were these mechanisms and motives? What do multi-voiced historical accounts reveal about (re)contextualized war-related discourse strategies? How important were key concepts like <i>Tsar, God</i> and/or <i>Fatherland</i> for varying discursive framings of engagement in war? Is it possible to categorize the discourse into distinct phases? The chapter posits that the discourse has evolved through three distinct phases, each shaped by the unique political needs of a regime and its attitude towards both war and peace. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.p2 155 1 Section header 7 10 01 JB code pbns.355.06wei 156 188 33 Chapter 8 1 A01 Daniel Weiss Weiss, Daniel Daniel Weiss University of Zurich 20 annexation 20 argumentation 20 conflict of values 20 Crimea 20 hate speech 20 historical analogy 20 incoherent discourse 20 keyword ranking 20 proximisation theory 20 reversion of victim and offender 01 The article aims at elucidating V. Putin’s war rhetoric by two of his nationwide broadcasted speeches delivered at the same location (the St. George’s Hall in the Kremlin Palace) to the same auditory (the two chambers of the Russian parliament) on two similar occasions: the annexation of the Crimea (18.3.2014) and the annexation of four partly occupied Ukrainian territories (30.9. 2022). Despite these commonalities, the contrast between the two speeches could not be more striking. The triumphant 2014 appearance took place during a rise of patriotic enthusiasm in Russian society. Putin’s verbal legitimation of the annexation was based on a host of pseudo-rational arguments (mostly historical analogies) related to the history of Crimea, Russia and NATO’s approaching Russia’s borders in space and time. By contrast, the 2022 speech was held after several defeats of the invaders’ army on the occupied Ukrainian territories and Putin’s announcement of partial mobilization. 77% of the whole speech is now dedicated to the West’s alleged crimes, including colonialism and US subjugation of its “vassals”, but also a moral degeneration culminating in Satanism. The Western threat is thus located on the ideological axis and described as an attack against traditional values, with “Russophobia” being a new manifestation of racism. The analysis is based on a mixed approach combining proximisation theory, argumentation theory and Neo-Gricean pragmatics. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.07bre 189 216 28 Chapter 9 1 A01 Ruth Breeze Breeze, Ruth Ruth Breeze Universidad de Navarra 2 A01 María Fernanda Novoa-Jaso Novoa-Jaso, María Fernanda María Fernanda Novoa-Jaso Universidad de Navarra 20 corpus assisted discourse analysis 20 political speeches 20 Russia 20 semantic domain analysis 20 Ukraine 01 This chapter focuses on how Putin and Zelenskyy addressed world audiences in the first three months after the invasion of Ukraine by the Russian army in February 2022. Using quantitative semantic analysis, we obtain a broad picture of the topic areas covered by each leader’s speeches. Our data show that Putin devoted relatively little space to Ukraine in his speeches, and paid more attention to Russia’s economic and technological development. His language was highly future-oriented with a strong emphasis on his personal intentions and strategic goals, and a monologic style marked by an absence of negatives or attenuation. This approach may have been motivated by a desire to emphasize his personal authority, but also to insulate himself from negative consequences of the war. By contrast, Zelenskyy’s speeches centred almost entirely on the conflict, with graphic accounts of its effects. Zelenskyy’s speeches contain a much greater number of personal pronouns, particularly first person and allusions to “our people”, as well as more emotionally laden lexis. His discourse is often outward-directed, appealing to western countries and “the world” for solidarity with Ukraine. In conclusion, during the early months Putin tried to downplay the conflict and its possible consequences, employing euphemistic, non-emotional terms and merging his references to Ukraine into a wider, future-oriented discourse about Russia’s development. By contrast, Zelenskyy’s emotional discourse centred on conflict and the Russia-inflicted destruction, launching strong appeals to the rest of the world for support. These findings are discussed in relation to the two leaders’ goals, the pragma-rhetorical strategies used to communicate these to their target audiences. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.08gru 217 249 33 Chapter 10 1 A01 Helmut Gruber Gruber, Helmut Helmut Gruber Vienna University 20 argumentation schemes 20 German media discourse 20 legitimation strategies 20 recontextualization 20 Ukraine war 01 In this article, an elite-discourse fragment from the beginning of the war in Ukraine is analyzed. It comprises four reference texts (an op-ed by German philosopher Jürgen Habermas and three open letters) dealing with the controversial issue of German heavy arms supply for Ukraine, as well as the uptake of these texts in opinion articles of the German quality press. The analysis focuses on recontextualizations of actors and previous texts, argumentative structures, their pragmatic purposes, and the legitimation of standpoints that had been put forward. Results show that only the first two reference texts (opposing German heavy arms supply) were widely discussed in the quality press. In the uptaking opinion articles, mainly the protagonists of the reference texts, their standpoints and arguments were evaluated and criticized, but almost no counter-argumentations were presented. It is concluded that in this historical situation, the German quality press staged a public conflict but did not discuss any alternative solutions besides the two standpoints it construed as contradicting each other. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.09pot 250 277 28 Chapter 11 1 A01 Serhiy Potapenko Potapenko, Serhiy Serhiy Potapenko Kyiv National Linguistic University 2 A01 Oleksii Deikun Deikun, Oleksii Oleksii Deikun Kyiv National Linguistic University 20 categorisation 20 cognitive rhetoric 20 construction 20 media 20 news text 20 peace 20 Ukraine 20 war 01 The chapter explores the media construction of <i>peace</i> into <i>war</i> transformation in Ukraine since 2013 domestic unrest till the beginning of the 2022 full-fledged armed conflict by applying the cognitive-rhetorical method of analysis. It combines categorisation with rhetorical canons revealing four periods of <i>peace</i> into <i>war</i> transformation in Ukraine denoted by linguistic units in the prominent positions of news texts. The periods comprise breach of peace, subdivided into initiative, intense, confrontational, intervening, (potential) war stages; impasse, characterised by the rivalry between the <i>conflict</i> and <i>crisis</i> keywords; pre-war, marked by the opposition between <i>crisis</i> and <i>tension</i>; war beginning structured by the units <i>conflict — war in Ukraine — Ukraine war</i>, offering different perspectives of a full-fledged confrontation. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.10jup 278 316 39 Chapter 12 1 A01 Anna Jupowicz-Ginalska Jupowicz-Ginalska, Anna Anna Jupowicz-Ginalska University of Warsaw 2 A01 Bianca Harms Harms, Bianca Bianca Harms NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences 3 A01 Anna Samelova Samelova, Anna Anna Samelova Comenius University in Bratislava 4 A01 Martyna Dudziak-Kisio Dudziak-Kisio, Martyna Martyna Dudziak-Kisio SWPS University 5 A01 Päivi Maijanen Maijanen, Päivi Päivi Maijanen LUT University 6 A01 Anca Anton Anton, Anca Anca Anton University of Bucharest 7 A01 Andreas Will Will, Andreas Andreas Will TU Ilmenau 8 A01 Emilia Zakrzewska Zakrzewska, Emilia Emilia Zakrzewska University of Warsaw 9 A01 Antonia Matei Matei, Antonia Antonia Matei University of Bucharest 10 A01 Gheorghe Anghel Anghel, Gheorghe Gheorghe Anghel University of Bucharest 20 corporate branding 20 logo modification 20 media CSR 20 media visual identity 20 symbolic solidarity 20 visual communication strategies 20 visual discourse 20 war in Ukraine 01 We examine how European media responded to the Russian invasion of Ukraine through visual identity changes. Using visual discourse and communication theories, we analysed 76 logo modifications in six countries: Finland, Germany, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and the Netherlands. A cross-national comparison revealed significant differences in the scale, type, and duration of changes. Media in former Eastern Bloc countries showed the strongest visual solidarity, while Northern and Western European media used more restrained strategies, reflecting different historical contexts. Modifications included Ukrainian colours, solidarity slogans, and design adjustments. Though mostly temporary, these symbolic actions turned branding into civic engagement and reinforced shared values. This study contributes to media research by framing logo changes as visual discourse and symbolic communication in times of conflict. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.index 317 323 7 Index 13 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20260414 2026 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027234322 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 jbe-platform.com 09 WORLD 20 01 00 125.00 EUR R 01 00 105.00 GBP Z 01 gen 00 163.00 USD S 166031236 03 01 01 JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code P&bns 355 Hb 15 9789027234322 13 2026009803 BB 01 P&bns 02 0922-842X Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 355 01 pbns.355 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/pbns.355 1 B01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 01 eng 329 vi 323 LAN009030 v.2006 CFG 2 24 JB Subject Scheme COMM.GEN Communication Studies 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.DISC Discourse studies 24 JB Subject Scheme LIN.PRAG Pragmatics 24 JB Subject Scheme SOC.GEN Sociology 06 01 The goal of this volume is to explore and make sense of the overall scope, implications and consequences of shifting discourses of war, peace and neutrality across time and space, in relation to conflict-ridden geopolitical environments characterized by power struggles, political polarizations, divergent goal settings and ideological confrontations (from the Russo-Japanese war, 1904–1905, to Russia’s war against Ukraine, 2022-present). Through a broad range of cutting-edge case studies (Finland, Germany, India, Japan, Poland, Romania, Russia/Soviet Union/Russian Federation, Slovakia, Sweden, The Netherlands, Ukraine, USA), the authors go beyond mainstream studies on war and peace by challenging existing paradigms and undergoing in-depth scrutiny of discourse argumentation strategies, historical metanarratives, reflective storytelling and visual mediatization. <br />Readers are called upon to reflect on, evaluate and discuss issues raised by questions like the following: To what extent are dogmatic and power-based discourse practices consequential in the evolution of political language and the language of international diplomacy regarding processes of war, peace and neutrality? In what ways have the mainstream and alternative news media changed the war reporting style, the audience-oriented verbal and visual communication strategies, and the emotion-triggering narratives?<br />Reaching beyond the boundaries of pragmatics and discourse analysis, this book should be a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners of rhetoric, argumentation, media studies, history, social and political sciences. 05 Utilizing the tools of language and culture analysis, this carefully edited volume offers new insights on the often contested definitions of war and peace. Misleading, over-simplified binaries are challenged in this sophisticated attempt to chart new theoretical waters. The collection is particularly valuable because the treatments include both telling historical examples and the contemporary war in Ukraine. Paul Joseph, Tufts University 05 This outstanding edited volume offers a timely and incisive exploration of how war, peace, and neutrality are constructed and contested in public discourse. Bringing together leading scholars, it challenges the traditional war–peace dichotomy and illuminates the grey zones of hybrid warfare and “unpeace,” providing a powerful and original framework for understanding today’s global disorder. Essential reading for scholars of discourse, international relations, political communication, and conflict studies, it compellingly demonstrates that struggles over words are inseparable from struggles over worlds. Ofer Feldman, Doshisha University & Kyoto University 05 A timely volume which brings essential analytical rigour to the question of how language shapes our understanding of conflict at a moment when the boundary between war and peace has never been more blurred. Mark Leonard, Director of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) 04 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/pbns.355.png 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027234322.jpg 04 03 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027234322.tif 06 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/pbns.355.hb.png 07 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/pbns.355.png 25 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/pbns.355.hb.png 27 09 01 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/pbns.355.hb.png 10 01 JB code pbns.355.prelim i iv 4 Prelim pages -1 10 01 JB code pbns.355.toc v vi 2 Table of contents 0 10 01 JB code pbns.355.01ili 1 27 27 Chapter 1 1 A01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 10 01 JB code pbns.355.p1 Section header 2 10 01 JB code pbns.355.02dun 30 62 33 Chapter 3 1 A01 Patricia L. Dunmire Dunmire, Patricia L. Patricia L. Dunmire Kent State University 20 experiential meaning 20 future 20 peace 20 semi-war 20 State of the Union address 20 Systemic Functional Linguistics 01 As numerous scholars have documented, the United States has had an active military presence around the globe since the end of World War II which has enabled it to intervene in numerous countries and regions. It is within this context that I examine how <i>peace</i> has been conceptualized in the State of the Union addresses delivered by postwar US presidents. Grounded in a Systemic Functional Linguistic framework, my analysis reveals that <i>peace</i> is conceptualized primarily through aspirational, goal-oriented language which renders it as a potential condition that could/might/will be realized at some future moment. The futurity of peace is conveyed through a range of linguistic and discursive features which place peace at a remove from the present moment. The temporal deferral of peace, I argue, suggests that rather than pursuing a Kantian “perpetual peace” postwar US presidents have proposed actions and policies oriented to a perpetual <i>quest</i> for peace. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.03ili 63 95 33 Chapter 4 1 A01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 20 argumentation 20 defence 20 keyword 20 neutrality 20 non-alliance 20 post-neutrality 20 security 20 Sweden 01 The increasingly blurred distinction between <i>war</i> and <i>peace</i> described by Leonard (2021) as an alternation of two interrelated labels, i.e. ‘unpeace’ and ‘unwar’, is crucially relevant to the need to reevaluate the interdependence of the closely related concepts of <i>neutrality, non-alignment</i> and <i>security</i> in political and legal discourses. Sweden is a case in point: having been a ‘nation of peace’ during its long-standing neutrality (Parker 2017), it turned into a ‘militarily non-aligned country’ in the post-neutrality period, and it eventually became a NATO member in 2024, having abandoned its neutrality after Russia’s brutal, illegal and unprovoked war on Ukraine in the quest for security. The aim of this chapter is to scrutinise the major paradigm shifts that have marked the political statements delivered by top Swedish politicians in the post-cold war period, by analysing keyword recontextualisation and reconceptualisation processes, as well as reframed argumentation strategies. Using a pragmatic approach to keywords (Ilie 2007, 2013; Wierzbicka 1997) and an argumentation framework of analysis (Ilie 2018, 2021; Rigotti and Rocci 2005; Walton, Reed, and Macagno 2008), the focus has been on context-based (re)definitions of political concepts used by Swedish politicians in order to persuade domestic and international audiences about the justification and legitimacy of Sweden’s paradoxical and apparently contradictory positions: on the one hand, persevering in upholding its neutrality and non-aligned status during the post-cold war period, and, on the other, abandoning its long-standing neutrality status to join NATO after Russia’s invasion and war on Ukraine. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.04bha 96 123 28 Chapter 5 1 A01 Aditi Bhatia Bhatia, Aditi Aditi Bhatia The Hong Kong Polytechnic University 20 collective memories 20 Discourse of Illusion 20 habitus 20 Hindu nationalism 20 ideology 20 metaphor 20 social categorization 01 In India, since Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) rise to power, socio-political discourse has increasingly been reconfigured through the lens of <i>Hindutva</i> (a conflation of religious and national identity). This includes the revision of history books to diminish India’s Mughal influence and rearticulate its national identity as more muscular against the enemy Other. This chapter explores how India has seen conceptualizations of war move beyond traditional border clashes towards the terrain of ideological thought, and where competing groups use language to redefine the nation’s identity. To do so, the analysis employs Bhatia’s (2015) Discourse of Illusion theoretical framework that demystifies how subjective notions of the imagined nation (Anderson 2010), within which India is reconceptualized as a pure Hindu nation, are legitimized. Data analysis occurs from three aspects: historicity (drawing on the past to make sense of the present or future); linguistic and semiotic action (subjective conceptualizations made apparent through metaphorical rhetoric); and degree of social impact (rise of delineating categorizations). 10 01 JB code pbns.355.05kow 124 154 31 Chapter 6 1 A01 Rotem Kowner Kowner, Rotem Rotem Kowner 2 A01 Cornelia Ilie Ilie, Cornelia Cornelia Ilie Strömstad Academy 20 discourse of defeat 20 Japan 20 public-private discourse 20 Russia, Soviet Union 20 Russo-Japanese War 20 thematic roles 20 war memory 01 Shortly before the Russo-Japanese War broke out in 1904, Russia’s Interior Minister, Viacheslav von Plehve, sought means to unify the country. He is often credited with advocating for a “short, victorious war” to achieve this end. Contrary to expectations, the war, lasting 19 months, ended in a resounding defeat for Russia. This chapter examines the discourses of Russian defeat following the war up to the present day, focusing on two crucial events: the surrender of the fort of Port Arthur and the defeat in the naval battle of Tsushima. By employing a combined discourse-analytical and pragma-rhetorical approach, it investigates the mechanisms and motives underlying the evolution of discourses over time, with a particular focus on domestic politics and international relations. The analysis addresses key questions, including: What were these mechanisms and motives? What do multi-voiced historical accounts reveal about (re)contextualized war-related discourse strategies? How important were key concepts like <i>Tsar, God</i> and/or <i>Fatherland</i> for varying discursive framings of engagement in war? Is it possible to categorize the discourse into distinct phases? The chapter posits that the discourse has evolved through three distinct phases, each shaped by the unique political needs of a regime and its attitude towards both war and peace. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.p2 155 1 Section header 7 10 01 JB code pbns.355.06wei 156 188 33 Chapter 8 1 A01 Daniel Weiss Weiss, Daniel Daniel Weiss University of Zurich 20 annexation 20 argumentation 20 conflict of values 20 Crimea 20 hate speech 20 historical analogy 20 incoherent discourse 20 keyword ranking 20 proximisation theory 20 reversion of victim and offender 01 The article aims at elucidating V. Putin’s war rhetoric by two of his nationwide broadcasted speeches delivered at the same location (the St. George’s Hall in the Kremlin Palace) to the same auditory (the two chambers of the Russian parliament) on two similar occasions: the annexation of the Crimea (18.3.2014) and the annexation of four partly occupied Ukrainian territories (30.9. 2022). Despite these commonalities, the contrast between the two speeches could not be more striking. The triumphant 2014 appearance took place during a rise of patriotic enthusiasm in Russian society. Putin’s verbal legitimation of the annexation was based on a host of pseudo-rational arguments (mostly historical analogies) related to the history of Crimea, Russia and NATO’s approaching Russia’s borders in space and time. By contrast, the 2022 speech was held after several defeats of the invaders’ army on the occupied Ukrainian territories and Putin’s announcement of partial mobilization. 77% of the whole speech is now dedicated to the West’s alleged crimes, including colonialism and US subjugation of its “vassals”, but also a moral degeneration culminating in Satanism. The Western threat is thus located on the ideological axis and described as an attack against traditional values, with “Russophobia” being a new manifestation of racism. The analysis is based on a mixed approach combining proximisation theory, argumentation theory and Neo-Gricean pragmatics. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.07bre 189 216 28 Chapter 9 1 A01 Ruth Breeze Breeze, Ruth Ruth Breeze Universidad de Navarra 2 A01 María Fernanda Novoa-Jaso Novoa-Jaso, María Fernanda María Fernanda Novoa-Jaso Universidad de Navarra 20 corpus assisted discourse analysis 20 political speeches 20 Russia 20 semantic domain analysis 20 Ukraine 01 This chapter focuses on how Putin and Zelenskyy addressed world audiences in the first three months after the invasion of Ukraine by the Russian army in February 2022. Using quantitative semantic analysis, we obtain a broad picture of the topic areas covered by each leader’s speeches. Our data show that Putin devoted relatively little space to Ukraine in his speeches, and paid more attention to Russia’s economic and technological development. His language was highly future-oriented with a strong emphasis on his personal intentions and strategic goals, and a monologic style marked by an absence of negatives or attenuation. This approach may have been motivated by a desire to emphasize his personal authority, but also to insulate himself from negative consequences of the war. By contrast, Zelenskyy’s speeches centred almost entirely on the conflict, with graphic accounts of its effects. Zelenskyy’s speeches contain a much greater number of personal pronouns, particularly first person and allusions to “our people”, as well as more emotionally laden lexis. His discourse is often outward-directed, appealing to western countries and “the world” for solidarity with Ukraine. In conclusion, during the early months Putin tried to downplay the conflict and its possible consequences, employing euphemistic, non-emotional terms and merging his references to Ukraine into a wider, future-oriented discourse about Russia’s development. By contrast, Zelenskyy’s emotional discourse centred on conflict and the Russia-inflicted destruction, launching strong appeals to the rest of the world for support. These findings are discussed in relation to the two leaders’ goals, the pragma-rhetorical strategies used to communicate these to their target audiences. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.08gru 217 249 33 Chapter 10 1 A01 Helmut Gruber Gruber, Helmut Helmut Gruber Vienna University 20 argumentation schemes 20 German media discourse 20 legitimation strategies 20 recontextualization 20 Ukraine war 01 In this article, an elite-discourse fragment from the beginning of the war in Ukraine is analyzed. It comprises four reference texts (an op-ed by German philosopher Jürgen Habermas and three open letters) dealing with the controversial issue of German heavy arms supply for Ukraine, as well as the uptake of these texts in opinion articles of the German quality press. The analysis focuses on recontextualizations of actors and previous texts, argumentative structures, their pragmatic purposes, and the legitimation of standpoints that had been put forward. Results show that only the first two reference texts (opposing German heavy arms supply) were widely discussed in the quality press. In the uptaking opinion articles, mainly the protagonists of the reference texts, their standpoints and arguments were evaluated and criticized, but almost no counter-argumentations were presented. It is concluded that in this historical situation, the German quality press staged a public conflict but did not discuss any alternative solutions besides the two standpoints it construed as contradicting each other. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.09pot 250 277 28 Chapter 11 1 A01 Serhiy Potapenko Potapenko, Serhiy Serhiy Potapenko Kyiv National Linguistic University 2 A01 Oleksii Deikun Deikun, Oleksii Oleksii Deikun Kyiv National Linguistic University 20 categorisation 20 cognitive rhetoric 20 construction 20 media 20 news text 20 peace 20 Ukraine 20 war 01 The chapter explores the media construction of <i>peace</i> into <i>war</i> transformation in Ukraine since 2013 domestic unrest till the beginning of the 2022 full-fledged armed conflict by applying the cognitive-rhetorical method of analysis. It combines categorisation with rhetorical canons revealing four periods of <i>peace</i> into <i>war</i> transformation in Ukraine denoted by linguistic units in the prominent positions of news texts. The periods comprise breach of peace, subdivided into initiative, intense, confrontational, intervening, (potential) war stages; impasse, characterised by the rivalry between the <i>conflict</i> and <i>crisis</i> keywords; pre-war, marked by the opposition between <i>crisis</i> and <i>tension</i>; war beginning structured by the units <i>conflict — war in Ukraine — Ukraine war</i>, offering different perspectives of a full-fledged confrontation. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.10jup 278 316 39 Chapter 12 1 A01 Anna Jupowicz-Ginalska Jupowicz-Ginalska, Anna Anna Jupowicz-Ginalska University of Warsaw 2 A01 Bianca Harms Harms, Bianca Bianca Harms NHL Stenden University of Applied Sciences 3 A01 Anna Samelova Samelova, Anna Anna Samelova Comenius University in Bratislava 4 A01 Martyna Dudziak-Kisio Dudziak-Kisio, Martyna Martyna Dudziak-Kisio SWPS University 5 A01 Päivi Maijanen Maijanen, Päivi Päivi Maijanen LUT University 6 A01 Anca Anton Anton, Anca Anca Anton University of Bucharest 7 A01 Andreas Will Will, Andreas Andreas Will TU Ilmenau 8 A01 Emilia Zakrzewska Zakrzewska, Emilia Emilia Zakrzewska University of Warsaw 9 A01 Antonia Matei Matei, Antonia Antonia Matei University of Bucharest 10 A01 Gheorghe Anghel Anghel, Gheorghe Gheorghe Anghel University of Bucharest 20 corporate branding 20 logo modification 20 media CSR 20 media visual identity 20 symbolic solidarity 20 visual communication strategies 20 visual discourse 20 war in Ukraine 01 We examine how European media responded to the Russian invasion of Ukraine through visual identity changes. Using visual discourse and communication theories, we analysed 76 logo modifications in six countries: Finland, Germany, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and the Netherlands. A cross-national comparison revealed significant differences in the scale, type, and duration of changes. Media in former Eastern Bloc countries showed the strongest visual solidarity, while Northern and Western European media used more restrained strategies, reflecting different historical contexts. Modifications included Ukrainian colours, solidarity slogans, and design adjustments. Though mostly temporary, these symbolic actions turned branding into civic engagement and reinforced shared values. This study contributes to media research by framing logo changes as visual discourse and symbolic communication in times of conflict. 10 01 JB code pbns.355.index 317 323 7 Index 13 02 JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia NL 04 20260414 2026 John Benjamins B.V. 02 WORLD 08 730 gr 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 01 WORLD US CA MX 20 114 20 01 02 JB 1 00 125.00 EUR R 02 02 JB 1 00 132.50 EUR R 01 JB 10 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 GB 20 20 02 02 JB 1 00 105.00 GBP Z 01 JB 2 Casemate Academic 610-853-9131 610-853-9143 Girard.Kratz@casematepublishers.com 01 https://benjamins.com 02 US CA MX 20 20 01 gen 02 JB 1 00 163.00 USD