Article In:
Pragmatics: Online-First Articles

Semantic and pragmatic properties of post-truth discourse

A description of reverse news on social media

ORCID logo | Xi’an Jiaotong University
 | Xi’an Jiaotong University
Social media discourse is characterized by the post-truth phenomenon, in which feelings and personal beliefs appear to exert greater influence on shaping public opinions than truth. In such cases, the truth of news may be blurred and reported events are often reversed along revelations of the facts. Reverse news on social media is, in a sense, a typical instance of post-truth discourse. This study attempts to provide a corpus-based description of attitude appraisal and illocutionary acts in reverse news on social media, with the aim of investigating semantic and pragmatic properties of post-truth discourse. The corpora for this study consist of social media posts in Chinese and English about a defamation lawsuit, which were collected from Weibo and Facebook.
The results indicate that the English corpus emphasizes the use of appreciations and judgments with more complex co-occurring relations among three attitudinal domains while the Chinese corpus contains more judgments than appreciations and affects. Meanwhile, both corpora exhibit higher frequencies of assertives and expressives than the other acts, yet the Chinese corpus presents more complicated illocutionary act sequences than the English corpus. After the verdict, the frequencies of both attitude appraisal and illocutionary acts decrease in the Chinese corpus but increase in the English corpus. Based on this, we propose that the development of post-truth discourse may go through three functional stages: starting with expression, progressing to appeal, and ending with representation. The sequence of these stages may vary depending on sociocultural contexts.
Keywords: post-truth, linguistic properties, reverse news, social media
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical framework
    • 2.1Attitude appraisal
    • 2.2Illocutionary acts
  • 3.Data collection
    • 3.1Corpus building
    • 3.2Coding
  • 4.Results and analysis
    • 4.1Semantic dimension: Attitude appraisal
      • 4.1.1Frequencies of attitudinal resources
      • 4.1.2Co-occurrences of attitudinal resources
    • 4.2Pragmatic dimension: Illocutionary acts
      • 4.2.1Frequencies and percentages of illocutionary acts
      • 4.2.2Sequences of illocutionary acts
    • 4.3Changes in attitudinal resources and illocutionary acts after the verdict of the case
  • 5.Three functional stages of post-truth discourse development
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (42)
References
Ahmad, Amirah, Norizah Ardi, and Rozaimah Rashidin. 2021. “Speech Acts in Trials of Underage Sexual Criminal Case.” Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal 6 (SI5): 3–9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Al-Mwzaiji, Khaled Nasser Ali. 2021. “The Political Spin of Conviction: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Origin of COVID-19.” GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies 21 (1): 239–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Angermuller, Johannes. 2018. “Truth After Post-Truth: For a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies.” Palgrave Communication 4 (30), 1–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Austin, John Langshaw. 1962. How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bühler, Karl. 2011. Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carretero, Marta, Carmen Maíz-Arévalo, M. Ángeles Martínez. 2015. “An Analysis of Expressive Speech Acts in Online Task-Oriented Interaction by University Students.” Procedia — Social and Behavioral Sciences 173: 186–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Csardi, Gabor. 2013. “Package igraph.” [URL]. Accessed 10 May 2023.
Ge, Mingsi. 2020. “‘后真相’时代网络民粹主义主导舆论的机制及其治理 [The mechanism and governance of public opinion led by internet populism in the ‘post-truth’ era].” Dong Yue Tribune 41 (5): 118–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1973. Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Harsin, Jayson. (2018). “Post-Truth and Critical Communication Studies.” Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalmanovitch, Yshai. 2021. “A Pragmatic Analysis of Descriptive, Depictive and Simulative Reporting Speech Acts: Empirical Evidence from a Prosodic Study on Conversational Modern Israeli Hebrew.” Journal of Pragmatics 172: 119–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalpokas, Ignas. 2019. “Affective Encounters of the Algorithmic Kind: Post-Truth and Posthuman Pleasure.” Social Media + Society 5 (2): 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keyes, Ralph. 2004. The Post-Truth Era: Dishonesty and Deception in Contemporary Life. New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Kreitner, Richard. 2016. “Post-Truth and Its Consequences: What a 25-Year-Old Essay Tells Us About the Current Moment.” The Nation. 30 Nov. 2016; Accessed 5 Oct. 2022. [URL]
Lei, Yuejie, and Li Si. 2019. “‘反转新闻’视角下新闻真实性再探 [Further exploration of news authenticity from the perspective of ‘reverse news’].” Youth Journalist (15): 25–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewandowsky, Stephan, Ullrich K. H. Ecker, and John Cook. 2017. “Beyond Misinformation: Understanding and Coping with the ‘Post-Truth’ Era.” Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 6 (4): 353–369. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liang, Weishan., and Shisheng Liu. 2019. “新闻叙事中的‘后真相’现象及其语篇分析 [The ‘post-truth’ phenomenon in news narratives: a case study].” Foreign Languages Research 36 (4): 50–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, Lihua. 2010. 评价理论研究 [Studies of appraisal theory]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Google Scholar
Luporini, Antonella. 2021. “Metaphor, Nominalization, Appraisal: Analyzing Coronavirus-Related Headlines and Subheadings in China Daily and The Wall Street Journal .” GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies 21 (1): 253–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ma, Yuan. 2018. “批评性话语分析视角下反转新闻的话语表达与意义建构 [Discourse expression and meaning construction of reverse news from the perspective of critical discourse analysis].” Jiang-huai Tribune (1): 118–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, James R. 2000. “Beyond Exchange: Appraisal Systems in English.” In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, ed. by Susan Hunston, and Geoff Thompson, 142–175. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, James R., and Peter R. R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, James R., and David Rose. 2007. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause. 2nd ed. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Mohamad, Azweed, Radzuwan Ab Rashid, Kamariah Yunus, et al. 2018. “Speech Acts in the Facebook Status Updates Posted by an Apostate.” International Journal of English Linguistics 8 (4): 226–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McDermott, Rose. 2019. “Psychological Underpinnings of Post-Truth in Political Beliefs.” PS-Political Science & Politics 52 (2): 218–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ruotsalainen, Juho, Jaana Hujanen, and Mikko Villi. 2021. “A Future of Journalism Beyond the Objectivity — Dialogue Divide Hybridity in the News of Entrepreneurial Journalists.” Journalism 22 (9): 2240–2258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Qiao, Fang, Kexin Jiang. 2022. “Attitudes Towards Global Warming on Twitter.” Journal of Global Information Management 30 (7): 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Safavi, Sarvenaz. 2021. “Bühler’s Organon Model of Communication: A Semiotic Analysis of Advertising Slogans.” Semiotica 2421: 229–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John. R. 1976. “A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.” Language in Society 5 (1): 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R. 1979. Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Searle, John R., and Daniel Vanderveken. 1985. Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun A. 1977a. Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.Google Scholar
1977b. “Context and Cognition: Knowledge Frames and Speech Act Comprehension.” Journal of Pragmatics 11: 211–232. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1998. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: SAGE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Olmen, Daniël, and Vittorio Tantucci. 2022. “Getting Attention in different Languages: A Usage-Based Approach to Parenthetical Look in Chinese, Dutch, English, and Italian.” Intercultural Pragmatics 19 (2): 141–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waisbord, Silvio. 2018a. “The Elective Affinity Between Post-Truth Communication and Populist Politics.” Communication Research and Practice 4 (1): 17–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018b. “Truth Is What Happens to News: On Journalism, Fake News, and Post-Truth.” Journalism Studies 19 (13): 1866–1878. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, Peter R. R. 2015. “Appraisal Theory.” In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Karen Tracy, Cornelia Ilie, and Todd Sandel, 1–7. Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeng, Xiangmin, and Jinrong Dai. 2020. “新媒体语境下新闻反转、舆论生成机制和治理路径探究——基于2014-2020年典型反转新闻事件的定性比较分析(QCA)研究 [Research on reversal news, public opinion generation mechanism and governance path in the context of new media — Based on the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) study of typical reversal news events from 2014 to 2020].” Journal of Social Sciences (7): 168–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Lushan. 2020. “浅析网络自媒体环境下的反转新闻现象 [Analysis of the reverse news phenomenon in the network self-media environment].” Southeast Communication (5): 5–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Yanni, Naveed Akhtar, Qamar Farooq, Yiwei Yuan, and Irfan Ullah Khan. 2022. “Comparative Study of Chinese and American Media Reports on the Covid-19 and Expressions of Social Responsibility: A Critical Discourse Analysis.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 51 (3): 455–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhao, Luolin, and Nicholas John. 2020. “The Concept of ‘Sharing’ in Chinese Social Media: Origins, Transformations and Implications.” Information, Communication & Society: 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar