Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 9:2 (2018) ► pp.252–273

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Does a corpus informed analysis provide any insights as to why Robert Phillipson’s theory of Linguistic Imperialism is labelled by some as a conspiracy theory?

 | Toyo University
Published online: 28 June 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.15065.tho
Abstract
This paper uses the corpus tools DOTA and WordSmith to see if they can provide any indication as to why some label Phillipson’s theory of Linguistic Imperialism as a conspiracy theory. The tools were applied to multiple corpora composed of texts drawn from: Phillipson’s works, conspiracy theory books, and a control corpus of general academic papers. The quantitative data generated was subjected to a corpus informed qualitative analysis with the tools being applied to facilitate a corpus-assisted discourse study of Linguistic Imperialism.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Literature review
    • Linguistic imperialism
    • Conspiracy theories
  • Methodology
  • Results
    • only
    • can
    • cannot
    • several
    • possible
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
References (25)
References
Adolphs, Svenja. 2006. Introducing Electronic Text Analysis. Abingdon, Oxon.: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baker, Paul (ed.). 2009. Contemporary Corpus Linguistics. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad, and Randi Reppen. 2006. Corpus Linguistics Investigating Language Structure and Use. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bunce, Pauline, Robert Phillipson, Vaughan Rapatahana, and Ruanni Tupas (eds). 2016. “Confronting the Hydra”. Why English? Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Byford, Jovan. 2015. Conspiracy Theories A Critical Introduction. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Canagarajah, A. Suresh. 2003. Resisting Linguistics Imperialism in English Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cooke, Monte. 2009. The Skeptic’s Guide To Conspiracies. Avon, Mass.: Adams Media.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, Alan. 1996. “Ironising the Myth of Linguicism”. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 161: 485–496. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ertel, Suitbert. 1972. “Erkenntnis und Dogmatismus“ [Insight and dogmatism]. Psychologischer Rundschau 231: 241–269.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. “Prägnanztendenzen in Wahrnehmung und Bewußtsein“ [Emerging tendencies in perception and consciousness]. Zeitschrift für Semiotik 31: 107–141.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. “Content analysis: An alternative approach to open and closed minds”. High School Journal 68 (4): 229–240.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, Kim Ebensgaard. 2014. “Linguistics and the digital humanities: (computational) corpus linguistics”. Mediekultur: Journal of Media and Communication Research 571: 117–136..Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kennedy, Graeme. 1998. An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. Harlow, Essex: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Knight, Peter (ed.). 2003. Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopaedia. Santa Barbara, Calif.: ABC-CLIO.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McKenny, John. 2003. “A double take on writer’s stance: Content analysis of dogmatism compared with corpus analysis of student essays”. corpus analysis of student essays”. In Luuk Lagerwerf, Wilbert Spooren, and Liesbeth Degand (eds) 2003, Determination of Information and Tenor in Texts: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Discourse. Amsterdam: Vrije Universiteit, Stichting Neerlandistiek. pp. 93–104.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Phillipson, Robert. 1992. Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. “Linguistic imperialism: a conspiracy, or a conspiracy of silence?”. Language Policy 61: 377–383. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Linguistic imperialism Continued. Hyderabad: Orient Blackswan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “English: from British empire to corporate empire”. Sociolinguistic Studies 5 (3): 441–464.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2016. Myths and realities of ‘global’ English. Language Policy. (On line).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, John. 2004. Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spolsky, Bernard. 2004. Language Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stefanowitsch, Anatol, and Stefan Thomas Gries (eds). 2007. Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Robert Anton. 1998. Everything is Under Control: Conspiracies, Cults, and Cover-ups. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue