The year 1999. The Media Discourse on the NATO Bombing of Yugoslavia in Serbia and Germany – A Contrastive Discourse Analysis.
A scientific project at the Faculty of Philology and Arts, University of Kragujevac
Contrastive Discourse Linguistics
Those who carry out comparative analysis have a better chance of discovering things that a non-comparative view might miss.
A linguist working comparatively thus has the advantage of studying not only two (or more) languages, but also at least two cultural areas, and she/he is able to recognise and describe their similarities and differences, which is the first prerequisite for understanding them.
NATO bombing of Yugoslavia
The first German military action after World War II.
First sustained use of armed force by the NATO alliance in its 50-year existence
There are a number of valid arguments questioning the legitimacy and effectiveness of the intervention in Yugoslavia. For example, many political scientists and even political actors and participants at the time believe that NATO’s intervention violated international law and led to an escalation of the conflict and a deterioration of the humanitarian situation in the region.
Media discourses
We do not learn about current events from history books. We usually do not have the necessary distance from the event to be able to process it historically. Nevertheless, we gather a lot of information and take a stand on the actions, people, events, etc. that attract our attention. Often the only medium for this is the mass media and, more recently, social networks. This is where discourses are formed, transported and modified. Different actors have their say and make themselves heard. Of course, the risk of fake news and disinformation increases in such rapidly changing and widely accessible media. For this reason, it is essential to scrutinise mass media discourses and reflect on the use of language and the transmission of information.
Knowledge constitution and reality construction
Is there such a thing as the one reality in its absoluteness, consisting in part of irrefutable truths? Or do we rather live in a discursively constructed world that is presented as real in its particular constellation? What do we know about people, things, circumstances, actions, events? Is it an absolute knowledge that is shared by all people, or is it rather knowledge-constituting discourse formations that are constantly negotiated or contested through the (public) use of language?