Framing Comparison Between The American Democratic Party’s And Republican Party’s State Of The Union Addresses From A Cognitive-Ecological Perspective

In political discourse,different agents spread their political views and policies,influence public cognition and values,implement propaganda and persuasion,realize power negotiations,and finally affect social reality.As an important genre of political discourse,the State of the Union Address has recently caught attention but studies have been largely based on criticism.These studies also fail to dissect both cognitive features and ecological orientations.Besides,America ruled by the Democratic Party and the Republican Party has increasingly shown hegemonism that is detrimental to the maintenance of world peace and social harmony since World War II.Frames are mental structures that allow humans to understand reality and create reality,providing a new perspective for individual and social cognition and reveal the interaction between discourse,cognition,and society.As for ecological discourse analysis guided by ecological philosophy,it can comprehensively explore the relations between man,society,and nature by elaborating ecological orientations of the discourses on the ecosystem.Given the research gaps,political circumstances,and theoretical advantages,the current research combines Framing Theory with ecological discourse analysis and from such a cognitive-ecological perspective,in detail analyzes and exposes how the Democratic Party and the Republican Party of the U.S.affect public mentalities and exert effects on the social and natural ecosystems via their framings in the State of the Union Addresses.Three questions are set as follows:(1)What are the surface frame features of the ecosystem constructed by the State of the Union Addresses? What are the similarities and differences of the surface frames used by the two parties in their major political issues?(2)What are the Democratic Party’s deep frames and the Republican Party’s deep frames reflected through their surface frames?(3)What ecological orientations can the Democratic Party’s framing and the Republican Party’s framing reflect?To answer the above questions,this study constructs a theoretical model for analyzing framing(i.e.,the combination of surface frames and deep frames)in political discourse,defines the cognitive orientation,the value orientation,and the ecological orientation,and expounds on their relationships with framing.Specifically,the cognitive orientation is represented by non-metaphorical and metaphorical surface frames.Non-metaphorical surface frames are lexically activated mental structures that provide conceptual networks for metaphorical surface frames,which are characterized by metaphorical units that can build connections between non-metaphorical surface frames.The cognitive orientation reflects the value orientation conveyed by the deep frame,a complex of world views,values,and moral patterns activated by/influencing the surface frame,which mirrors the cognitive subject’s value orientation towards the physical,social,and mental worlds;the value orientation is the preexisting position on the subject-object relationship that cover three dimensions of man and society,man and nature,and man and self;achieved by framing,the ecological orientation refers to the potentially beneficial,ambivalent,and destructive effects on nature,society,and man,which the analyst can judge guided by ecological philosophy.The research collected 78 addresses released by the two parties from 1946 to2020 and constructed the corpus,whose capacity is 501,005 tokens and 13,695 types.Then deep frames were qualitatively dug out by quantitatively summarizing the features of the discursive surface frames.Under the guidance of the ecological philosophy of “the unity of heaven and man,equality and reciprocity,and benevolence and conscience”,the study further assesses the framing’s ecological orientation.By adopting such procedures of “description”,“interpretation”,and“judgement and explanation”,the following main findings are obtained:(1)According to the high-frequency nouns calculated via Ant Conc,it is found that in the addresses,the ecosystem is mainly society-related,supplemented by frames related to individuals,and few to nature,which can be further categorized into five political agendas,i.e.,the economy,military affairs and diplomacy,social security and welfare,energy and the environment,and education.In the meanwhile,both parties metaphorically construct the ecosystem with eight source frames including humans,animals and plants,fire and water,disasters and diseases,construction and machinery,wars,competitions and games,journeys,and vertical space and distance.Specifically,journey metaphors have the largest percentage,followed by war,competition,and game metaphors,with construction and machinery metaphors ranking third.Human metaphors and animal and plant metaphors respectively rank fourth and fifth.Vertical space and distance metaphors and fire and water metaphors have similar percentages,slightly more than the least disaster and disease metaphors.Diachronically,compared with the Republicans’ non-metaphorical surface frames,the Democrats’ have varied more considerably.Regarding metaphorical surface frames,first,the Democrats’ number of journey metaphors has increased since Johnson’s administration,while the Republicans’ has fluctuated repeatedly;second,the Democrats’ number of war,competition,and game metaphors has diminished since Carter’s administration,whereas the Republicans’ plummeted to the lowest level during Ford’s term,and then dramatically escalated before dropping back during Trump’s tenure;third,the Democrats less frequently utilize construction and machinery metaphors but more human metaphors than the Republicans.Based on the similar,idiosyncratic,and different degrees of employment of non-metaphorical surface frames,it is deduced that the two parties diverge on the economy,military affairs and diplomacy,and social security and welfare.They gradually reach agreements on energy and the environment and largely achieve consensus in education.Significant disparities also exist between the two parties’ metaphorical frames in military affairs and diplomacy,social security and welfare,and education.(2)The interconnection of the aforementioned surface frames indicates the two parties’ values,worldviews,and moral models.Those deep frames can indicate the bipartisan value orientations in three dimensions.First,the intragroup relationship is primarily reflected through the metaphorical frames(e.g.,fire,plants,construction,and journey metaphors)of freedom and equality and the surface frames of the economy and social security and welfare.It is observed that though both parties pursue freedom and equality,the Democrats are more concerned about equality while the Republicans focus more on freedom.However,the two parties’ value orientations reflect their similar emphasis on hierarchism.Second,the bipartisan intergroup relationships are mainly embodied in the surface frames of military affairs and diplomacy.Since World War II,the two parties have displayed extreme hatred of communism and moral condemnation of terrorism,exported “democracy” by giving humanitarian aid to other countries,and sought “common interests” with allies.However,these value orientations of rejection,“acceptance” and “reciprocity”conceal America’s hegemonic desire of controlling others.Third,as for the relationship between man and nature embodied in the surface frames of energy and the environment,although the Democrats pay more attention to environmental protection and long-term interests than the Republicans,both parties have a strong predisposition of anthropocentrism,underline class interests,and ignore the common interests of mankind.Fourth,as to man and the ego reflected in the surface frames of education and morality,the Republicans stress egoism while the Democrats promote“altruism”.Nevertheless,the two parties are constrained by the capitalist system that profits for interest groups,neglecting others’ importance and values in the real sense.(3)Based on the bipartisan surface and deep frames,the ecological orientations of such framing actions can be evaluated.In detail,the Republican Party’s deep frames are on the left end of the value orientation continuum and deviate completely or partially from the ecosophy in the theoretical model.Consequently,the ecological orientations are judged as largely destructive and partially ambivalent,presumably resulting in inciting individualism and extreme nationalism and concealing the deteriorating relationship between the capitalist production system and the environmental crisis.By comparison,the Democratic Party’s deep frames are at the intermediate end of the value orientations and deviate partially or completely from the ecosophy.Thus the ecological orientations are predominantly ambivalent and partially destructive,potentially intensifying public sense of competition and justifying America’s military intervention and hegemony.Moreover,the ecological orientations need be assessed in specific socio-political contexts.It is also worth noting that certain presidents’ framing manners seem to be “beneficial”,but essentially are ambivalent,which should be cautioned.Particularly,the excessive war,competition,and game metaphors reflect the bipartisan deep frames that deviate completely from the ecosophy.The framings have fixed destructive ecological orientations in that they may deepen Social Darwinism and spawn undesirable racism,extreme patriotism,and hegemonism,which should be condemned and resisted.Theoretically,this research constructs a theoretical model of framing in political discourse from a cognitive-ecological perspective,providing insights for political discourse analysis and ecological discourse analysis.Practically,this study reveals how the American Democratic Party and Republican Party manipulate language to entrench their ideologies and promote their interests.Accordingly,their future paths can be predicted,offering a reference for the Chinese government’s foreign policies related to the U.S.Furthermore,it sheds light on Chinese political discourse to more harmoniously frame the progressive socialist ecosystem.Besides,this study can be integrated into ideological-political education where students can gain an in-depth understanding of how the American government controls its citizens and maintains global hegemony.Consequently,students will be enabled to assess the negative effects of American parties’ discourses and enhance their critical political awareness.