Работа посвящена исследованию роли метафоры как средства манипулирования в политическом дискурсе, на примере дебатов между Хиллари Клинтон и Дональдом Трампом во время президентской кампании 2016 года. Автор анализирует использование метафор и их влияние на аудиторию, раскрывая механизмы манипуляции, которые лежат в основе такого использования. Работа имеет целью повысить информированность читателей и помочь им развить более осознанный подход к политическим сообщениям, основанный на анализе метафорического языка и его эффектах на аудиторию. Целью данного исследования является анализ роли метафоры в политическом дискурсе, а также раскрытие механизмов манипуляции, которые связаны с использованием метафор. В исследовании автор стремится более глубоко понять, как политические лидеры могут использовать метафоры для воздействия на аудиторию, формирования определенных образов и манипуляции мнениями людей. В результате исследования автор выявил ряд ключевых результатов. Во-первых, оба кандидата активно использовали метафоры в своих выступлениях и дебатах. Хиллари Клинтон использовала метафоры, связанные с образованием и экономикой, чтобы подчеркнуть свою экспертизу и стабильность. Дональд Трамп же в своих метафорах обращался к насилию, угрозам и созданию образа «американского героя». Во-вторых, метафоры, используемые обоими кандидатами, имели сильное эмоциональное воздействие на аудиторию. Они создавали определенные ассоциации, вызывали эмоциональные реакции и убеждали слушателей в правоте высказываемых идей и политических взглядов. В-третьих, анализ метафор позволил выявить механизмы манипуляции, используемые в политическом дискурсе. Оба кандидата использовали метафоры, чтобы создать определенные образы, усилить эмоциональные реакции и вызвать у избирателей чувство кризиса и необходимости перемен. Исследование подчеркивает важность осознания и критического анализа метафорического языка в политическом дискурсе. Понимание механизмов манипуляции при помощи метафор позволяет развить более информированное и осознанное отношение к политическим сообщениям и повысить критическую грамотность восприятия политической риторики. / This paper is devoted to the study of the role of metaphor as a means of manipulation in political discourse, using the example of debates between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. The author analyzes the use of metaphors and their impact on the audience, revealing the mechanisms of manipulation that underlie such use. The work aims to raise readers' awareness and help them develop a more informed approach to political messaging based on an analysis of metaphorical language and its effects on audiences. The purpose of this study is to analyze the role of metaphor in political discourse, as well as to reveal the mechanisms of manipulation that are associated with the use of metaphors. In the study, the author seeks to better understand how political leaders can use metaphors to influence the audience, form certain images and manipulate people's opinions. As a result of the study, the author identified several key findings. First, both candidates actively used metaphors in their speeches and debates. Hillary Clinton used metaphors related to education and the economy to emphasize her expertise and stability. Donald Trump, on the other hand, in his metaphors turned to violence, threats, and creating an image of an "American hero. Second, the metaphors used by both candidates had a strong emotional impact on the audience. They created certain associations, evoked emotional reactions, and persuaded listeners of the validity of the ideas and political views expressed. Third, the analysis of metaphors revealed the manipulation mechanisms used in political discourse. Both candidates used metaphors to create certain images, enhance emotional reactions, and evoke a sense of crisis and the need for change among voters. The study highlights the importance of awareness and critical analysis of metaphorical language in political discourse. Understanding the mechanisms of manipulation through metaphors allows us to develop a more informed and conscious attitude toward political messages and to increase the critical literacy of the perception of political rhetoric.

El proyecto de innovación se denomina “El debate, técnica didáctica que permite mejorar la capacidad de argumentación de los estudiantes”, surge ante la necesidad de que los estudiantes de la I.E Ricardo Palma 5099 de la región Callao, en su gran mayoría presentan problemas para argumentar sus posturas cuando participan en las sesiones de aprendizaje del área de Desarrollo Personal Ciudadanía y Cívica. Esto se debe a múltiples causas entre las que podemos considerar que algunos docentes aún emplean estrategias metodológicas tradicionales enfocadas más en el proceso de enseñanza que en el proceso de aprendizaje. Asimismo, otros docentes no manejan técnicas didácticas que desarrollan la capacidad de argumentación como el debate. El objetivo central de este proyecto es que los docentes apliquen la técnica del debate para mejorar la capacidad de argumentación de sus estudiantes. Los conceptos que sustentan la innovación son el concepto de adolescencia media, el pensamiento abstracto, la capacidad de la argumentación y la técnica didáctica del debate. Para la construcción del proyecto de innovación educativa se siguieron los siguientes pasos: La elaboración de una matriz FODA, árboles de problemas y objetivos y una matriz de consistencia para determinar la lógica de intervención. Al finalizar, la implementación del proyecto se espera contar con docentes mejor preparados que apliquen la técnica del debate para mejorar la capacidad de argumentación de sus estudiantes. Finalmente, se ha previsto que el debate es una de las mejores técnicas didácticas para desarrollar la capacidad de argumentación de los estudiantes.

Transparency International published its annual corruption perceptions index in 2022, where Sweden obtained the highest measured level of perceived corruption in eleven years. At about the same time, an investigation into corruption and undue influence was discarded by the newly appointed government. The purpose of this thesis is to examine two current political debates about corruption through Norman Faircloughs model for critical discourse analysis. In more detail, the objectives are to study which discourses that can be distinguished, the characteristics of the discursive struggle and which discourse that dominates the Swedish corruption debate. In this thesis, political debates are considered as usable contexts to illustrate both contradiction and consensus regarding the corruption in Sweden. By using critical discourse analysis as an approach, the ambition is to visualize how politicians construct the image of the increased corruption and to examine how certain statements are presented as more evident or true than others. This study shows that there are four discourses that can be distinguished in the two political debates on corruption: privatization, increasing crime rate, accountability and openness and trust. The observed discursive struggle generally has high interdiscursivity, a few cases of intertextuality, and seems to be open to changes. The discourse that dominates the order of discourse is "the increasing crime rate". The results indicate that current societal problems, that are mainly highlighted by the ruling politicians, appear to have an impact on the political discussion about corruption in Sweden.

In this thesis, I investigate to what extent and how the normative changes in UN peace operations have left an imprint on Swedish foreign policy tradition. Departing from a constructivist point of view, this thesis explores to what extent the changing international norms on UN peace operations translate to the national level. By way of this, the thesis aims to contribute to the theoretical discussion on how international norms and ideas imprint on a national level. The analysis focuses on the heightened threat level, the increased authorisation of the use of force, the inclusion of new military domains and humanitarian and civilian aspects. The Swedish approach is analysed through parliamentary debates and government propositions on MINUSMA between 2021-2022, where MINUSMA represents the normative changes UN peace operations have undergone. The material is analysed through qualitative content analysis. The results of the analysis indicate that Sweden aligns regarding the acceptance of increased military influence over MINUSMA and also accepts the heightened threat level. At the same time, the mission’s own use of force is played down by the government and parliamentarians, instead choosing to emphasise civilian and humanitarian factors. As a result, the alignment regarding the aspect of the use of force is more difficult to draw firm conclusions around.

Sweden has long been known for an extensive and generous migration policy in relation to the rest of the European countries. Since the 2015 migration crisis Sweden took a turn by implementing several measures in order to restrain the comprehensive immigration. The topic of migration has since been highly debated, not in the least within parliamentary debates. Thus the purpose of this study is to examine whether three of the Swedish parliamentary parties the Moderates, Social Democrats and the Sweden Democrats use a securitizing discourse on the topic of migration in parliamentary debates during the years 2019, 2020 and 2021. The essay used a qualitative text analysis to conduct the study. The results showed that a securitizing language was used by the Moderates and the Sweden Democrats while the Social Democrats showed little to no indications. The analysis of the two securitizing parties could also confirm their use of two specific securitizing strategies. The study also concluded that the general migration discourse of each of the securitizing parties showed an increase of strengthened positions towards refugees through the analyzed years.

No description available.

No description available.

Skills of argument have attracted the attention of educators but remain challenging to both assess and develop. In contrast to the traditional essay, dialogic argument requires reflection on and coordination of one’s own claims with those of an interlocutor. Investigating a tool for assessing an individual’s dialogic argument skill is an objective of the present work. Building on an earlier study by the author and colleagues, and informed by philosophical writings on objectives of argumentation, undertaken here is a conceptual analysis of instances of dialogic argumentation by skilled arguers in order to discern its essential characteristics. The identified set of characteristics is then used as a basis for evaluating the argumentation skills exhibited by a sample of sixth grade students. A practical purpose is development of an assessment tool for use in educational contexts, identifying the range and variation of argumentation skills individuals bring to dialog. A value of the individual instrument referred to as a constructed dialog and developed and employed here, is that it overcomes the statistical problem created by lack of independence between participants in a dialog which requires that the unit of analysis be the pair-- thereby defeating the objective of assessing the skill of an individual. Empirical results document that young adolescents display competence in some basic skills of argumentation but, even following an intervention designed to build and exercise such skills, they continue to use these sparingly and to lack other equally fundamental ones. Discussion addresses implications for education, as well as the potential for use of the constructed dialog as an assessment tool for evaluating an individual student’s skill in argumentation and the associated understanding it reflects regarding the nature and objectives of argumentation.

This thesis explores public discourses surrounding audiobooks as manifested in cultural articles in Swedish newspapers. The aim is to gain a deeper understanding about values and opinions about the audio book as a literary media. The method employed is discourse analysis, with a theoretical frame- work built mainly on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffes discourse theory. The articles were gath- ered from Sweden’s four biggest newspapers, totaling 45 articles between the years 2016-2023. Four major themes were identified in the material: the form and content of the audiobook, the act of reading versus listening, the commodification of literature, and the economic aspects of the audiobook market. Further, the study identifies both pessimistic and optimistic discourses. Pessi- mistic discourses see audiobooks as a threat to traditional literary forms and quality, while optimistic discourses highlight the potential of audiobooks to expand the concept of literature and promote reading. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of how audiobooks are discussed and debated in Swedish media, reflecting broader societal and cultural concerns. This is a two years master’s thesis in Library and Information Science.

The buying of domestic services in Sweden has become an increasingly privatized practice, something that correlates with the global feminization and racialisation of domestic labour. Although RUT deductions within the domestic sector historically have been a criticised phenomenon, it is today representing a politically normalised labour market measure. In using a WPR-method, social constructions of equality in parliamentary debates are examined with the theoretical perspectives of post-colonial feminism. The result indicate that the parliamentary social constructions of equality are connected to a neoliberal narrative where women’s increased time in the labour market equals female emancipation.