《纽约时报》“新冠肺炎病毒溯源”新闻报道的文化话语探讨

utes, media, speakers with ambiguous identities, and the public. Among them, the U.S. and Chinese officials pay attention to different contents. The U.S. government focuses on its own anti-epidemic achievements and slanders China for refusing to cooperate with WHO in tracing inquiry, while China focuses on the tracing process. The remaining five types of subjects have roughly the same concerns. 

Secondly, in terms of the category of intents/forms in CDS, this thesis carries out an analysis from three aspects: keyword list, concordance lines of keywords, and discursive strategies. The top 30 keywords are selected and divided into five categories according to their semantics: subjects (scientists, experts, researchers, organization, administration, government, officials, Trump, Biden, Chinese, American, public), pandemic and virus origin (virus, coronavirus, pandemic, outbreak, pread, vaccine, health, investigation, origins, evidence, bats), geographic name (China, Wuhan, Beijing, Washington), location (lab, market), and quoting sign (said). In order to identify the tendency and characteristics of news’ contents more clearly, this study separately analyzes the concordance lines of the remaining keywords, excluding the keywords whose concordance lines are overlapped, and finds that in addition to objective descriptions, some news reports on the origin of COVID-19 virus in the New York Times also stigmatize China. 

reference(omitted)