Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides

The aim of the study is to describe the diachronic construction of the discourse of giftedness in print media and to show how the historical media discourse relates to the understanding of the essence of giftedness developing in parallel in science. The media analysis is based on a critical discours...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture 2014 (16), p.228-253
1. Verfasser: Põlda, Halliki
Format: Artikel
Sprache:est
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 253
container_issue 16
container_start_page 228
container_title Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture
container_volume
creator Põlda, Halliki
description The aim of the study is to describe the diachronic construction of the discourse of giftedness in print media and to show how the historical media discourse relates to the understanding of the essence of giftedness developing in parallel in science. The media analysis is based on a critical discourse analysis of the media texts from the 1890s–1990s stored in the corpus of written Estonian and the analysis model of Norman Fairclough (2001), one of the most central theoreticians of this approach.The results of the analysis indicate that the historical media discourse of giftedness was constructed in parallel with the understandings emerging in the studies of giftedness: there were similarities between the media and scientific discourse but some differences could also be outlined. The viewpoints which had first become natural through the notion of “genius”in scientific literature, according to which giftedness is hereditary, were also reflected in the historical media discourse. Atypically of the scientific discourse back then, the media also discussed the individual's physical assumptions in relation to giftedness, which was reflected in modern approaches to giftedness.The first linguistic form denoting giftedness in media was not genius,which occurred in scientific texts (see Galton, 1869), but talent (Wirmaline,1892), which was used in scientific language only a century later. The discourse analysis revealed that the talent discourse back then was similar to the modern scientific approach, relating to skills and abilities already a century ago (see Gagné, 2004). Almost at the same time as the term talent, the term gift richness (Walgus, 1895) occurred in media, creating the giftedness discourse, the dynamics of which were similar to the talent discourse. The discourse included texts which directly summarised the viewpoints of science – both the role of heredity in giftedness as well as eugenics – creating clear connections between the dominant ideological beliefs of that era. Similarly to the scientific discourse, the discourse of environment emerged in the texts,although giftedness was constructed either through the monetary or competition discourse. In examining the emotional tone of the texts, it was clear that, compared to the talent discourse, the emotional tone of the texts of the giftedness discourse was more positive, even under conditions of Soviet ideology.Based on the discourse analysis, it may be concluded that the discourse of genius was the m
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>ceeol</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_ceeol_journals_440932</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ceeol_id>440932</ceeol_id><sourcerecordid>440932</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-ceeol_journals_4409323</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFjEsKwjAYhIMoKOoNXOQChbSNr6WI4gHcSzCjpEkTyJ8czZ27XsyK3buabx7MiM3Kbb0pZFWV44F3OyGnbEnUCCHKWlZrKWYsHLyGzdR2L0MJlIzlCUpnKnijePd22gIOxL3xT65-a3BtyOZIP1Q2huCNMx7cBk8pZiCa9utboB8k2P5agxZs8lCOsBx0zlbn0_V4Ke5AcLcm5Oj7_Cal2NdV_af-ABF5S0Y</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides</title><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Põlda, Halliki</creator><creatorcontrib>Põlda, Halliki</creatorcontrib><description>The aim of the study is to describe the diachronic construction of the discourse of giftedness in print media and to show how the historical media discourse relates to the understanding of the essence of giftedness developing in parallel in science. The media analysis is based on a critical discourse analysis of the media texts from the 1890s–1990s stored in the corpus of written Estonian and the analysis model of Norman Fairclough (2001), one of the most central theoreticians of this approach.The results of the analysis indicate that the historical media discourse of giftedness was constructed in parallel with the understandings emerging in the studies of giftedness: there were similarities between the media and scientific discourse but some differences could also be outlined. The viewpoints which had first become natural through the notion of “genius”in scientific literature, according to which giftedness is hereditary, were also reflected in the historical media discourse. Atypically of the scientific discourse back then, the media also discussed the individual's physical assumptions in relation to giftedness, which was reflected in modern approaches to giftedness.The first linguistic form denoting giftedness in media was not genius,which occurred in scientific texts (see Galton, 1869), but talent (Wirmaline,1892), which was used in scientific language only a century later. The discourse analysis revealed that the talent discourse back then was similar to the modern scientific approach, relating to skills and abilities already a century ago (see Gagné, 2004). Almost at the same time as the term talent, the term gift richness (Walgus, 1895) occurred in media, creating the giftedness discourse, the dynamics of which were similar to the talent discourse. The discourse included texts which directly summarised the viewpoints of science – both the role of heredity in giftedness as well as eugenics – creating clear connections between the dominant ideological beliefs of that era. Similarly to the scientific discourse, the discourse of environment emerged in the texts,although giftedness was constructed either through the monetary or competition discourse. In examining the emotional tone of the texts, it was clear that, compared to the talent discourse, the emotional tone of the texts of the giftedness discourse was more positive, even under conditions of Soviet ideology.Based on the discourse analysis, it may be concluded that the discourse of genius was the most politicised among the emerged sub-discourses and was clearly different from the discourse once described by Galton (1869). The genius that had emerged in the 1930s was then used in a context related to the origin of the term (compare genius in Latin – a spirit, and good intellectual abilities (e.g., PM, 1934)). However, during the Soviet times it became a tool of the ideology and was used to emphasize the political decisions of the heads of the state.The dynamics of the discourse of giftedness indicates that the discourse has played an important role in human relationships throughout history.Musicians and artists, and later politicians and working people, were considered to have important positions in the society. This indicates that certain fields of life have been clearly more prestigious at different stages of history.The difference between the scientific and media discourses of giftedness indifferent age-related contexts that emerged during the analysis must also be considered important. While scientific texts almost always described gifted children and scientific literature used example sentences related to children as definitions of terms (e.g., Saareste, 1997, etc.), in historical media texts the discourse of giftedness was only constructed through adults.In summary, the study indicated that there were clearly different understandings of giftedness in science in historical media texts, as well as a connection in creating and maintaining societal agreements.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1736-8804</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1736-4221</identifier><language>est</language><publisher>Tallinn University Press</publisher><subject>Baltic Languages ; Communication studies ; Language and Literature Studies</subject><ispartof>Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture, 2014 (16), p.228-253</ispartof><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,4012</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Põlda, Halliki</creatorcontrib><title>Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides</title><title>Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture</title><addtitle>Proceedings of TLU Institute of Estonian Language and Culture</addtitle><description>The aim of the study is to describe the diachronic construction of the discourse of giftedness in print media and to show how the historical media discourse relates to the understanding of the essence of giftedness developing in parallel in science. The media analysis is based on a critical discourse analysis of the media texts from the 1890s–1990s stored in the corpus of written Estonian and the analysis model of Norman Fairclough (2001), one of the most central theoreticians of this approach.The results of the analysis indicate that the historical media discourse of giftedness was constructed in parallel with the understandings emerging in the studies of giftedness: there were similarities between the media and scientific discourse but some differences could also be outlined. The viewpoints which had first become natural through the notion of “genius”in scientific literature, according to which giftedness is hereditary, were also reflected in the historical media discourse. Atypically of the scientific discourse back then, the media also discussed the individual's physical assumptions in relation to giftedness, which was reflected in modern approaches to giftedness.The first linguistic form denoting giftedness in media was not genius,which occurred in scientific texts (see Galton, 1869), but talent (Wirmaline,1892), which was used in scientific language only a century later. The discourse analysis revealed that the talent discourse back then was similar to the modern scientific approach, relating to skills and abilities already a century ago (see Gagné, 2004). Almost at the same time as the term talent, the term gift richness (Walgus, 1895) occurred in media, creating the giftedness discourse, the dynamics of which were similar to the talent discourse. The discourse included texts which directly summarised the viewpoints of science – both the role of heredity in giftedness as well as eugenics – creating clear connections between the dominant ideological beliefs of that era. Similarly to the scientific discourse, the discourse of environment emerged in the texts,although giftedness was constructed either through the monetary or competition discourse. In examining the emotional tone of the texts, it was clear that, compared to the talent discourse, the emotional tone of the texts of the giftedness discourse was more positive, even under conditions of Soviet ideology.Based on the discourse analysis, it may be concluded that the discourse of genius was the most politicised among the emerged sub-discourses and was clearly different from the discourse once described by Galton (1869). The genius that had emerged in the 1930s was then used in a context related to the origin of the term (compare genius in Latin – a spirit, and good intellectual abilities (e.g., PM, 1934)). However, during the Soviet times it became a tool of the ideology and was used to emphasize the political decisions of the heads of the state.The dynamics of the discourse of giftedness indicates that the discourse has played an important role in human relationships throughout history.Musicians and artists, and later politicians and working people, were considered to have important positions in the society. This indicates that certain fields of life have been clearly more prestigious at different stages of history.The difference between the scientific and media discourses of giftedness indifferent age-related contexts that emerged during the analysis must also be considered important. While scientific texts almost always described gifted children and scientific literature used example sentences related to children as definitions of terms (e.g., Saareste, 1997, etc.), in historical media texts the discourse of giftedness was only constructed through adults.In summary, the study indicated that there were clearly different understandings of giftedness in science in historical media texts, as well as a connection in creating and maintaining societal agreements.</description><subject>Baltic Languages</subject><subject>Communication studies</subject><subject>Language and Literature Studies</subject><issn>1736-8804</issn><issn>1736-4221</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>REL</sourceid><recordid>eNqFjEsKwjAYhIMoKOoNXOQChbSNr6WI4gHcSzCjpEkTyJ8czZ27XsyK3buabx7MiM3Kbb0pZFWV44F3OyGnbEnUCCHKWlZrKWYsHLyGzdR2L0MJlIzlCUpnKnijePd22gIOxL3xT65-a3BtyOZIP1Q2huCNMx7cBk8pZiCa9utboB8k2P5agxZs8lCOsBx0zlbn0_V4Ke5AcLcm5Oj7_Cal2NdV_af-ABF5S0Y</recordid><startdate>2014</startdate><enddate>2014</enddate><creator>Põlda, Halliki</creator><general>Tallinn University Press</general><general>Tallinna Ülikooli Kirjastus</general><scope>AE2</scope><scope>BIXPP</scope><scope>REL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2014</creationdate><title>Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides</title><author>Põlda, Halliki</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-ceeol_journals_4409323</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>est</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Baltic Languages</topic><topic>Communication studies</topic><topic>Language and Literature Studies</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Põlda, Halliki</creatorcontrib><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library (C.E.E.O.L.) (DFG Nationallizenzen)</collection><collection>CEEOL: Open Access</collection><collection>Central and Eastern European Online Library</collection><jtitle>Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Põlda, Halliki</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides</atitle><jtitle>Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture</jtitle><addtitle>Proceedings of TLU Institute of Estonian Language and Culture</addtitle><date>2014</date><risdate>2014</risdate><issue>16</issue><spage>228</spage><epage>253</epage><pages>228-253</pages><issn>1736-8804</issn><eissn>1736-4221</eissn><abstract>The aim of the study is to describe the diachronic construction of the discourse of giftedness in print media and to show how the historical media discourse relates to the understanding of the essence of giftedness developing in parallel in science. The media analysis is based on a critical discourse analysis of the media texts from the 1890s–1990s stored in the corpus of written Estonian and the analysis model of Norman Fairclough (2001), one of the most central theoreticians of this approach.The results of the analysis indicate that the historical media discourse of giftedness was constructed in parallel with the understandings emerging in the studies of giftedness: there were similarities between the media and scientific discourse but some differences could also be outlined. The viewpoints which had first become natural through the notion of “genius”in scientific literature, according to which giftedness is hereditary, were also reflected in the historical media discourse. Atypically of the scientific discourse back then, the media also discussed the individual's physical assumptions in relation to giftedness, which was reflected in modern approaches to giftedness.The first linguistic form denoting giftedness in media was not genius,which occurred in scientific texts (see Galton, 1869), but talent (Wirmaline,1892), which was used in scientific language only a century later. The discourse analysis revealed that the talent discourse back then was similar to the modern scientific approach, relating to skills and abilities already a century ago (see Gagné, 2004). Almost at the same time as the term talent, the term gift richness (Walgus, 1895) occurred in media, creating the giftedness discourse, the dynamics of which were similar to the talent discourse. The discourse included texts which directly summarised the viewpoints of science – both the role of heredity in giftedness as well as eugenics – creating clear connections between the dominant ideological beliefs of that era. Similarly to the scientific discourse, the discourse of environment emerged in the texts,although giftedness was constructed either through the monetary or competition discourse. In examining the emotional tone of the texts, it was clear that, compared to the talent discourse, the emotional tone of the texts of the giftedness discourse was more positive, even under conditions of Soviet ideology.Based on the discourse analysis, it may be concluded that the discourse of genius was the most politicised among the emerged sub-discourses and was clearly different from the discourse once described by Galton (1869). The genius that had emerged in the 1930s was then used in a context related to the origin of the term (compare genius in Latin – a spirit, and good intellectual abilities (e.g., PM, 1934)). However, during the Soviet times it became a tool of the ideology and was used to emphasize the political decisions of the heads of the state.The dynamics of the discourse of giftedness indicates that the discourse has played an important role in human relationships throughout history.Musicians and artists, and later politicians and working people, were considered to have important positions in the society. This indicates that certain fields of life have been clearly more prestigious at different stages of history.The difference between the scientific and media discourses of giftedness indifferent age-related contexts that emerged during the analysis must also be considered important. While scientific texts almost always described gifted children and scientific literature used example sentences related to children as definitions of terms (e.g., Saareste, 1997, etc.), in historical media texts the discourse of giftedness was only constructed through adults.In summary, the study indicated that there were clearly different understandings of giftedness in science in historical media texts, as well as a connection in creating and maintaining societal agreements.</abstract><pub>Tallinn University Press</pub><tpages>26</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1736-8804
ispartof Proceedings of TLU institute of Estonian language and culture, 2014 (16), p.228-253
issn 1736-8804
1736-4221
language est
recordid cdi_ceeol_journals_440932
source EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Baltic Languages
Communication studies
Language and Literature Studies
title Andekusmõistestik teadus- ja üldkeeles ning andekuse diskursuse diakrooniline konstrueerimine meediatekstides
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-16T17%3A01%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-ceeol&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Andekusm%C3%B5istestik%20teadus-%20ja%20%C3%BCldkeeles%20ning%20andekuse%20diskursuse%20diakrooniline%20konstrueerimine%20meediatekstides&rft.jtitle=Proceedings%20of%20TLU%20institute%20of%20Estonian%20language%20and%20culture&rft.au=P%C3%B5lda,%20Halliki&rft.date=2014&rft.issue=16&rft.spage=228&rft.epage=253&rft.pages=228-253&rft.issn=1736-8804&rft.eissn=1736-4221&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cceeol%3E440932%3C/ceeol%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ceeol_id=440932&rfr_iscdi=true