Differences. Conclusion

Differences

➢ BBC columnist used litotes. Litotes is a figure of speech in which a negative statement is used to affirm a positive sentiment. Litotes is a form of ironic understatement. An understatement can be any expression that minimizes the importance of something.

It is not uncommon for Chinese criminal suspects to appear in "confessional" videos.

➢ BBC columnist used rhetorical question in the article not only to rise the reader’s interest to the problem stated but also to make us think and have a deeper awareness to the topic. Here is the example.

A forced confession?

➢ SCMP columnist didn’t use any figures of expression. The writer’s refusal from tropes, figures and other means of expression, the use of all words only in their direct meanings is also a stylistic device. Although, a lot of quoting was used:

“illegally providing intelligence for overseas entities”
“agreed to restore his Chinese citizenship”
“I believe he was asked to do so”

➢ NY Times columnist used a variety of epithets to describe a Gui Minhai’s disappearance. Epithet is an artistic definition of a word that marks a significant, from the point of view of the author, feature in the depicted phenomenon, expressed as an adjective.

secretive [detention], mysterious [circumstances], secretly [spirited]

Conclusion

As for me, these columnists have pretty the same attitude to Chinese court actions. All of them told that Gui Minhai is a Swedish citizen, though Chinese government says it is not true (as he returned to China, and China does not recognise dual citizenship). All columnists quoted Ann Linde, a Swedish politician, to present the official position of Sweden on this topic.

As I see it, all the sources are negative to Chinese policy, but they show it in different ways. The New York Times is obviously negative, the columnist used a variety of epithets and a photo of protesters in Hong Kong. BBC News columnist is less obviously negative, we can get his opinion out of irony through litotes, rhetorical question and a photo of a poster in Chinese, probably from the same protests as in the picture used in NY Times article. The opinion of the South China Morning Post’s columnist is not so obvious. There aren’t any epithets or any other figures of expression. He used a neutral picture, a Gui Minhai’s portrait. However, the columnist named him a Swedish citizen, used a plenty of quotation, through what we can imagine his opinion. I believe, that is mainly because Hong Kong’s authorities face pressure from the mainland China.

⇐ Предыдущая 1 2 34