Bandingkan kaedah
Semak kaedah pilihan anda secara bersebelahan; baris yang berbeza akan diserlahkan.
| Analisis Metafora Digital× | Analisis Metafora Kritis× | |
|---|---|---|
| Bidang | Kualitatif | Kualitatif |
| Keluarga | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Tahun asal≠ | 2000s–2010s (digital application) | 2004 |
| Pengasas≠ | Rooted in Lakoff & Johnson (1980); extended to digital contexts by corpus and computational linguists from the 2000s onward | Jonathan Charteris-Black |
| Jenis≠ | Qualitative–interpretive analysis | Qualitative-critical textual analysis |
| Sumber perintis≠ | Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press. ISBN: 978-0226468013 | Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN: 978-1403932921 |
| Alias | online metaphor analysis, digital metaphor research, metaphor analysis of digital texts, DMA | CMA, critical metaphor research, corpus-based critical metaphor analysis, ideological metaphor analysis |
| Berkaitan | 5 | 5 |
| Ringkasan≠ | Digital Metaphor Analysis (DMA) is a qualitative research approach that identifies, maps, and interprets conceptual metaphors embedded in digital texts — social media posts, online forums, blogs, comment sections, and other internet-mediated communication. Drawing on Conceptual Metaphor Theory (Lakoff and Johnson 1980), it examines how users frame abstract ideas (identity, politics, health, crisis) through systematic metaphorical mappings, revealing shared conceptual structures and ideological orientations within online discourse communities. | Critical Metaphor Analysis (CMA) is a qualitative method for uncovering how metaphorical language constructs, legitimises, or contests power relations and ideological positions in texts. Developed by Jonathan Charteris-Black (2004), it integrates Conceptual Metaphor Theory with the evaluative concerns of Critical Discourse Analysis to reveal the persuasive and ideological work performed by metaphors in political, institutional, and media discourse. |
| ScholarGateSet data ↗ |
|
|