IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v25y2022i3p347-362.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Risk’ in political discourse. A corpus approach to semantic change in German Bundestag debates

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus Müller
  • Ruth M. Mell

Abstract

Our paper presents a diachronic corpus linguistic approach to the conceptualisation and framing of ‘risk’ in German parliamentary discourse. We analyse all occurrences of risk based on the complete collection of plenary protocols of the German Bundestag covering the legislative periods 1–18 (1949–2017). We apply methods used in Digital Discourse Analysis to show how the concept of ‘risk’ changes through time. Therefore, we investigate co-occurrences to find typical collocations and contexts. We measured three peaks: the first in the late 1950s, the second from the 1970s onwards, and the third in the first decade of the new millennium. We show that ‘risk’ as a negative and ‘chance’ as a positive concept have partly taken the communicative place of ‘danger’ and ‘possibility’. The collocates of risk that can be related to different knowledge domains increase until 2009. This hints at the growing importance of risk thematizations in more and more thematic contexts. Technology and economics turn out to be the most important of these contexts. The analysis shows a clear tendency towards a negative and rather generic use of the word risk. Our results provide for the first time a data-driven insight into the long-term development of the ‘risk’ concept in political discourse of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus Müller & Ruth M. Mell, 2022. "‘Risk’ in political discourse. A corpus approach to semantic change in German Bundestag debates," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(3), pages 347-362, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:25:y:2022:i:3:p:347-362
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2021.1913631
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2021.1913631
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2021.1913631?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:25:y:2022:i:3:p:347-362. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.