Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot

dc.contributor.authorKortetmäki, Teea
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-08T08:03:23Z
dc.date.available2010-12-08T08:03:23Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.otheroai:jykdok.linneanet.fi:1144070
dc.identifier.urihttps://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/25662
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this treatise is to analyse five of the Copenhagen Climate Convention's main speeches to see how they supported or weakened the agreement possibilities in the convention. Particular focus will be on the elements that divide or unite negotiators and whether the summit's failing outcome is already built in the pre-planned speeches held at the main podium. Theoretically, the study builds on Kenneth Burke's identification thesis and Elizabeth L. Malone's climate change debate analysis. I combine these in my analysis using a revised version of Malone's argument family classification tool putting it into Burke's theoretical framework. The central concept is Burke's identification, whose manifestations are searched from speeches. The analysis will cover five of the main speeches from Copenhagen summit negotiators (the United States, China, Zimbabwe, the African Union and the Climate Group). Analysed speeches contain more elements that divide negotiators than elements with possibly uniting effect. The division between North and South is particularly distinct in most speeches. Another dividing issue is the major emitters' tendency to speak themselves out of more emission cut commitments instead of expressing willingness to engage in more ambitious accord. At the same time, less developed countries utter their mistrust which increases division and weakens the possibilities for negotiators to become consubstantial. Every participator agrees in public about seriousness of climate change, but this claim is supported only weakly by other arguments in their speeches. Copenhagen Climate Convention's failure can be foreseen in speeches that fail to build and recognise a common interest among negotiator countries. Rhetorical analysis reveals that climate change as an environmental problem is not faced by a ”global we” but from national perspectives, which weakens the possibilities for real action. The ”global we” facing and reacting to climate change has not emerged. This is a challenge for further study discussing the ways in which the real identification could be achieved and action taken.
dc.format.extent96 s
dc.language.isoeng
dc.rightsThis publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.en
dc.rightsJulkaisu on tekijänoikeussäännösten alainen. Teosta voi lukea ja tulostaa henkilökohtaista käyttöä varten. Käyttö kaupallisiin tarkoituksiin on kielletty.fi
dc.subject.otherrhetoric
dc.subject.otherenvironmental rhetoric
dc.subject.otherenvironmental philosophy
dc.subject.otherBurke
dc.subject.otheridentification
dc.subject.otherclimate change
dc.subject.otherCopenhagen Climate Convention
dc.subject.otherNorth-South clash
dc.subject.otherilmastonmuutos
dc.titleCopenhagen failure : a rhetorical treatise of how speeches unite and divide mankind
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:fi:jyu-201012083146
dc.type.dcmitypeTexten
dc.type.ontasotPro gradufi
dc.type.ontasotMaster’s thesisen
dc.contributor.tiedekuntaYhteiskuntatieteellinen tiedekuntafi
dc.contributor.tiedekuntaFaculty of Social Sciencesen
dc.contributor.laitosYhteiskuntatieteiden ja filosofian laitosfi
dc.contributor.laitosDepartment of Social Sciences and Philosophyen
dc.contributor.yliopistoUniversity of Jyväskyläen
dc.contributor.yliopistoJyväskylän yliopistofi
dc.contributor.oppiaineFilosofiafi
dc.contributor.oppiainePhilosophyen
dc.rights.accesslevelopenAccessfi
dc.contributor.oppiainekoodi201
dc.subject.ysoretoriikka
dc.subject.ysoympäristöfilosofia
dc.subject.ysofilosofia
dc.subject.ysoilmastonmuutokset


Aineistoon kuuluvat tiedostot

Thumbnail

Aineisto kuuluu seuraaviin kokoelmiin

Näytä suppeat kuvailutiedot