Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Framing of the EU Visa Liberalization with Ukraine Cover

The Framing of the EU Visa Liberalization with Ukraine

Open Access
|Feb 2019

References

  1. Abid, R.–S. Abdul Manan–Z. Abdul Amir Abdul Rahman. 2017. A flood of Syrians has slowed to a trickle. The use of metaphors in the representation of Syrian refugees in the online media reports of host and non-host countries. Discourse and Communication 11(2): 121–140.10.1177/1750481317691857
  2. Antonijević, Z. 2015. Framing the gender mainstreaming in Serbia: The case of family policy. In: Tamara Petrović-Trifunović–Sanja Milutinović Bojanić– Gazela Pudar Draško (eds), Mind the gap(s): Family, socialization and gender. 400–423.
  3. Arrese, A.–Vara-Miguel, A. 2016. A comparative study of metaphors in press reporting of the Euro crisis. Discourse and Society 27(2): 133–155.10.1177/0957926515611552
  4. Aydın-Düzgit, S. 2016. De-Europeanisation through discourse: A critical discourse analysis of AKP’s election speeches. South European Society and Politics 21(1): 45–58.10.1080/13608746.2016.1147717
  5. Batalla-Adam, L. 2017. The EU-Turkey deal one year on: A delicate balancing act. The International Spectator 52(4): 44–58.10.1080/03932729.2017.1370569
  6. Baysan, A. 2013. Multiple arenas and diverse techniques of securitisation: The case of the EU’s visa regime towards Turkey. Journal of Contemporary European Research 9(5): 740–758.10.30950/jcer.v9i5.566
  7. Boeynaems, A.–Burgers, Ch.–Konijn E. A.–Steen G. J. 2017. The effects of metaphorical framing on political persuasion: A systematic literature review. Metaphor and Symbol 32(2): 118–134.10.1080/10926488.2017.1297623
  8. Brugman, B. C.–Burgers, Ch.–Steen, G. J. 2017. Recategorizing political frames: A systematic review of metaphorical framing in experiments on political communication. Annals of the International Communication Association 1: 1–18.10.1080/23808985.2017.1312481
  9. Burgers, Ch.–Konijn E. A.–Steen G. J. 2016. Figurative framing: Shaping public discourse through metaphor, hyperbole, and irony. Communication Theory 26: 410–430.10.1111/comt.12096
  10. Burlyuk, O.–Shapovalova N. 2017. “Veni, vidi,… vici?” EU performance and two faces of conditionality towards Ukraine. East European Politics 33(1): 36–55.10.1080/21599165.2017.1280470
  11. Chaban, N.–L. Elgström–Gulyaeva, O. 2017. Russian images of the European Union: Before and after Maidan. Foreign Policy Analysis 13: 480–499.10.1093/fpa/orw055
  12. Charteris-Black, J. 2006. Britain as a container: Immigration metaphors in the 2005 election campaign. Discourse–Society 17(5): 563-581.10.1177/0957926506066345
  13. Cornelissen, J. P., R. Holt–M. Zundel. 2011. The role of analogy and metaphor in the framing and legitimization of strategic change. Organization Studies 32(12): 1701–1716.10.1177/0170840611425729
  14. Dahl, T. 2015. Contested science in the media: Linguistic traces of news writers’ framing activity. Written Communication 32(1): 39–65.10.1177/0741088314557623
  15. Đurović, T. 2010. Metaphors we vote by. The case of ‘marriage’ in contemporary Serbian political discourse. Journal of Language and Politics 9(2): 237–259.10.1075/jlp.9.2.04dur
  16. Đurović, T.–Silaški, N. 2012. How heavy do I journey on the way: Framing the issue of the EU visa liberalisation process in contemporary Serbia. Selected Papers from UKCLA Meetings 1: 64–77.
  17. Entman, R. M. 2004. Projections of power: Framing news, public opinion, and US foreign policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226210735.001.0001
  18. Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  19. Fillmore, Ch. J. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di semantica 6(2): 222–254.
  20. Finotelli, C.–Sciortino, G. 2013. Through the gates of the fortress: European visa policies and the limits of immigration control. Perspectives on European Politics and Society 14(1): 80–101.10.1080/15705854.2012.732390
  21. Fiss, P. C.–Hirsch, P. M. 2005. The discourse of globalization: Framing and sense making of an emerging concept. American Sociological Review 70(1): 29–52.10.1177/000312240507000103
  22. Foucault, M. 1972. The archaeology of knowledge and the discourse on language. New York: Pantheon.
  23. Fournier, A. 2017. From frozen conflict to mobile boundary: Youth perceptions of territoriality in war-time Ukraine. East European Politics and Societies 32(1): 23–55.10.1177/0888325417740627
  24. Haferlach, L.–Tekin, F.–Wodka J. 2017. Friends. Foes. Frenemies? Unpacking the future of EU-Turkey relations. Futures 1–25.10.1016/j.futures.2017.04.006
  25. Happ, D.–Bruns, B. 2017. The EU and its “ring of friends”—Eyelevel or top-down relationships? Problems of Post-Communism 64(2): 94–105.10.1080/10758216.2016.1176863
  26. Jansen, S. 2009. After the red passport: Towards an anthropology of the everyday geopolitics of entrapment in the EU’s ‘immediate outside’. The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 15(4): 815–832.10.1111/j.1467-9655.2009.01586.x
  27. Kapranov, O. 2016. The Framing of Serbia’s EU accession by the British Foreign Office on Twitter. Text und Diskurs 9: 67–80.10.15388/RESPECTUS.2016.29.34.08
  28. Kimmel, M. 2010. Why we mix metaphors (and mix them well): Discourse coherence, conceptual metaphor, and beyond. Journal of Pragmatics 42: 97–115.10.1016/j.pragma.2009.05.017
  29. Kleinschnitger, K.–M. Knodt. 2018. Asymmetric perceptions of EU relations with the near Eastern neighbours: The Republic of Moldova, Ukraine and Belarus in comparison. European Foreign Affairs Review 23(1): 79–99.10.54648/EERR2018012
  30. Kortenska, E.–Sircar, I.–Steunenberg, B. 2016. Public-elite gap on European integration: The missing link between discourses about EU enlargement among citizens and elites in Serbia. MAXCAP Working Paper Series 31: 3–37.
  31. Kostovicova, D. 2014. When enlargement meets common foreign and security policy: Serbia’s Europeanisation, visa liberalisation and the Kosovo policy. Europe-Asia Studies 66(1): 67–87.10.1080/09668136.2013.855018
  32. Kövecses, Z. 2017. Levels of metaphor. Cognitive Linguistics 28(2): 321–347.10.1515/cog-2016-0052
  33. Lakoff, G. 2014. The all new don’ think of an elephant!: Know your values and frame the debate. White River Junction: Chelsea Green Publishing.
  34. Lakoff, G. 1996. ‘Sorry, I’m not myself today’: The metaphor system for conceptualizing the self’. Spaces, worlds, and grammar. 91–123.
  35. Luke, A. 1995. Text and discourse in education: An introduction to critical discourse analysis. Review of research in education 21(1): 3–48.10.3102/0091732X021001003
  36. Meadows, B. 2007. Distancing and showing solidarity via metaphor and metonymy in political discourse: A critical study of American statements on Iraq during the years 2004–2005. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 1(2): 1–17.
  37. Musolff, A. 2010. Metaphor, nation and the holocaust: The concept of the body politics. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203847282
  38. Musolff, A. 2000. Political imagery of Europe: A house without exit doors? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 21(3): 216–229.10.1080/01434630008666402
  39. Nerlich, B. 2010. ‘Climategate’; paradoxical metaphors and political paralysis. Environmental Values 19(4): 419–442.10.3197/096327110X531543
  40. Özdemir, Z.–Ayata, A. G. 2017. Dynamics of exclusion and everyday bordering through Schengen visas. Political Geography 0: 1–9.10.1016/j.polgeo.2017.05.005
  41. Özerim, M. G. 2018. Stretching, opening or sealing the borders: Turkish foreign policy conceptions and their impact on migration, asylum and visa policies. Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 20(2): 165–182.10.1080/19448953.2018.1379751
  42. Reese, S. 2007. The framing project: A bridging model for media research revisited. Journal of Communication 57(1): 148–154.10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00334.x
  43. — 2001. Framing public life: A bridging model for media research. In: S. Reese–O. Gandy–A. Grant (eds), Framing public life. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. 7–31.
  44. Sciortino, G.–Colombo, A. 2004. The flows and the flood: The public discourse on immigration in Italy, 1969–2001. Journal of Modern Italian Studies 9(1): 94–113.10.1080/1354571042000179209
  45. Scott, J. W. 2017. Constructing European neighborhood: Critical perspectives from EU–Ukraine interaction and civil society actors. Journal of Borderlands Studies 32(1): 23–39.10.1080/08865655.2016.1247651
  46. Snow, D. A.–Rochford, E. B.–Worden, S. K.–Benford, R. D. 1986. Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation. American Sociological Review 51: 464–481.10.2307/2095581
  47. Thibodeau, P. H.–Boroditsky, L. 2011. Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS ONE 6(2): 1–11.10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
  48. Tsarouhas, D. 2018. Turkey: Identity politics and reticent Europeanisation. In: Flenley, Paul–Mannin, Michael–Tsarouhas, Dimitris (eds), The European Union and its eastern neighbourhood. Manchester, Michigan: Manchester University Press. 126–138.10.7228/manchester/9781526109095.003.0009
  49. Vieira, A. 2016. Ukraine, Russia and the strategic partnership dynamics in the EU’s Eastern neighbourhood: Recalibrating the EU’s ‘self’, ‘we’ and ‘other’. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 29(1): 128–150.10.1080/09557571.2015.1093410
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2018-0030 | Journal eISSN: 2068-2956 (formerly 2391-8179)
Language: English
Page range: 97 - 115
Published online: Feb 25, 2019
Published in print: Dec 1, 2018
Published by: Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2019 Oleksandr Kapranov, published by Sapientia Hungarian University of Transylvania
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.