Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorHeller, Brooke
dc.date.accessioned2014-03-04T02:50:44Z
dc.date.available2014-03-04T02:50:44Z
dc.date.issued2007-12
dc.identifier.otherheller_brooke_a_200712_ma
dc.identifier.urihttp://purl.galileo.usg.edu/uga_etd/heller_brooke_a_200712_ma
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10724/24411
dc.description.abstractTwo main purposes motivated this research: 1) to demonstrate deliberate manipulation and intent to deceive in a document that is exemplary of tobacco industry language ; and 2) to demonstrate that authorial intent can be uncovered by applying tools and methods from different linguistic perspectives, especially draft analysis. The document analyzed, a taped speech by Philip Morris CEO Geoff Bible to worldwide employees, was written in early April, 1996 when the industry was at its most vulnerable. It covers topics crucial in tobacco control research (e.g. controversial FDA investigations, industry insiders turned whistleblowers, and mounting litigation). Four sequential drafts were available for analysis. Analytic methods draw from discourse analysis, computer programming, cognitive linguistics, and corpus linguistics. Utilizing a draft analysis computer program, paragraph-by-paragraph comparisons of the speech were conducted. These comparisons involved both lexical semantics and a pragmatics-based approach to deception. Results demonstrated that the difficult issue of determining author/speaker intent to manipulate an audience can be overcome when concrete textual evidence via draft comparison is used. For example, the word 'addiction' appears in the first three drafts but is omitted from the final draft demonstrating the authors' knowledge of and intent to avoid discussing such a crucial public health topic. The methodology offers another avenue for tobacco control research and practice by demon-strating that purely textual analysis of tobacco industry documents can provide evidence of manipulation and deception.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisheruga
dc.rightspublic
dc.subjecttobacco documents
dc.subjectdraft analysis
dc.subjectcomputer-assisted text analysis
dc.subjectpragmatics
dc.subjectsemantics
dc.subjectauthorial intent
dc.subjectdeception
dc.subjectmanipulation
dc.subjecttobacco control
dc.subjectPhilip Morris
dc.subjectGeoff Bible
dc.titleManipulative language in corporate discourse
dc.title.alternativea case study of deception in a major tobacco industry speech
dc.typeThesis
dc.description.degreeMA
dc.description.departmentLinguistics
dc.description.majorLinguistics
dc.description.advisorDon Rubin
dc.description.committeeDon Rubin
dc.description.committeeLewis C. Howe
dc.description.committeeWilliam Kretzschmar, Jr.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record