| Summary: | The main purpose of this thesis is to qualitatively study how the argumentation appears in the museum debate from 2016 in the Swedish newspapers ”Svenska Dagbladet”, ”Dagens Nyheter”, ”Expressen” and ”Aftonbladet’” from a rhetorical perspective. Research was performed on two to three mounths worth of debate articles from 2016. The thesis has been analysed through both classic rhetorical analysis and from Norman Fairclough’s three- dimensional model in order to answer the questions as to how the argumentation was done in order to acutate the writers positions, which discources that was managing in the debate and how the writers treats the concepts ”identity policy” and ”standard criticism”. Based on the articles that the thesis analysed, I were able to draw certain conclusions. First, the debate concists of writers who argument from rhetorical style figures to persuade one another. Writers identify with each other alternatively exclude from each other, depending on the discourse they are belonging to. And the view of the museum plays a major role in debate, that contributes to the discourse belonging.
|
|---|
