Unveiling the eco-storytelling: multimodal layers of meaning in Greenpeace’s environmental videos
Abstract
This paper addresses eco-storytelling as the process of meaning-making in Greenpeace’s environmental videos, with a focus on semiotic and cognitive aspects within a multimodal framework. By combining insights from multimodal discourse analysis and cognitive semiotics, this study explores how Greenpeace’s videos construct environmental issues through the interplay of various modes across different layers of meaning. This study presents a semiotic space within Greenpeace’s videos, highlighting the interplay of signs at the core, involved in a situation and embedded in the worldview. This model allows differentiation of three layers of meaning within the videos: embodied, referential, and ideological. Eco-storytelling involves the strategic use of multimodal elements—visual and auditory modes, including verbal, nonverbal, and cinematic means. These elements construct narratives at embodied, referential, and ideological layers, aiming not only to inform about environmental issues but also to inspire viewers to engage in environmental stewardship and advocacy. The study examines the role of multimodal means in constructing each semiotic layer and investigates the process of conceptual integration based on Brandt’s theory of Mental Space Network. In this framework, embodied, referential, and ideological meanings interact through mental spaces to create a comprehensive narrative that underscores the urgency of environmental action. This research contributes to understanding the complex role of multimodal resources in eco-storytelling and highlights how Greenpeace’s videos foster environmental awareness.
Downloads
References
Barrett, L. F., & Bar, M. (2009). See it with feeling: affective predictions during object perception. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 364 (1521), 1325–1334.
Bateman, J., Wildfeuer, J., & Hiippala, T. (2017). Multimodality: Foundations, research and analysis – a problem-oriented introduction. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Biber, B. (2006). University language: A corpous-based study of spoken and written registers. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publication Company.
Bordwell, D. (1991). Making meaning: Inference and rhetoric in the interpretation of cinema. United States: Harvard University Press.
Bousé, D. (2000). Wildlife films. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Boykoff, M. T. (2008). Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of anthropogenic climate change. Climatic Change, 86(12), 111. https://doi.org/10.1386/jem_00003_1
Brandt, P. A. (2020) Cognitive semiotics. Signs, mind, and meaning. London: Bloomsbury.
Brandt, P.A. (2004). Spaces, domains, and meaning. Essays in cognitive semiotics. Berlin: Peter Lang.
Carvalho, A. (2007). Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: Re-reading news on climate change. Understanding of Science, 16(2), 223-243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662506066775
Cottle, S. (2000). TV news, lay voices and the visualisation of environmental risks. In S. Allan, B.Adam, & C. Carter (Eds.), Environmental risks and the media (pp. 29-44). London: Routledge.
Coulson, S., & Oakley, T. (2001). Blending basics. Cognitive Linguistics, 11, 3-4.
Cox, A. (2016). Music and embodied cognition: Listening, moving, feeling, and thinking. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Cox, R. (2013). Environmental communication and the public sphere. London: Sage.
Dijk, T. A., van. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.
Doyle, J. (2007). Picturing the clima(c)tic: Greenpeace and the representational politics of climate change communication. Science as Culture, 16(2), 129-150. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505430701368938
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.
Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (1996). Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. Goldberg (Ed.), Conceptual Structure, Discourse, and Language (pp. 113-131). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
Greenpeace. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/
Greimas, A. J. (1987). On Meaning. Selected writings on semiotic theory. (Theory and history of literature). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Heimann, K. S., Umiltà, M. A., Guerra, M., & Gallese, V. (2014). Moving mirrors: A high density EEG study investigating the effects of camera movements on motor cortex activation during action observation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 26(9), 2087–2101.
Hochachka, G. (2021). Finding shared meaning in the Anthropocene: engaging diverse perspectives on climate change. Sustainability Science, 17, 519–539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-00965-4
Husserl, E. (2012). Ideas. General introduction to pure phenomenology. London and New York: Routledge.
Konderak, P. (2019). Introduction: perspectives on studies of meaning-making. Filozofia i nauka, 7 (1), 5-12.
Konderak, P. (2021). Towards an integration of two aspects of semiosis – a cognitive semiotic perspective. Sign Systems Studies, 49(1/2), 132-165.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge: London.
Krysanova, T. (2022). Emergent meaning-making in multimodal discourse: A case for sadness in The Horse Whisperer. Cognition, Communication, Discourse, 24, 37-52. https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2022-24-03
Krysanova, T. (2024). Meaning-making in Trump’s anti-Biden political campaign commercials: Multimodal perspective. In R. Butler (Ed.), Political Discourse Analysis: Legitimisation Strategies in Crisis and Conflict (pp. 123–144). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Krysanova, T., & Shevchenko, I. (2021). Conceptual blending in multimodal construction of negative emotions in film. In A. Pawelec, A. Shaw, & G. Szpila (Eds.), Text-Image-Music: Crossing the borders. intermedial conversations on the poetics of verbal, visual and musical texts. In honour of prof. Elzbieta Chrzanowska-Kluczewska. Series: Text – Meaning – Context: Cracow studies in English language, literature and culture (pp. 357-371), Berlin: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/b18012
Lakoff, G. (2009). The political mind: A cognitive scientist's guide to your brain and its politics. London: Penguin Books.
Lotman, Y.M. (2001). Universe of the mind: A semiotic theory of culture. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Meyer, K., Coren, E., McCaffrey, M., & Slean, C. (2021). Transforming the stories we tell about climate change: from ‘issue’ to ‘action. Enviromental Research Letters, 16, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abcd5a
Moezzi, M., Janda, K. B., & Rotmann, S. (2017). Using stories, narratives, and storytelling in energy and climate change research. Energy Research & Social Science, 31, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.034
Molina, S., & Belmonde, I. (2016). The construction of meaning in multimodal discourse. A digital story as a case study. In M. Romano & M.D. Porto (Eds.), Exploring discourse strategies in social and cognitive interaction: Multimodal and cross-linguistic perspectives (pp.111-136). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Peverini, P. (2014). Environmental issues in unconventional social advertising: A semiotic perspective. Semiotica, 199, 219-246.
Portch, E., Havelka, J., Brown, C., & Giner-Sorolla, R. (2015). Using affective knowledge to generate and validate a set of emotion-related, action words. PeerJ. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1100
Scorolli, C., & Borghi, A. (2008). Language and embodiment. Anthropology and philosophy, 9(1‒2), 7‒23.
Shanahan, J., & McComas, K. (1999). Nature stories: Depictions of the environment and their effects. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Shevchenko, I.S. (2023). Scenarios of meaning-making in media discourse: cognitive and multimodal analysis). Scientific Bulletin of KSU. Series Germanic Studies and Intercultural Communication 1, 99-106. https://doi.org/10.32999/ksu2663-3426/2023-1-14 (in Ukrainian).
Шевченко, І.С. (2023). Сценарії смислотворення в медіадискурсі: когнітивний і мультимодальний аналіз. Науковий вісник Херсонського державного університету. Серія «Германістика та міжкультурна комунікація», 1, 99-106. https://doi.org/10.32999/ksu2663-3426/2023-1-14
Shreedhar, G., & Mourato, S. (2018). Do biodiversity conservation videos cause pro-environmental spillover effects? Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, 302. Retrieved from https://www.bioecon-network.org/pages/20th%202018/Mourato.pdf
Svoboda, M. (2011). Advertising climate change: A study of green ads, 2005-2010. Yale climate connections. Retrieved from https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2011/07/advertising-climate-change-a-study-of-green-ads-2005-%E2%80%93-2010/
Zhabotynska, S., & Brynko, A. (2022). Emotive lexicon of the political narrative: Ukraine and the West in Chinese media. Cognition, communication, discourse, 25, 89-118. https://doi.org/10.26565/2218-2926-2022-25-07
Zheng, S., Cui, J., Sun, C., Li, J., Li, B., & Guan, W. (2022). The effects of the type of information played in environmentally themed short videos on social media on people’s willingness to protect the environment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(15), 9520. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159520
Zlatev, J. (2008). The co-evolution of intersubjectivity and bodily mimesis. In J. Zlatev, T. P. Racine, Ch. Sinha, & E. Itkonen (Eds.), The shared mind: Perspectives of intersubjectivity (pp. 215-244). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Zlatev, J. (2009). The Semiotic hierarchy: Life, consciousness, signs and language. Cognitive Semiotics, 4, 169-200. https://doi.org/10.3726/81608_169
Zlatev, J., Steffensen, S.V., Harvey, M.I., & Kimmel, M. (2018). Introduction. Cognitive Semiotics, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/cogsem-2018-0006
Copyright (c) 2024 Tetiana Krysanova
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors, who publish with this journal, accept the following conditions:
The authors reserve the copyright of their work and transfer to the journal the right of the first publication of this work under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Non-Derivs License (CC BY-NC-ND), which allows other persons to freely distribute a published work with mandatory reference to the authors of the original work and the first publication of the work in this journal.
Authors have the right to enter into separate additional agreements for the non-exclusive dissemination of the work in the form in which it was published by this journal (for example, to post the work in the electronic institutions' repository or to publish as part of a monograph), provided that the link to the first publication of the work in this journal is given.
The journal policy allows and encourages the authors to place the manuscripts on the Internet (for example, in the institutions' repositories or on personal websites), both before the presentation of this manuscript to the editorial board and during review procedure, as it contributes to the creation of productive scientific discussion and positively affects the efficiency and dynamics of citing the published work (see The Effect of Open Access).
