Construction of China’s National Identity in An Australian Travel Brochure ─ A Critical Discourse Analysis Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As promotional advertising discourses, travel brochures are the direct products of travel institutions’ ideology, as well as a major medium for addressees’ perceiving tourist sites. In cross-cultural context, the travel brochure of China produced by Australian Helen Wang travel agency constructed a specific national identity catering for tourists’ seeking novelty. From a Critical Discourse Analysis perspective, Systemic Functional Grammar is effective in interrogating the institutional ideology behind this discourse. Keywords: travel brochure; ideology, Critical Discourse Analysis, Systemic Functional Grammar Resume: En tant que discours de publicite de promotion, les brochures de voyage sont les produits directs de l’ideologie des institutions de voyage, et egalement un media majoritaire pour le porte-parole des sites touristiques. Dans un contexte interculturel, la brochure du voyage de la Chine produite par l’agence australien de voyage Helen WANG a etablit une identite particuliere nationale en lancant des nouveautes de decouverte pour les touristes. A travers une analyse de la perspective dans un discours critique, la grammaire fonctionnelle et systematique est effective dans l’enquete de l’ideologie institutionnelle derriere ce discours. Mots-cles: brochure de voyage, l’ideologie, discours critique, la grammaire fonctionnelle et systematique
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".