Scholarlink

<p>This study employs a mixed-methods, corpus-based approach to analyze the complex linguistic and discursive dynamics surrounding a series of bomb threats in a Philippine University between November 2024 and November 2025. A specialized, multilingual corpus of 15,782 words was compiled from official institutional statements, anonymous perpetrator messages, and community social media reactions. Quantitative analysis, including normalized frequency distributions, collocation analysis, and statistical significance testing (Chi-square), reveals distinct linguistic patterns across these three discourse domains. These patterns are interpreted through qualitative methods, including Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), pragmatic analysis of speech acts, and multimodal analysis. The findings demonstrate that the word “bomb” functioned as a contested linguistic symbol with a tripartite meaning. The institution deployed a discourse of legalistic deterrence and administrative normalization . Perpetrators weaponized the term as a tool for political provocation, explicitly linking it to the Marcos family and accusations of institutional complicity. The community’s response, tracked diachronically, evolved from acute trauma and fear to weary resignation and cynical dismissal. This paper triangulates quantitative and qualitative data to deconstruct the competing narratives, offering a robust model for analyzing crisis communication in a politically charged, digital-first environment.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Deconstructing the “Bomb”: Legalistic Deterrence, Political Provocation, and Community Sentiment in Campus Crisis Messaging

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月19日

查看全文
  • Leonardo Tejano

摘要

This study employs a mixed-methods, corpus-based approach to analyze the complex linguistic and discursive dynamics surrounding a series of bomb threats in a Philippine University between November 2024 and November 2025. A specialized, multilingual corpus of 15,782 words was compiled from official institutional statements, anonymous perpetrator messages, and community social media reactions. Quantitative analysis, including normalized frequency distributions, collocation analysis, and statistical significance testing (Chi-square), reveals distinct linguistic patterns across these three discourse domains. These patterns are interpreted through qualitative methods, including Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), pragmatic analysis of speech acts, and multimodal analysis. The findings demonstrate that the word “bomb” functioned as a contested linguistic symbol with a tripartite meaning. The institution deployed a discourse of legalistic deterrence and administrative normalization . Perpetrators weaponized the term as a tool for political provocation, explicitly linking it to the Marcos family and accusations of institutional complicity. The community’s response, tracked diachronically, evolved from acute trauma and fear to weary resignation and cynical dismissal. This paper triangulates quantitative and qualitative data to deconstruct the competing narratives, offering a robust model for analyzing crisis communication in a politically charged, digital-first environment.