is more beneficial than harmful, while in Frisk’s text the invasion is constructed as violent, illegal and highly destructive. Lukin further argues that war and violence are not isolated lexical items but they create an ‘existential fabric’, which, once constituted, is capable of spontaneously producing its own movements without external impulsion. Chapter 7 transcends the limitations of the context-independent large-scale analysis in Chapter 4 and the detailed analysis of single texts-in-context in Chapters 5 and 6, and conducts a complex inter-rank and cross-metafunctional analysis of war and violence based on a larger corpus of ABC TV news reports on the Iraq invasion. The multidimensional analysis corroborates the findings in the previous two chapters that war is insulated from its human agents and its terrible destructiveness. It is this semantic insulation, Lukin argues, that permits the construal of a beneficial war; the consistent cross-stratal/metafunctional insulation, forming a configurative rapport, testifies to the ‘existential fabric’ of war: each way of construing war has been oriented, unconsciously, to the legitimation of war and adds to its semiotic energy. Chapter 8 explores the possibility of tearing down such existential fabric. The possibility, suggests Lukin, may lie in exploring the ambiguities and contradictions in our symbolic arrangements and accordingly creating counter-semiotic energy. Lukin’s work is a remarkable attempt at pushing back the frontiers of linguists, especially the methodological difficulties in grasping and holding ideology. Her methodology is doubtlessly innovative and the analytical framework robust and of clear use. Though many critical discourse analysts have followed Norman Fairclough in drawing extensively on Halliday’s functional linguistics, they, unlike Lukin, tend to merely use his metalinguistic terminology and pass over his profound ideas on the relationship between language and ideology. Lukin owes a great debt to Halliday for his portrait of language as both panoptic and finely textured, but she successfully carries forward his profound insights into ideology, not only by engaging them in dialogue with other disciplines such as sociology to make them more explanatory but also by using them to contribute to social issues. Her book will be an inspiring read to sociologists, discourse analysts, functional linguists and other linguistic theorists.

中文翻译：

---

书评：Elie Friedman和Dalia Gavriely-Nuri，以色列话语和西岸正常化与疏远的辩证法

利大于弊，而在弗里斯克（Frisk）的著作中，入侵被构造为暴力，非法和高度破坏性的。卢金进一步指出，战争和暴力不是孤立的词汇，而是它们创造了一种“存在的结构”，这种结构一旦构成，就能够自发地产生自己的运动而不会受到外界的冲动。第7章超越了第4章中与上下文无关的大规模分析以及第5和6章中对单个上下文中文本的详细分析的限制，并对战争与暴力进行了复杂的等级间和跨元功能分析根据美国广播公司（ABC）电视台有关伊拉克入侵的大型新闻报道。多维分析证实了前两章中的发现，即战争与人为因素及其可怕的破坏性是隔离的。卢金认为，正是这种语义上的隔离才允许进行一场有益的战争。始终如一的跨层/元功能隔离，形成了配置性的融洽关系，证明了战争的“存在结构”：每种解释战争的方式都在不知不觉中面向战争的合法性，并增加了其符号能量。第8章探讨了拆除这种存在结构的可能性。卢金认为，这种可能性可能在于探索我们的象征性安排中的模棱两可和矛盾之处，从而创造出反犹太主义的能量。卢金（Lukin）的工作是一次杰出的尝试，旨在推翻语言学家的前沿领域，尤其是在掌握和掌握意识形态方面的方法论难题。她的方法无疑是创新的，并且分析框架健壮且使用明确。尽管许多批评性话语分析家都跟随诺曼·费尔克洛夫（Norman Fairclough）广泛借鉴了Halliday的功能语言学，但与卢金不同，他们倾向于只使用他的语言学术语，而忽略了他关于语言和意识形态之间关系的深刻思想。卢金（Lukin）对哈里代伊（Halliday）的语言描述既具有全景感又具有精细的质感而负有极大的责任，但她成功地发扬了他对意识形态的深刻见解，不仅使他们与社会学等其他学科进行对话，使它们更具解释性，而且通过使用它们为社会问题做贡献。她的书将给社会学家，话语分析家，功能语言学家和其他语言理论家以启发性的读物。