As China’s technological strength forms competition with America, CSIS has published a series of China-related technological commentary articles. The study conducts a critical cognitive discourse analysis on these articles based on proximization theory. The study finds that among three major proximization strategies, spatial proximization strategy is dominant, followed by axiological and temporal proximization strategy. Through spatial proximization, CSIS identifies the Chinese side as the ODCs and the American side as the IDCs, highlighting that the Chinese side threatens or has already harmed America’s interests, mainly via its growing global influence and power as well as some “illegal” practices. In terms of temporal proximization, CSIS shows the continuous efforts of China in developing its technology, China’s benefits licitly and illicitly gained from America in the history, and the possible adverse situations that may be created by China. At the dimension of axiological proximization, CSIS draws a contrast between the America’s positive values and China’s negative values, highlighting the ideological conflicts between the two sides. By producing technological discourse, CSIS delivers the idea of “China threat” to suppress China’s development and maintain America’s leading technological position.

Yating Zhang. A Critical Cognitive Discourse Analysis of CSIS’s China-related Technological Discourse Based on Proximization Theory. Academic Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences (2024) Vol. 7, Issue 8: 129-135. https://doi.org/10.25236/AJHSS.2024.070821.

[1] Chen J. Role of think tanks in U.S. science and technology policy towards China: Based on the framework of discursive institutionalism [J]. Journal of Intelligence, 2024, http://kns.cnki.net/kcms/ detail/ 61. 1167.G3.20240614.1604.008.html.

[2] Xu D, Li X C. Comparison of Sino-U.S. scientific and technological power and U.S. public perception of China’s threat: Based on U.S. public opinion survey data analysis[J]. Journal of Intelligence, 2023, 42(01): 77-74+41.

[3] Xu G C. Comparison of European and American think tanks and enlightenment to the development of Chinese think tanks [J].Comparative Economic & Social Systems, 2010, (02): 77-83.

[4] Cap P. Proximization: The Pragmatics of Symbolic Distance Crossing[M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 2013

[5] Cap P. The Language of Fear: Communicating Threat in Public Discourse[M]. London: Macmillan. 2017 

[6] Li J M, Wu S Z. Trends in the application of emerging technologies in the American intelligence community and implications for China—Based on the analysis of CSIS reports[J]. Journal of Intelligence, 2021, 40(5): 31-41.