Title: Mindsets and irreconcilable positions: A linguistic representation of Corona 19 social fractures


Vol. 11(3), 2023, pp. 207-223.



Author: Cristina Silvia Vâlcea

About the author: Cristina Silvia Vâlcea has taken a special interest in researching teaching methods and she is particularly interested in adjusting teaching English methods to students’ needs and abilities. Secondly, she has been teaching lexical structures as she construes vocabulary as a facilitator to language learning. She is equally engrossed in teaching grammar as it organizes language and gives students a vision of the language. Thirdly, she has long been embroiled in turning ESP an accessible area for the professionals who need to further their technical knowledge in top industries where English has become the preponderant communication language. Last but not least, she has run studies in the social embodiment of genders and has taken a deep insight into the role of ideology in the rendering of social roles.






Citation (APA style): Vâlcea, C. S. (2023). Mindsets and irreconcilable positions: A linguistic representation of Corona 19 social fractures. Studies in Linguistics, Culture, and FLT, 11(3), 207-223.


Abstract: Important subjects such as Flat Earth, global warming, Covid 19, Ukrainian war have given out the existence of two major factions on antagonistic stances, the pros and the cons, that aggressively deny their adversaries’ opinions on any of the aforementioned topics. One side’s arguments formed by heavy reliance on previous beliefs that stand in high credibility (Nilsson 2014, 16) to that group are denied by the other side’s that builds, at their turn, their current beliefs on others their group is usually fond of. This article aims at inventorying the discursive practices which each side makes use of firstly in building their own arguments for their believers and secondly in dismantling the discourse of the opponents. In building their own arguments, the focus of the analysis will be laid on the persuasive strategies used to convince those that already have a serious grounding in either of the sides. In dismantling the others’, special attention will be paid to address formulas and any other derogatory means used for the credibilisation of one’s stand and the discreditation of the others’. 

Key words: mindsets, beliefs, persuasive strategies, discreditation, polarisation.



  1. Bacchi, C., & Bonham, J. (2014). Reclaiming discursive practices as an analytic focus: Political implications. Foucault Studies, 179–192.
  2. Bernstein, M. J. (2015). Ingroups and Outgroups. In The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Nationalism (pp. 1–3). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
  3. Connors, M. H., & Halligan, P. W. (2015). A cognitive account of belief: A tentative road map. Frontiers in Psychology, 5.
  4. Douglas, K. M., & Sutton, R. M. (2023). What Are Conspiracy Theories? A Definitional Approach to Their Correlates, Consequences, and Communication. Annual Review of Psychology, 74(1), 271–298.
  5. Durach, F., & Volintiru, C. (2022). Disinformation, societal resilience and Covid 19. In Report of Aspen Institute Romania (p. 10). Aspen Institute.
  6. Fiske, S., & Dupree, C. (2015). Cognitive Processes Involved in Stereotyping. In R. A. Scott & S. M. Kosslyn (Eds.), Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (pp. 1–12). Wiley & Sons.
  7. Fiske, S. T. (2010). Envy Up, Scorn Down: How Comparison Divides Us. The American Psychologist, 65(8).
  8. Foucault, M. (1972). The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. Pantheon Book.
  9. Frenken, M., & Imhoff, R. (2021). A Uniform Conspiracy Mindset or Differentiated Reactions to Specific Conspiracy Beliefs? Evidence From Latent Profile Analyses. International Review of Social Psychology, 34, 1–15.
  10. Frenken, M., & Imhoff, R. (2023). Don’t trust anybody: Conspiracy mentality and the detection of facial trustworthiness cues. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 37(2), 256–265.
  11. Fürsich, E. (2010). Media and the representation of Others. International Social Science Journal, 61(199), 113–130.
  12. Hall, S. (1997). The Work of Representation. In Representation: Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices (pp. 13–74). The Open University.
  13. Hellinger, D. C. (2019). Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories in the Age of Trump.
  14. Korteling, J. E. (H.), & Toet, A. (2022). Cognitive Biases. In S. Della Sala (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Behavioral Neuroscience (2nd ed., pp. 610–619). Elsevier.
  15. Kristeva, J. (1982). Powers of Horror. Columbia University Press.
  16. Nilsson, N. (2014). Understanding beliefs. MIT Press.
  17. Pettigrew, T. F. (2005). Ethnocentrism. In K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Social Measurement (pp. 827–831). Elsevier.
  18. Sutton, R., & Douglas, K. (2005). Justice for all, or just for me? More evidence of the importance of the self-other distinction in just-world beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 637–645.
  19. Whorf, L. B. (1956). Language, Thought and Reality. Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
  20. Wood, M., Douglas, K., & Sutton, R. (2012). Dead and Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3(6), 767–773.
  21. Zafiu, R. (2021, September 30). Crocobauri. Dilema Veche.