Revisiting Greenspeak

  • Peter MühlhäuslerEmail author
Part of the Theory and History in the Human and Social Sciences book series (THHSS)


The book Greenspeak (1998) sought to establish the foundations of a critical discourse concerned with the ways the environmental crisis has been constructed by a range of environmental discourses, both by environmentalists and non-environmentalist and anti-environmentalist speakers, as distinct from an environmental advocacy document. The distinction made between scientific and moral discourses and meta-discourses has become increasingly blurred in recent times, a process helped by the emergence of social media as a powerful source of shaping human perceptions and actions. Revisiting Greenspeak I shall argue that this proliferation of ideological rather than empirically grounded green discourses has greatly reduced their efficacy.


Greenspeak Environmental discourse Ecolinguistics 


  1. Cartledge, B. (1992). Monitoring the environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Fill, A., & Mühlhäusler, P. (Eds.). (2001). The ecolinguistics reader: Language, ecology and environment. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  3. Göthesson, L.-A. (1997). Plants of the Pitcairn Islands. Sydney: Centre for South Pacific Studies.Google Scholar
  4. Harré, R. (1986). Varieties of realism: A rationale for the natural sciences. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Harré, R., Brockmeier, J., & Mühlhäusler, P. (1998). Greenspeak: A study of environmental discourse. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  6. Harris, R. (1981). The language myth. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  7. Lamb, R., & Harré, R. (1983). The Encyclopedia of psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Mühlhäusler, P. (2003). Language of environment-environment of language. London: Battlebridge.Google Scholar
  9. Mühlhäusler, P. (2000). Humboldt, Whorf and the roots of ecolinguistics. In M. Pütz & M. H. Verspoor (Eds.) Explorations in linguistic relativity (pp. 89–100). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  10. Mühlhäusler, P. (1996). Linguistic adaptation to changed environmental conditions: Some lessons from the past. In A. Fill (Ed.) Sprachökologie und Ökolinguistik (pp. 105–130). Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
  11. Mühlhäusler, P., & Peace, A. (2006). Environmental discourses. Annual Review of Anthropology, 35(1), 457–479.Google Scholar
  12. Mühlhäusler, P., & Harré, R. (1990). Pronouns and people: The linguistic construction of social and personal identity. In Language and society (Vol. 15, pp. viii & 303). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Pavlidou, T.-S. (2014). Constructing collectivity: ‘We’ across languages and contexts. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Sapir, E. (1912). Language and environment. American Anthropologist 14, 226–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought and reality. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
  16. Wohlleben, P. (2016). The hidden life of trees. London: William Collins.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Supernumerary FellowLinacre CollegeOxfordUK
  2. 2.University of AdelaideAdelaideAustralia

Personalised recommendations