Mariia P. Lozytska2025-12-102025-12-102025-12-023041-217X (print)3041-2188 (online)https://ir.duan.edu.ua/handle/123456789/6434This paper addresses the topic of gender representation in armed conflicts and investigates how masculinity and femininity are linguistically constructed and represented under exceptional circumstances. The object of the study is to examine how gender is portrayed in war-related German-language journalistic discourse, with particular attention to lexical units, metaphorical expressions, and argumentative structures. The research draws on linguistic discourse analysis, which serves not only as a methodological tool but also as a theoretical and interpretive framework. A specialized corpus was compiled for the analysis, consisting of 64 journalistic articles (totaling approximately 241,000 tokens) published between January 2022 and April 2024 in the German newspapers Der Spiegel and Taz. These articles deal with the discourse surrounding the Russian military aggression in Ukraine. The corpus was subjected to both quantitative and qualitative analysis in order to gain deeper insight into the language used to construct gendered narratives. The findings demonstrate that both male and female figures are linguistically represented in the discourse, though in distinct ways. Women are frequently associated with semantic fields such as “vulnerability” and “resistance”, particularly in the context of fighting for their rights. The lemma _Opfer_ (victim) is predominantly used in reference to women, although it does occasionally appear in relation to male subjects. In contrast, masculinity is often constructed through associations with military service and heroic acts, which are framed as spheres traditionally dominated by men. This framing is reinforced through frequent collocations involving the lexemes kämpfen (to fight) and Mann/Männer (man/men). Meanwhile, female figures are more commonly mentioned in contexts involving flight, caregiving, or emotional and logistical support. The metaphor analysis revealed five major metaphorical domains: hero metaphors, protector metaphors, victim metaphors, combat metaphors, and additional metaphorical constructs. Men are predominantly associated with metaphors emphasizing heroism, protection, and combat, reinforcing traditional masculine roles in wartime narratives. In contrast, women are more frequently linked to victim metaphors, highlighting their perceived vulnerability and suffering. In terms of argumentative structures, the discourse often reproduces traditional gender roles. Men are typically portrayed as active persons, fighters, and national heroes, with these representations supported by linguistic patterns and established cultural narratives. These portrayals are legitimized through references to historical traditions, moral duties, and illustrative examples. Women, by contrast, are frequently depicted as multifunctional contributors to the war effort—engaged in a variety of supportive roles, often behind the front lines. This framing positions them as flexible, adaptable, and indispensable, but still secondary to the male figure as combatant and hero. The overall findings suggest that under conditions of social crisis and armed conflicts societies tend to revert to conventional gender norms. The persistence of gender stereotypes in journalistic representations appears to serve several social functions: they facilitate rapid cognitive processing, help individuals identify with collective roles, and contribute to social cohesion by reinforcing familiar cultural patterns. Moreover, these stereotypes offer narrative and moral orientation, enabling readers to interpret complex and chaotic events through established frameworks of meaning.demasculinityfemininityjournalistic war discoursediscourse analysismetaphorargumentationмаскулінністьфемінністьвоєнний публіцистичний дискурслінгвістичний дискурс-аналізметафорааргументаціяArticle