The term "ecolinguistics" gained prominence through the works of Michael Halliday, who in the 1990s underscored the necessity of applying linguistic analysis to environmental issues (Halliday, 1990). The field further evolved with contributions from scholars like Arran Stibbe, who emphasized the integration of ecological philosophy into linguistic analysis (Stibbe, 2015). The interdisciplinary nature of ecolinguistics has also been enriched by the works of researchers like Peter Mühlhäusler, who explored linguistic diversity's role in ecological understanding (Mühlhäusler, 1995). Naess's ecosophy, often summarized by the phrase "Self-realization for all beings". This approach challenges anthropocentric views and calls for a radical restructuring of human societies based on principles of diversity, ecological compatibility, and decentralization (Naess & Rothenberg, 1989). Anthropocentrism is a philosophy that emphasizes humankind as the central or most important element. Ecocentrism emphasizes the intrinsic value of all living things, including humans but also animals, plants, water, soil, etc. Norton and Hulme's (2019) analysis of climate change narratives in UK media indicates various stories that drive public discourse on climate change. The analysis emphasizes the diversity of climate change perspectives, as well as the shift in editorial focus toward a consensus on the need for technological solutions and adaptation measures, revealing the complex interplay between language, ideology, and environmental discourses. Ecolinguistic analysis has been applied to various discourses, including animals (Glenn, 2004; Goatly, 2006; Stibbe, 2012a), advertising (Hogben, 2008; Slater, 2007), the concept of ‘nature’ (Hansen, 2006; Knight, 2010), natural resources (Kurz, Donaghue, & Rapley, 2005; Meisner, 2007), economics (Halliday, 2001; Stibbe, 2005), ecotourism (Milstein, 2008, 2011), environmentalism (Alexander, 2010; Benton & Short, 1999; Harre´, Brockmeier, & Muhlhausler, 1999), climate change (Doulton & Brown, 2009; Ihlen, 2009), energy (Russell et al., 2011), and sustainability (Kowalski, 2013). Ecolinguistic studies differ in complexity, scope, depth of investigation, and purpose.