This paper examines the role and place of hedging in central bank discourse in order to determine to what extent a focus on classical hedges can yield an adequate analysis of the phenomenon. The research hypothesis is that, given the multiple risks at stake, a broader, more inclusive approach to hedging is called for than that adopted by many scholars. The paper bringd evidence that, beyond the quantitative aspectsbetween 4.5% and 5.8% of the words in the corpus are classical hedging devicesit is important to consider the qualitative and discrusive dimensions of hedging.