1887
image of The pen is mightier than the sword
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

On October 9, 2012 Malala Yousafzai, a Pakistani schoolgirl, was severely wounded by a Taliban assassin’s bullet. This was the culmination of a history of conflict in the Swat valley region of north-western Pakistan. The historical, ethnic, political and religious reasons for this conflict are manifold. After several surgeries in Pakistan and Great Britain, Malala Yousafzai miraculously recovered from her serious injuries and was even able to give a speech at the United Nations Youth Assembly on her 16th birthday on July 12, .

In this paper, Malala Yousafzai’s speech will be analysed in some detail regarding her main arguments and verbal presentation strategies. Furthermore, I will focus on the way Malala Yousafzai deals with both the verbal and non-verbal aggression of the Taliban. I would also like to show how determined she is to argue against the Taliban’s escalation of the conflict without letting herself getting entangled in a spiral of verbal violence.

The theoretical framework for this analysis and the critical evaluation of the speech will be the concept of “strategic maneuvering” as developed by van Eemeren ( ) within his framework of Pragma-Dialectics. This concept has frequently been applied to the analysis of political discourse (see e.g. ).

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00034.kie
2020-04-02
2020-09-30
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. 1.   Malala Yousafzai: Speech at the United Nations Youth Assembly (12.72013) [https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/12/malala-yousafzai-united-nations-education-speech-text; last seen onJanuary 8, 2020; my own text is based on the transcription of the British newspaper The Guardian, which has been modified and corrected according to the video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QRh_30C8l6Y; length of the video (within the ABC News Special Report): 19:35; length of Malala Yousafzai’s speech: 00:40 – 17:36, that is, 17 minutes; last seen onJanuary 8, 2020)]
  2. 2.   Yousafzai, Malala and Lamb, Christina (2013): Ich bin Malala. München: Droemer (Engl. Original: M. Yousafzai and Chr. Lamb (2013): I am Malala. New York: Little, Brown and Company).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 3.   Yousafzai, Malala and McCormick, Patricia (2014): I am Malala. Teen Edition Retold by Malala for Her Own Generation. London: Indigo.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 4.   Yousafzai, Malala (2017): Malala’s Magic Pencil. London: Puffin Books, Penguin/Random House.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Aristotle
    Aristotle 2006On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Das, Runa
    2017 “He Named Me Malala: Connecting the Historical, the Local, and the Global.” Social Identities. Journal for the Study of Race, Nation and Culture. 23(2): 195–211. 10.1080/13504630.2016.1186534
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.2016.1186534 [Google Scholar]
  7. Eemeren, Frans H. van
    2010Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2018Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑95381‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6 [Google Scholar]
  9. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, and Bert Meuffels
    2009Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑2614‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9 [Google Scholar]
  10. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij, and Jean H. M. Wagemans
    2014Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst
    1984Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht: Foris. 10.1515/9783110846089
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846089 [Google Scholar]
  12. 1992Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. 2004A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Amsterdam: SicSat.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Peter Houtlosser
    2002 “Strategic Manoeuvring with the Burden of Proof.” InAdvances in Pragma-Dialectics, edited byFrans H. van Eemeren, 13–28. Amsterdam: SicSat.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. 2006 “Strategic Manoeuvring with the Burden of Proof.” Argumentation20(4): 381–392.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser, and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
    2007Argumentative Indicators in Discourse. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑6244‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6244-5 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fahnestock, Jean
    2009 “Quid pro nobis. Rhetorical Stylistics for Argument Analysis.” InExamining Argumentation in Context, edited byFrans H. van Eemeren, 191-220. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.1.12fah
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.1.12fah [Google Scholar]
  18. Fairclough, Isabela, and Norman Fairclough
    2012Political Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Garssen, Bart
    1997Argumentatieschema’s in pragma-dialectisch perspectief. Amsterdam: IFOTT.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Gilligan, Carol
    1985Die andere Stimme. München: Piper.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Habermas, Jürgen
    1981Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Vol.1. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
    1997 “A Multilevel Approach in the Study of Talk in Interaction.” Pragmatics7(1): 1–20. 10.1075/prag.7.1.01ker
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.7.1.01ker [Google Scholar]
  23. Kienpointner, Manfred
    1986 “Topische Sequenzen in argumentativen Dialogen.” Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik14(3): 321–355. 10.1515/zfgl.1986.14.3.321
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1986.14.3.321 [Google Scholar]
  24. 1992Alltagslogik. Stuttgart: Frommann/Holzboog.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 2013 “Strategic Maneuveringg in the Political Rhetoric of Barack Obama.” Journal of Language and Politics12(3): 357–377. 10.1075/jlp.12.3.03kie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.12.3.03kie [Google Scholar]
  26. 2017 “Reason and Passion in Political Rhetoric: The Case of Louise Michel’s (1830–1905) Revolutionary Discourse.” InArgumentation across Communities of Practice: Multi-disciplinary Perspectives, edited byCornelia Ilie and Giuliana Garzone, 99–125. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.10.06kie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.10.06kie [Google Scholar]
  27. Kienpointner, Manfred, and Anna Orlandini
    2005 “La doxa de la justice à travers les langues et les époques.” Revue Internationale des droits de l’antiquité52: 181–206.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kienpointner, Manfred, and Maria Stopfner
    2017 “Ideologies and (Im)politeness.” InThe Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited byCulpeper, Jonathan, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 61–87. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/978‑1‑137‑37508‑7_4
    https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_4 [Google Scholar]
  29. Kohlberg, Lawrence
    1974Zur kognitiven Entwicklung des Kindes. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Khoja-Moolji, Shenila
    2018 “Why is Malala such a Polarising Figure in Pakistan.” April1 2018 https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/malala-polarising-figure-pakistan-180401054631496.html
  31. Lakoff, George
    2006Whose Freedom? The Battle over America’s Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Larivée, Serge, Carole Sénéchal and Geneviève Chénard
    2013 “Les côtés ténébreux de Mère Teresa.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses42(3): 319–345. 10.1177/0008429812469894
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0008429812469894 [Google Scholar]
  33. Mazza, Viviana
    2013Die Geschichte von Malala. München: dtv.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Montefiore, Simon Sebag
    2015Speeches that Changed the World. London: Quercus.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Olesen, Thomas
    2016 “Malala and the Politics of Global Iconicity.” The British Journal of Sociology67(2): 307–327. 10.1111/1468‑4446.12195
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12195 [Google Scholar]
  36. Perelman, Chaim, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca
    1983Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Piaget, Jean, and Bärbel Inhelder
    1980Die Psychologie des Kindes. Stuttgart: Klett.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Walton, Douglas N., Chris Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno
    2008Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00034.kie
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error