1887
Volume 15, Issue 6
  • ISSN 1569-2159
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9862
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The article investigates the construction of the “self” and the “other” in George W. Bush’s political discourse before and after the Iraq war. Van Dijk’s ideological square theory is used to examine the group polarization of Us versus Them dichotomy. Halliday’s systemic functional grammar is utilised to analyse the speeches and to designate the strategies that Bush utilises to differentiate between the protagonist (America) and the antagonist (Iraq). Furthermore, the diachrony in Bush’s discourse regarding Iraq’s WMDs and Saddam Hussein is also examined. The results of the study indicated that before the invasion, Iraq was an active entity in upgrading its WMDs’ program and supporting terrorism. However, after the invasion, Iraq is now perceived as a beacon of hope in the Middle East, thus, justifying America’s illegitimate act of invading Iraq.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.15.6.03abi
2017-01-31
2019-08-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baker, Paul , and Ellece, Sibonile
    2011Key Terms in Discourse Analysis. USA: Continuum International Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cap, Piotr
    2015 “Follow-ups in the US anti-terrorist discourse: Proposal for a macro-discursive approach to monologic follow-up sequences.” Discourse & Society, in print. doi: 10.1177/0957926515581155
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926515581155 [Google Scholar]
  3. Carter, Ralph
    1998 “Congress and Post-Cold War U.S. Foreign Policy”. InAfter the End: Making U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War World, ed. by Scott, J. M , 108–137. Durham: Duke University Press. doi: 10.1215/9780822382157‑005
    https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822382157-005 [Google Scholar]
  4. Chilton, Paul
    2004Analysing political discourse: theory and practice. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. ‘Dicator’
    ‘Dicator’ 2006Oxford Wordpower. UK: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Engel, Dominik
    2004 Modelling Self and Other: A Hybrid Approach to the Analysis of Images of Self and Other in the Radio Addresses Delivered by the American President Before and After 9/11. Master thesis: University of Salzburg.
  7. Fairclough, Norman
    1989Language and Power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2001Language and Power, 2nd edition. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Graham, Phil ., Keenan, Thomas ., and Dowd, Anne-Maree
    2004 “A call to arms at the end of history: A discourse-historical analysis of George W. Bush’s declaration of war on terror.” Discourse & Society15(2): 199–221. doi: 10.1177/0957926504041017
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926504041017 [Google Scholar]
  10. Halliday, Michael ., and Christian Matthiessen
    2004An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edition. London: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hodge, Robert Ian V. , and Kress Gunther R.
    1993Language as ideology. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kandil, Magdi A.
    2009 The Israeli-Palestinian conflict in American, Arab, and British media: Corpus-based critical discourse analysis. Master thesis: Georgia State University.
  13. Kull, Steven , Clay Ramsay ., Stefan Subias ., and Evan Lewis
    2004 US public beliefs on Iraq and the presidential election. Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) and Knowledge Networks. Available atwww.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Iraq/IraqReport4_22_04.pdf (Accessed: January 6 2012).
  14. Lazar, Annita ., and Michelle M. Lazar
    2004 “The discourse of the new world order: ‘Out-casting’ the double face of threat.” Discourse & Society15(2): 223–242. doi: 10.1177/0957926504041018
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926504041018 [Google Scholar]
  15. Mazid, Bahaa-eddin
    2007 “Presuppositions and strategic functions in Bush’s 20/9/2001 speech: A critical discourse analysis.” Journal of Language and Politics6(3): 351–375. doi: 10.1075/jlp.6.3.05maz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.6.3.05maz [Google Scholar]
  16. Oddo, John
    2011 “War legitimation discourse: Representing ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ in four US presidential addresses.” Discourse & Society22(3): 287–314. doi: 10.1177/0957926510395442
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926510395442 [Google Scholar]
  17. ‘Regime’
    ‘Regime’ 2006 Oxford Wordpower. UK: Oxford University Press.
  18. Simpson, Paul , and Andrea Mayr
    2009Language and Power: A Resource Book for Students. UK: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Sowińska, Agnieszka
    2013 “A critical discourse approach to the analysis of values in political discourse: The example of freedom in President Bush’s State of the Union addresses (2001–2008).” Discourse & Society24(6): 792–809. doi: 10.1177/0957926513486214
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513486214 [Google Scholar]
  20. Thompson, Geoff
    2004Introducing functional grammar. UK: Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Van Dijk, Teun A.
    1998 “Opinions and ideologies in the Press.” InApproaches to Media Discourse, ed. by Allan, Bell ., and P. Garrett , 21–63. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2000 “Widening information gaps and policies of prevention.” InDigital democracy: Issues of theory and practice, ed. by Hacker, Kenneth L. , and Teun A., Van Dijk , 166–183. London: Sage Publications. doi: 10.4135/9781446218891.n10
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446218891.n10 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2006 “Politics, ideology, and discourse.” InEncyclopedia of language and linguistics, ed. by Keith, Brown , 728–740. UK: Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/00722‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00722-7 [Google Scholar]
  24. Van Leeuwen, Theo
    1993 “Genre and field in critical discourse analysis: a synopsis.” Discourse and Society4(2): 193–223. doi: 10.1177/0957926593004002004
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002004 [Google Scholar]
  25. Weintraub, Megan
    2007 “The formative power of wartime rhetoric: A critical discursive analysis of presidential speeches.” Gnovis Journal8(1): 48–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Williams, Michael
    2011The good war: NATO and the liberal conscience in Afghanistan. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230348660
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230348660 [Google Scholar]
  27. Wodak, Ruth
    2001 “The Discourse-Historical Approach.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Wodak, Ruth , and Michael Meyer , 63–94. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Wodak, Ruth , and Michael Meyer
    2001 “What CDA is about – a summary of its history, important concepts and its developments. In Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Wodak, Ruth , and Michael Meyer , 1–13. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.15.6.03abi
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlp.15.6.03abi
Loading

Data & Media 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