Volume 18, Issue 5
  • ISSN 1569-2159
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9862
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper analyzes how political aspirations and convictions during Taiwan’s authoritarian period (from the 1940s to 1996) are expressed through first-person plural pronouns. Combining both corpus-assisted method and discourse historical analysis (DHA, Wodak et al. 1999), we compared the speeches delivered by the presidents – Chiang Kai-shek (CKS, 1955–1975), Chiang Ching-kuo (CCK, 1978–1988), and Lee Teng-hui (LTH, 1989–1996) – from the one-party domination era to the time of the direct presidential elections in 1996. Moreover, by locating lexical items in the co-texts and checking the collocates, we have tried to find referents of against changing socio-political contexts. The meaning of has changed from representing Chinese compatriots on the Chinese mainland and the revolutionary militia in CKS’s speeches to an over-inclusion and more hearer-dominant (HD) in CCK’s speeches. A “wandering ” was found in LTH’s speeches with which a well-defined national collectivity was difficult to identify in the late 1980s.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Anthony, Lawrence
    2014 “AntConc (Windows, Macintosh OS X, and Linux). Build 3.4.3.” DownloadedAugust 10, 2014. www.laurenceanthony.net/software.html
  2. Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid Khosravinik, Michał Krzyżanowski, Tony McEnery, and Ruth Wodak
    2008 “A Useful Methodological Synergy? Combining Critical Discourse Analysis and Corpus Linguistics to Examine Discourse of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press.” Discourse & Society19 (3): 273–306. 10.1177/0957926508088962
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962 [Google Scholar]
  3. BBC News
    BBC News. n.d. “Taiwan Profile – Timeline.” AccessedDecember 6, 2018. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-16178545
  4. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
    1987Politeness. Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bull, Peter, and Anita Fetzer
    2006 “Who Are We and Who Are You? The Strategic Use of Forms of Address in Political Interviews.” Text and Talk26 (1): 3–37. 10.1515/TEXT.2006.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.002 [Google Scholar]
  6. Cap, Pitor
    2010Legitimization in Political Discourse: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective on the Modern US War Rhetoric, 2nd revised edition. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Chang, Hui-ching, and Richard Holt
    2011 “Naming China: Taiwan’s National Day Speeches as Identity Politics.” Journal of Language and Politics10 (3): 396–415. 10.1075/jlp.10.3.05cha
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.10.3.05cha [Google Scholar]
  8. 2015Language, Politics and Identity in Taiwan: Naming China. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Chang, Mao-kuei
    2003 “On the Origin and Transformation of Taiwanese National Identities.” InReligion and the Formation of Taiwanese Identities, edited byPaul Katz and Murray Rubenstein, 23–58. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9781403981738_2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781403981738_2 [Google Scholar]
  10. De Cock, Barbara
    2011 “Why We Can Be You: The Use of 1st Person Plural Forms with Hearer Reference in English and Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics43 (11): 2762–2775. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.009 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fairclough, Norman
    1989Language and Power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fell, Dafydd
    2017 “When Did Martial Law Start and End?” Taiwan Sentinel. AccessedDecember 7, 2018. https://sentinel.tw/martial-law-start-end/
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fetzer, Anita, and Peter Bull
    2008 “Well, I Answer It by Simply Inviting You to Look at the Evidence.” Journal of Language and Politics7 (2): 271–289. 10.1075/jlp.7.2.05fet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.7.2.05fet [Google Scholar]
  14. Huang, Chu-Ren, and Kathleen Ahrens
    2008Taiwan Presidential Corpus. Taipei: Academia Sinica.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Krzyżanowski, Michał
    2010The Discursive Construction of European Identities: A Multi-level Approach to Discourse and Identity in the Transforming European Union. Berlin: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Lu, Louis W.-L., and Kathleen Ahrens
    2008 “Ideological Influence on BUILDING Metaphors in Taiwanese Presidential Speeches.” Discourse & Society19 (3): 383–408. 10.1177/0957926508088966
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088966 [Google Scholar]
  17. Maitland, Karen, and John Wilson
    1987 “Pronominal Selection and Ideological Conflict.” Journal of Pragmatics11 (4): 495–512. 10.1016/0378‑2166(87)90092‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90092-0 [Google Scholar]
  18. Mûhlhäusler, Peter, and Rom Harré
    1990Pronouns and People: The Linguistic Construction of Social and Personal Identity. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Myers, Ramon, and Hsiao-ting Lin
    2008 “Starting Anew on Taiwan.” The Hoover Digest: Research and Opinion on Public Policy 2008 (2). AccessedAugust 23, 2017. www.hoover.org/research/starting-anew-taiwan
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Obeng, Samuel
    2002 “The Language of Politics.” InSurviving Through Obliqueness: Language of Politics in Emerging Democracies, edited bySamuel Obeng and Hartford Beverly, 5–18. New York: NOVA Science Publishers, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Palmer, Frank R.
    1986Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Pavlidou, Theodossia-Soula
    ed. 2014Constructing Collectivity: “We” across Languages and Contexts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/pbns.239
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.239 [Google Scholar]
  23. Proctor, Katarzyna, and Lily, I-W. Su
    2011 “The 1st Person Plural in Political Discourse – American Politicians in Interviews and in a Debate.” Journal of Pragmatics43 (13): 3251–3266. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  24. Petersoo, Pille
    2007 “What Does ‘We’ Mean? National Deixis in the Media.” Journal of Language and Politics6 (3): 419–436. 10.1075/jlp.6.3.08pet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.6.3.08pet [Google Scholar]
  25. Reisigl, Martin
    2008 “Rhetoric of Political Speeches.” InHandbook of Communication in the Public Sphere, edited byRuth Wodak and Veronika Koller, 243–267. Berlin: Mouton de Guyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
    2001Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetoric of Racism and Antisemitism. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Van Dijk, Teun A.
    1995 “Discourse Semantics and Ideology.” Discourse & Society5 (2): 243–89. 10.1177/0957926595006002006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926595006002006 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2008Society and Discourse: How Social Contexts Influence Text and Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Wilson, John
    1990Politically Speaking. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wodak, Ruth, Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl, and Karin Liebhart
    1999The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): first-person plural pronoun; national leaders’ speeches; Taiwan
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