1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language and Dialogue
  4. Volume 6, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The present study offers an underlying theoretical framework for examining political speeches from a rhetorical perspective. This framework is based on systemic functional linguistics developed by Halliday (most recently updated by Halliday and Matthiessen 2014), and includes discourse structures suggested by later authors. We suggest that the interpersonal stratum of meaning, through which we manage social relations, represents a powerful resource for creating a dialogue with the audience in order to recruit it to a politician’s call for action. To address this issue, we analyzed ten speeches delivered by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to five different international audiences. We examined strategies that foster dialogic interaction with the audience, by directly addressing them, or otherwise acknowledging their presence. The interpersonal strategies we identified combine into larger domains which we term , and These strategies may be salient because they tap into various aspects of the audience’s experience and identity: the social, affective, and ideological spheres.

© 2016 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ld.6.2.04liv
2016-08-11
2025-04-30

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ld.6.2.04liv
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AIPAC
    . www.aipac.org (RetrievedJan. 4, 2016).
  2. Alavi-Nia, Maryam and Alireza Jalilifar
    2013 “We Believe the Iranian Nation Can: The Manifestation of Power in Iranian Televised Presidential Debates.”Language & Communication33 (1): 8–25. doi: 10.1016/j.langcom.2012.11.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2012.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Aristotle
    1982 Rhetoric. Trans. John. H. Freese . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Austin, John L
    1962 How to Do Things with Words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Bard, Mitchell
    . “United Nations: The U.N’s Relations with Israel”www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/UN/israel_un.html (RetrievedDec. 21, 2015).
  6. Bateson, Gregory
    1953 “The Position of Humour in Human Communication.”InCybernetics, ninth conference, ed. by Geinz von Foerster , 1–47. New York: Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bull, Peter and Ofer Feldman
    2011 “Invitations to Affiliative Audience Responses in Japanese Political Speeches.”Journal of Language and Social Psychology30: 158–176. doi: 10.1177/0261927X10397151
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X10397151 [Google Scholar]
  8. Bussman, Hadumod
    1998 “Phatic Communication.”InRoutledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics, ed. by Hadumod Bussman , Transl. by Gregory Trauth and Kerstin Kazzazi , 358. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Charteris-Black, Jonathan
    2005 Politicians and Rhetoric: The Persuasive Power of Metaphor. London: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230501706
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230501706 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chilton, Paul
    1990 “Politeness, Politics, and Diplomacy.”Discourse & Society1(2), 201–224. doi: 10.1177/0957926590001002005
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926590001002005 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2004 Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Chilton, Paul and Christina Schäffner
    1997 “Discourse and Politics.”InDiscourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Vol. 2: Discourse as Social Interaction, ed. by T. van Dijk , 206–230. London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi: Sage Publication.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Clark, Herbert H. and Thomas B. Carlson
    1982 “Hearers and Speech Acts.”Language58 (2): 332–373. doi: 10.1353/lan.1982.0042
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1982.0042 [Google Scholar]
  14. Cutler, Richard H
    1995 “Distributed Presence and Community in Cyberspace.”Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century3 (2), 12).
     [Google Scholar]
  15. de Cillia, Rudolf , Martin Reisigl , and Ruth Wodak
    1999 “The Discursive Construction of National Identities.”Discourse & Society10 (2): 149–173. doi: 10.1177/0957926599010002002
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926599010002002 [Google Scholar]
  16. Dik, Simon, C
    1997 The Theory of Functional Grammar: Complex and Derived Constructions. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Emrich, Cynthia G. , Holly H. Brower , Jack Feldman and Howard Garland
    2001 “Images in Words: Presidential Rhetoric, Charisma, and Greatness.”Administrative Science Quarterly46 (3): 527–557. doi: 10.2307/3094874
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3094874 [Google Scholar]
  18. Ensink, Titus
    1996.”The Footing of a Royal Address: An Analysis of Representativeness in Political Speech, Exemplified in Queen Beatrix’ Address to the Knesset on March 28, 1995.”Current Issues in Language and Society3 (3): 205–233.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. European Friends of Israel
    . www.efi-eu.org (RetrievedDec. 21, 2015)
  20. Fairclough, Norman
    2003 Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London and New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Faris, Ali A. , Shamala Paramasivam , Tan B. Hoon , and Abdul M. Zamri
    2016 “Persuasive Strategies in Mandela’s No Easy Walk to Freedom.”International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature5 (1): 192–208.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Feng, Hao and Yuhui, Liu
    2010 “Analysis of Interpersonal Meaning in Public Speeches: A Case Study of Obama’s Speech.”Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1 (6): 825–829. doi: 10.4304/jltr.1.6.825‑829
     https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.1.6.825-829 [Google Scholar]
  23. Halliday, Michael A.K
    1970 “Language Structure and Language Function.”InNew Horizons in Linguistics, ed. by John Lyons , 140–165. London: Penguin.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Halliday, Michael A.K. and Christian M.I.M Matthiessen
    2014 Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4th ed., New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Holmes, Janet
    1984 “Modifying Illocutionary Force.”Journal of Pragmatics8: 345–365. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90028‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90028-6 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hunston, Susan
    1993 “Professional Conflict: The Management of Disagreement in Academic Discourse.”InText and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, ed. by Mona Baker , Gill Francis and Elena Tognini Bonelli , 115–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.64.08hun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.64.08hun [Google Scholar]
  27. Hyland, Ken
    2002 “What Do They Mean? Questions in Academic Writing.”Text22 (4): 529–557.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. 2005 “Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse.”Discourse Studies7 (2): 173–192. doi: 10.1177/1461445605050365
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2015 “Genre, Discipline and Identity.”Journal of English for Academic Purposes19: 32–43. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.005 [Google Scholar]
  30. Jaffee, Alexandra
    . “58 Members of Congress Skipped Netanyahu’s Speech.”edition.cnn.com/2015/02/26/politics/democrats-missing-netanyahu-whip-list/ (RetrievedApril 19, 2015)
  31. Johnstone, Barbara
    2008 Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Kazemian, Bahram and Somayyeh Hashemi
    2014 “Critical Discourse Analysis of Barack Obama’s 2012 Speeches: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics and Rhetoric.”Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4 (6): 1178–1187. doi: 10.4304/tpls.4.6.1178‑1187
     https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.6.1178-1187 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kondowe, Wellman
    2014 “Interpersonal Metafunctions in Bingu wa Mutharika’s Second-Term Political Discourse: A Systemic Functional Grammatical Approach.”International Journal of Linguistics, 6 (3): 70–84. doi: 10.5296/ijl.v6i3.5750
     https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v6i3.5750 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lewin, Beverly A. and Hadara Perpignan
    2012 “Recruiting the Reader in Literary Criticism.”Text & Talk32 (6): 751–772.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Livnat, Zohar
    2012 Dialogue, Science and Academic Writing. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.13
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.13 [Google Scholar]
  36. Martin, Jim R. and Peter R.R. White
    2005 The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1057/9780230511910
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  37. Morreall, John
    1990 Prepared versus Spontaneous Humour. Unpublished manuscript.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Myers-Roy, Alice
    1981 “The Function of Irony in Discourse.”Text1 (4): 407–423.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Neuman, Yair and Iris Tabak
    2003 “Inconsistency as an Interactional Problem: A Lesson from Political Rhetoric.”Journal of Psycholinguistic Research32 (3): 251–267. doi: 10.1023/A:1023569501293
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023569501293 [Google Scholar]
  40. Norrick, Neal R
    1994 “Involvement and Joking in Conversation.”Journal of Pragmatics22: 409–430. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90117‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90117-1 [Google Scholar]
  41. Reisigl, Martin
    2010 “Rhetoric of Political Speeches.”InHandbook of Communication in the Public Sphere, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Veronika Koller , 243–269. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Reyes, Antonio
    2011 “Palin vs Biden: The Right for Credibility in Political Discourse.”Issues in Political Discourse Analysis3 (1): 75–94.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Rourke, Liam , Terry Anderson , Randy Garrison and Walter Archer
    1999 “Assessing Social Presence in Asynchronous Text-Based Computer Conferencing.”International Journal of E-Learning and Distance Education14 (2): 50–71.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Short, John , Ederyn Williams , and Bruce Christie
    1976 The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Toronto, ON: Wiley.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Tannen, Deborah
    1989 Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Thompson, Geoff
    2000 Introducing Functional Grammar. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. 2012 “Intersubjectivity in Newspaper Editorials: Construing the Reader-in-the-Text.”English Text Construction5 (1): 77–100. doi: 10.1075/etc.5.1.05tho
     https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.5.1.05tho [Google Scholar]
  48. Weigand, Edda
    2009 “The Argumentative Power of Words or How to Move People’s Minds with Words.”InLanguage as Dialogue, ed. by Sebastian Feller . 357–378. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/ds.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.5 [Google Scholar]
  49. Willner, Ann R
    1984 The Spellbinders: Charismatic Political Leadership. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Wilson, John
    1990 Politically Speaking. Oxford: Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Ye, Ruijuan
    2010 “The Interpersonal Metafunction Analysis of Barack Obama’s Victory Speech.”English Language Teaching3 (2): 146–151. doi: 10.5539/elt.v3n2p146
     https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n2p146 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ld.6.2.04liv
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): audience; Benjamin Netanyahu; interpersonal strand; political speech; recruitment; rhetoric; Systemic Functional Linguistics

Most Cited

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