Journal of Language and Politics - Online First

Contemporary Turkey has gone through many reforms that have been legitimized by country’s historical legacy. The constitutive elements of this legacy are images, historical figures, events, and symbolisms embedded in memory. It is through those elements that Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the leader of the Justice and Development Party sets himself up as the appropriate narrator and appropriate doer, incrementally gaining an upper hand in the legitimacy struggles by telling stories from history, emerging as the new founding father of Turkey and introducing new policies rooted in the legacy of the past. How has he been able to occupy such a position of superiority through the struggles for legitimacy in Turkish politics? This paper critically argues that Erdoğan first set up his personality, imposing himself as the most appropriate narrator and finally showing himself to be the most appropriate doer, by crafting his political communication with symbols and figures from history.

This article seeks to explore the discursive rediscovery of the left menace and the ideological relevance between the far right and the right wing in Greece in times of political turmoil. Drawing on some historical aspects of modern Greece, first, I intend to explain the resurgence of Greece’s divided past. By emphasising references to Gramsci and the ‘hegemony of the left’, the article investigates the discursive construction of ingroups and outgroups on the basis of haunted memories of modern Greek history. By synthesising the Discourse Historical Approach and the concept of Aristotelian topos, I explicate how Gramsci has been re-utilised in an extreme right context by Greek far-right figures in order to stigmatise their ideological opponents. In a second step, my aim is to study the normalisation of political enmity by highlighting far-right discourses’ resemblance to New Democracy’s members’ rhetoric through references to Greek culture and economic imaginaries.

As a type of written discourse without guaranteed readership and response, protest graffiti nonetheless projects a participation framework in which protesters address different participants, including not only the government but also other potential ‘participants’ in the social/cultural/political context. This paper studies a dataset of graffiti associated with a protest movement in Macao, China. A survey of the longitudinal data reveals that the contents and visual representation of the graffiti have changed to reflect evolving participation frameworks which are in response to different stages of social movements. While graffiti in earlier stages tends to be more accusatory and anti-governmental, graffiti in later stages shows a shift of protesters’ position more in alignment with patriotism and allegiance to authority. Instead of presenting views competing with mainstream political discourse, our data, with their multimodal resources, draw heavily on Chinese cultural discourses which are supposedly shared among the protesters and addressees in this context.

This paper examines how, within the context of meritocracy, a highly differentiated education system can coexist with assertions of equal opportunity. Drawing on the example of Singapore’s education policy texts from 1991 to 2012, the paper exemplifies and expands the analytical potential of a micro-meso-macro movements framework with which to critically engage the discursive role of neo-liberal metaphors in ameliorating the tension of providing ‘equal opportunities’ between students who will undertake the university pathway and those who will have to undergo vocational training. Based on the interconnected discourses of opportunity-choice and opportunity-skills through a more flexible system, the analytical development of these two simultaneous sub micro-meso-macro movements demonstrates how the playing field is levelled, and competition for society’s occupations and academic progression is fair even for Vocational and Industrial Training Board Act (VITB) trainees.

This article sets out to explore the potential of journalistic attitudinal positioning in dis/aligning readers into different feeling and moral communities in traumatic news event. To do so, it utilises the appraisal framework to examine how the Bangkok Post and the New York Times present and represent ‘attitude’ of different news actors in the coverage of the Bangkok Blast. Analytical findings show that while journalistic attitudinal positioning constitutes a means of political empowerment through bringing in otherwise marginal and silenced voices, it also opens up a space for journalists to evaluate risks and negotiate responsibilities. News reports of the Bangkok Blast eventually construe the Thai society as divided by representing the event as a blame game. The findings also extend the conceptual scope of symbolic codes of victims, villain and hero by resorting to attitudinal resources.

This research incorporates Corpus Linguistic techniques with the socio-cognitive approach (SCA) to Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) to analyse the discursive representation of the British Monarchy (BM) through the categorisation of its individual members within the Now Corpus from 2010–2020. Analysis concentrated on their categorisation around key events over the ten-year period, most notably the accusations that Prince Andrew had sexual relations with a minor and Prince Harry’s and Meghan Markle’s decision to relinquish their roles within the Monarchy. Significantly, the Royals were positively represented through the affixation of agency and active form to attach them to positive actions, for instance, performing work and charity related duties. Negativity was deemphasised via the removal of agency, passive use and a refocus onto less serious acts which distanced them, particularly the Queen and Prince Andrew, from scandal.

Human rights are essential pillars of democracies. But under populism, they are a proclaimed nemesis of political leaders who claim to represent the common people. This article argues that the discourses of strongman, patronage and fake news constitute three prominent right-wing populist ploys that erode human rights in Rodrigo Duterte’s Philippines. It interrogates the communicative power of populism as a means of disfiguring free expression and press freedom. Drawing from human rights and media reports and interviews, the pro-human rights current is reformatted by strongman pronouncement in the war on drugs, unity of long-established blocs of power through patronage, and belligerent charge of fake news.