A critical discourse analysis study of stance taking and positioning in American and Russian political speeches
Keywords:
American speech, an entrance to positioning, function, Russian speech, stance takingAbstract
The goal of the current study is to look into the various stance-taking techniques utilized in American and Russian political speeches. Examining these forms' lexical and grammatical forms, semantic and discoursal roles, and social relevance in establishing the speaker's place and ideology are all important. Thus, based on Fairclough's (1995) dialectical-relational approach of CDA, the current study analysis six political speeches. They study concludes that the prevalent application of certain markers, whether in terms of highly significant words or grammatical things, has symbolically conveyed the speakers level of confidence and knowledge. Their adoption of engagement formalizations demonstrated their propensity to consider other people's perspectives, but they do not value them as highly as their own beliefs and attitudes. They create a dialogue space for different viewpoints, but they take care to prevent them from receiving the same endorsement as their own. Engagement conveys a conviction in this way.
Downloads
References
Biber, D., (2006). University Language: A Corpus-based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Burns, A. R., Matarazzo, O., and Lucia Abbamonte, (2014). “Corpus Linguistics and the Appraisal Framework for Retrieving Emotion and Stance – The Case of
Samsung?s and Apple?s Facebook Pages”. In S. Bassis et al. (eds.), Recent Advances of Neural Network Models and Applications, Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies. Switzerland Springer International Publishing, pp: 283-293.
Charteris-Black, J., (2018). Analysing Political Speeches: Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. (2nd edition). New York : Red Globe Press.
Fairclough, N., (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge : Polity Press.
Fairclough, N., (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London and New York : Longman.
Fairclough, N., (2000). Language and Power (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
Halliday M.A.K., (1971 ). 'Language in a Social Perspective'. The Context of Language (Educational Review, University of Birmingham. 23.3). pp.165-188.
Halliday, M. A. K., (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London : Edward Arnold.
Hunston, S., (1995). “Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse”. In Coulthard, M., (ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis. London: Routledge, pp : 191 -218.
Johnstone, B., (2009). “Stance, Style, and the Linguistic Individual”. In A. Jaffe (ed.) Stance : Sociolinguistic Perspectives. London : Oxford University Press, pp: 29 – 52.
Kärkkäinen, E., (2006). “Stance Taking in Conversation: From Subjectivity to Intersubjectivity”. Text and Talk Journal, Vol. 26(No. 6), pp : 699-731.
Klanicová, E., (2013). Genre Analysis of TV Interview Based on Gender Differences. Master?s diploma thesis. Retrieved from
http://is.muni.cz/th/210318/ff_m/DT_final_version.pdf
Kress, G. & B. Hodge, (1977). Language as Ideology. London: Routledge.
Martin, J.R., and P. White, (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and J. Svartvik, (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London : Longman.
Schäffner, C., (1996). “Editorial: Political Speeches and Discourse Analysis”. Journal of Current Issues in Language and Society, Vol.3, pp: 201-204.
Siepmann, D., Gallagher, J. D., Hannay, M., and Lachlan Mackenzie, (2008). Writing in English: A Guide for Advanced Learners. Dischingerweg : Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH & Co. KG.
Thomas, L., and S. Wareing, (1999). Language, Society and Power: An Introduction. London : Francis & Taylor Group.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2024 Linguistics and Culture Review

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.



