30Jul 2017

PERSUASION IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE: THE SAUDI MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS ADEL AL-JUBEIR\'S SPEECHES AS A CASE STUDY.

  • Department Of Foreign Languages, College Of Arts & Humanities, Albaha University, Ministry Of Education, Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia.
Crossref Cited-by Linking logo

  • Abstract
  • Keywords
  • References
  • Cite This Article as
  • Corresponding Author

This research deals with a critical discourse reading of five speeches and press conferences delivered by the Saudi Minister of Foreign Affairs Adel Al-Jubeir at Munich Security Conference (MSC) on February 12, 2016, in Brussels on July 21, 2016, on February 12, 2017 in Riyadh with UN Secretary General, on 24 January 2017 in Riyadh with French Foreign Minister, Jean-Marc Ayrault and on February 8, 2017 in Ankara with the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs. Since it is an untrodden topic, a number of models, texts and contextual analyses are drawn from literature in order to shed more light on Al-Jubeir\'s speeches. Fairclough (2001) and van Dijk (2001)\'s models among other authors were applied to get an in-depth view of the topics and subtopics mentioned in the speeches in order to uncover the persuasive techniques behind the use of language functioned by the speaker to reach a true self-image as well as the image of the other in the world community. Afterwards, the researcher examined Adel Al-Jubier\'s use of analogy, as well as argumentation, as persuasive techniques employed in this discourse. Grice?s (1975) four maxims of quality, quantity, relevance and manner were used to verify whether the Cooperative Principle was observed in the two speeches, and whether any deviation, if found, was intended as a persuasive strategy. The study concluded with recommendations, opportunities for change in the region, and facts about CDA in its optimistic unprecedented new look. Politics is not all destructive. There are constructive and optimistic gates to it.

  1. Al-Sowaidi, B., Banda, F., and Mansour, A. (2015). Doing Politics in the Recent Arab Uprising: Towards a Political Discourse Analysis of the Arab Spring Slogans. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 1-25.
  2. Arabnews, The Middle East Leading English Language Daily, Saturday 23 July 2016. Retrieved from: http:www.arabnews.com/node/958321/Saudi-arabia on April 26, 2017. And from: http://youtube/FqSzlxkspBQ
  3. Billing, M. (2008). The language of critical discourse analysis: Discourse & Society, Vol. 19, 6, 783-800.
  4. Birch, D. (1989). Language, Literature and Critical Practice: Ways of analyzing Text. London and New York: Routledge.
  5. Chilton, P., &Schaffner, C. (1997). Discourse and politics. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction. London: Sage.
  6. Chilton, P., &Schaffner, C. (2002). Introduction: Themes and principles in the analysis of political discourse. In P. Chilton & C. Schaffner (Eds.), Politics as text and talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse (pp. 1-41). Amsterdam: Benjamin.
  7. D?Amato, A. Anthony (1989). Introduction to Law and Legal Thinking. Editions Anthropos. Paris.England.
  8. Dillon, G. L., Doyle, A., Eastman, C. M., Kline, S., Silberstein, S., &Toolan, M. The Rhetorical Construction of a President. Discourse and Society 1 (2): 189-
  9. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analyzing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. New York: Routledge.
  10. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  11. Fairclough, N.(1995a). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
  12. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. Pearson Education Limited.
  13. Fairclough, N. (2005) \'Critical Discourse Analysis\', MargesLinguistiques 9: 76-94.
  14. Farrelly, M. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis in Political Studies: An Illustrative Analysis of the \'Empowerment\' Agenda. Politics, Vol. 30, 2, 98-104.
  15. Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class? The Authority of Interpretative Communicaties. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
  16. Fowler, R. (1991). Language in the News. London: Routledge.
  17. Fowler, R., Hodge, B., Kress, G. and Trew, T. (1979). Language and Social Control.? London:Routledge.
  18. Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold.
  19. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.
  20. Halliday, M. A. K. (1983). Foreword to Cummings and Simons.
  21. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985a). Spoken and Writter Language. Geelong: Deakin??? University Press.
  22. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985b). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
  23. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
  24. Harris, S. 1991. Evasive action: How politicians respond to questions in political interviews and campaign effect. Annu. Rev. 2000.51:149-169.
  25. Hasan, Ruqaiya. (1971). Rime and Reason in Literature. In Seymor Chatman (ed.), Literary style: a symposium. New York: Oxford University Press.
  26. Herman, V. (1995). Dramatic discourse. Dialogue as Interaction in Plays. London and New York: Routledge.
  27. Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (Eds). (2001). Evaluation in Text.
  28. . In P. Scannell (ed) Broadcast talk: 76-99. London: Sage.
  29. Jakobson, R. (1960). Closing Statement; Linguistics and Poetics. In Sebeok T.A. (ed.), Style in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  30. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1995). Creative constructive controversy: Intellectual challenge in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
  31. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (2000). Civil political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology. Journal of Peace Psychology, 6, 291-317. [Electronic version]. Retrieved December 22, 2006, from http://www.co-operation.org/pages/contro-pol.html.
  32. Keyser, Samuel Jay. (1980). ?Wallace Stevens: Form and Meaning in Four Poems.?. In Marvin K. L. Ching, Michael C. Haley, and Ronald F. Lunsford. (eds.), Linguistic Perspectives on Literature. London: Routledge.
  33. Klebanov, P. B., Diermier, D., and Beigman, E. (2008). Lexical Cohesion Analysis of Political Speech. Political Analysis, Vol. 16, No. 4, Special Issue, pp. 447-463.
  34. Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor in politics: An open letter to the internet from George Lakoff. Retrieved December 22, 2006, from Center for the Cognitive Science of Metaphor Online Web site: http://www.uoregon.edu/~uophil/metaphor/lakoff-1.htm
  35. Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M., (1980, [1995]). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .Retrieved from http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/467716.html
  36. Lakoff, G.(1995).Metaphor, morality and politics. Or, why conservatives have??? left??? liberals??? in??? the??? Retrieved?? fromhttp://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/lakoff/newschool.pdf
  37. Littell, F. H.(1995). \"The Language of Assault vs the Language of Dialogue\". The Christian Ethics Today Foundation, December 1995 (Issue 4 Page 23). Retrieved from http://christianethicstoday.com/cetart/index.cfm?fuseaction=Articles.main&ArtID=259
  38. Maynard, S. K. 1994. Images of Involvement and Integrity: Rhetorical Style of a Japanese Politician. Discourse and Society 5(2): 233-261.
  39. Maynard, S.K. (1999) \'On Rhetorical Ricochet: Expressivity of Nominalization and da in Japanese Discourse\', Discourse Studies 1: 57-81.
  40. Mazrui, A. (1975). The political sociology of the English language. The Hague:
  41. McGregor, S. (2003).Critical Science and Critical Discourse Analysis. 15, No. 1.
  42. Orwell, G. (1949). Nineteen Eighty?Four. London: Secker & Warburg. Retrieved fromOxford University Press. Oxford.
  43. Pinter, H.(2005, December).Art, truth, & politics. Retrieved From http://www.Nobelprize.org. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/2005/pinter-lecture-e.html
  44. Praitmoko, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis of susilobanbangyudhoyono\'s speech. Semarng: Dian Nuswantoro University.
  45. Ranney, A. (1975). The governing of men (4th) Hinsdale, IL: The Dryden Press.
  46. Rylance, S. and Simons, J. (2001). Literature in Context. Palgrave: Macmillan.
  47. Salkie, R. (1995). Text and Discourse Analysis. London and New York: Routledge.
  48. Schaffner, C. (1996). Editorial: Political speeches and discourse analysis. [Electronic version]. Current issues in language & society, 3, 201-204. Retrieved December 21, 2006, from http://www.multilingual-matters. net/cils/003/0201/cils0030201.pdf.
  49. Seidel, G. 1988b. Verbal strategies of the collaborators. A discursive analysis of the yudhoyono\'s speech. Semarng: Dian Nuswantoro University.
  50. Shanto, Adam. (2000). New perspective and evidence on political communication and campaign effect. Annu. Rev. 2000.51:149-169.
  51. Stubbs, M. (1993). Words and phrases. Oxford: Blackwell.
  52. Thompson, G. and Hunston, S. (2001). Evaluation: An Introduction. In
  53. Transnational Publishers, Inc. Irvington-on-Hudson. New York.
  54. Van Dijk, T. (1993a). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & society,4, 249-283.
  55. Van Dijk, T. A. (1995) Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. Retrieved December 26, 2016 from http://www. discourse.org.
  56. Van Dijk, T. A. (1996). Introduction to Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.
  57. Van Dijk, T. A. (1998b). What is political discourse analysis? In: Jan Blommaert& Chris Bulcaen (Eds.), Political linguistics. (pp. 11-52). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  58. Van Dijk, T. A. (2001, April). Political discourse and ideology. Retrieved from http://www.discourse-in-society.org
  59. Van Dijk, T. A. (2003). Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. Retrieved December 21, 2006, from Teun A. van Dijk Web site: http://www.discourses.org/UnpublishedArticles/Ideologv%20and%20discourse.pdf
  60. vanDijk, T. A. (2006). Politics, Ideology, and Discourse. Spain: Elsevier
  61. Wodak, R. (2006) \'Critical Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis\', in J.-O. ?stman and J. Verschueren (eds) Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 1-24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  62. Wodak, R. (2007) \'Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: A Cross-disciplinary Inquiry\', Pragmatics & Cognition, 19: 203-25.
  63. Yule, G. (1997). The Study of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

[Mohammed Ahmed Aboraas. (2017); PERSUASION IN POLITICAL DISCOURSE: THE SAUDI MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS ADEL AL-JUBEIR\'S SPEECHES AS A CASE STUDY. Int. J. of Adv. Res. 5 (Jul). 2497-2529] (ISSN 2320-5407). www.journalijar.com

Mohammed Ahmed Aboraas

DOI:

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/4991      
DOI URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/4991

Download Full Paper

Download PDF No. of Downloads: 195 | No. of Views: 828