Modern Society Has Observed the Rise of Visual Images Used in Different Types of Media

INTRODUCTION

1.Rationale

Modern society has observed the rise of visual images used in different types of media which drives language at the risk of losing its primary role in social communication. In fact, there have been fears by writers of post-modernism that language may have been totally outweighed by visual images. However, the truth is far from being so. Many scholars have recently been successful in uncovering the power of language in the belief that ‘exercise of power is increasingly achieved through ideology, particularly through the workings of language’ (Fairclough, 2000).

Ever since its emergence several decades ago, Critical Discourse Analysis (henceforth CDA) has attracted interest not only from the internal sections of the linguistics field but also from other related ones such as politics, cultural studies, media studies, etc. It is because discourse has been seen now as not only social practice but also reflection of reality. The shift has, to a great extent, given rise to the enhancement of awareness of language and its power, especially how it helps people to gain power over the others through ideology, which is underlied in the language.

This is particularly the case of politics, where language is the tool of authority holders to gain, to represent and to realize power and ideology. A specific issue regarding politics and public opinion can best exemplify this. As we may know, presidential policy-making behaviour is of paramount importance to both the president himself and his fellow citizens in almost any countries like the U.S. where it is the citizens who choose their own president, the Chief Executive. The president is understandably the convergence of great many public expectations, one of which is evident in the public expectation toward his public speeches.

Although a generalization of people’s expectation proves to be impossible, it is widely accepted that there are usually two aspects to the expectations of the presidents: the personal behaviour and the policy performance which result in two purposeful criteria of the speech: the fellowship and the leadership (Cohen, 1997). That is, to be considered successful and popular, a presidential speech generally has to show the leadership of the speech-maker while it can maintain the responsiveness of the public opinion. The integration of these two features into the speech poses quite challenging job of the president. Some scholars (Cronin, Rockman, cited in Cohen, 1997) even refer to this as ‘presidential contradictions, conflicts or paradoxes.’

It could be estimated then each and every presidential speech has to undergo a long and stringent process of revising and editing before being officially publicized. This is because presidential address is an immediate channel of passing on policies and conveying political ideology of the president and his administration to the common people. Undoubtedly, the analysis of the texts of the addresses - the process of decoding assumptions and thinking embedded in it- promises to unearth potentially interesting findings about the president, his/her administration and to a large extent, the politics life of a country. This very inspiration has urged me to conduct a study on the presidential speeches made by the incumbent president of the United States of America.

Undoubtedly, this research enables the fulfillment of my two-fold desire. First, it stands me an opportunity to try myself in a quite new yet promisingly fascinating linguistics branch. Second, it satisfies my curiosity of investigating the politics of one of the world’s most powerful countries as well as the ideology of the head of the power.

2.Significance of the study

Given that CDA is a quite new research area in linguistics in Vietnam, and little about CDA has been known, (except for, to my knowledge, a recently published article by Hoa Ng. (2005) and some graduation theses in CDA), this study is intended to at least enhance the consciousness of how power and ideology are embedded in language in particular, and the relation between language and society in general. It thus raises a voice in approval of applying and advancing Critical Discourse Analysis in doing linguistics research.

Hopefully, CDA will soon be introduced into curriculum in Vietnam and more linguists will find interest in it, thus making CDA a popular choice for linguists when the relation between language and society is in question.

The study is also expected to be of benefit for English language learners, as it is common that they usually find authentic discourses difficult to comprehend fully. Usually, this is due to their failure to interpret the author’s underlying assumptions (or to be more exact, the ideology that drives the discourses). The awareness of the ideological meanings of the discourse will, to a certain extent, enable the comprehensive understanding of the authentic discourses, especially political ones.

3.Scope of the study

In this research, I would give spotlight on the written text (i.e. the linguistic features) of the two inaugural speeches made by the incumbent president of the USA, G.W. Bush. Nevertheless, the limitations of time and the author’s capability preclude it from covering all the features available in the data. Instead, only salient features relevant to the aims of the thesis are given focus on.

Of the two speeches, concentration is reserved for the second speech (of 2004) with the assumption that social-political context will result in difference in the realization and representation of power and ideology as compared to these in the first one made four years earlier. The paper also excludes all non-verbal aspects (intonation, posture, etc,) from the analysis procedure though the author is fully aware that they do have some role in representing the speaker’s ideology.

As required by CDA’s principles, I have gathered relevant political and economic data (including speeches, statistics, political references and so forth) with a view to deciphering the discourse in question in the most proper way they may allow. I have no intention of yielding an in-depth insight into political science with the assumptions and comments proposed in the research. It is pure linguistic research and hence, should be exempted from judgments on the basis of politics.

4.Background information

Context, as integrated by knowledge, situation and text, is generally regarded as a must in almost all approaches to discourse. In CDA, context plays an ever-important role. It is consequently necessary to give some brief background information of the data before stating the questions guiding my study. (More detailed account of the presidential and the inaugural speeches will be found in chapter 1 and chapter 2)

The data speeches, though by the same author, George W. Bush, were produced four years apart and in two periods of substantially different socio-political contexts of the U.S country. When George W. Bush took over presidency from Bill Clinton in 2000, the U.S was then at peace with a prosperous economy and facing almost no potential threat domestically and internationally. However, one of the major factors supposedly of effects on the realization of power of the new president maybe the election itself. Being the winner in the closest and controversial presidential election ever, Bush does not seem to have the utmost pride of the successful candidate. The case was considerably opposite when Mr. Bush retook the oath of office in 2004 nevertheless. Some unprecedented and unexpected events had happened to the country during Mr. Bush’s four years in office, threatening the domestic and international security. Hereinafter I am reviewing some of these events and briefly discussing the aftermaths and effects they produce. (Appendix 2 will provide more detailed year reviews of all related events)

First, it was the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington on September 9/11 which killed nearly 3,000 people and caused the collapse of three skyscrapers. In an attempt to ‘hunt down’ the terrorists and all those who ‘harbor’ (G.W. Bush) them, the Bush Administration decided to went to war against nations which were supposed to have links with terrorism. In October 2001, the U.S troops (in coalition with some others) launched war against Afghanistan. This brought victory to the U.S and his coalition at the expense of well over 200 deaths to the American side but the efforts to capture Osama bin Laden (the prime suspect behind the attacks) and many of his top aides were in vain. In March 2003, the U.S-led coalition attacked Iraq reasoning that Iraq were storing weapons of mass destruction and maintaining the alleged link with Al Qaeda, the international network of terrorism. Again, US –led coalition won but bloodshed has been continuing and so far (November 2005) this war has claimed more than 2,000 Americans.

Second, the U.S suffered an economics downturn and went into recession in almost all sectors with the largest job losses in 21 years recorded in 2000. Until 2004, the U.S remained in time of controversial war, and was recovering but had yet recovered from economics recession by the time the second presidency of G.W. Bush commenced.

In short, the USA can be said to be in two periods of radical discrepancy: one in peace and the other in war, as Mr. Bush once acknowledged in an address in 2005. Presumably, these are the prime factors thatwould create remarkable changes in the second speech. More specifically, they will get the key persons of the U.S to adopt a different dominant ideology and to re-outline the vision for his new period in office. It is this very point that invites analysis and interpretation in the light of CDA.

5.Aims of the study and research questions

In studying the two inaugural speeches by G.W. Bush in the presidential election 2000 and 2004, I would like to find out the relationship between language and ideology. My contrastive textual analysis of the two texts (and social political background clarification where necessary) is to give focus to some aspects as follows:

+ The first is the way socio-political context influences his strategic representation of ideology in the two speeches, especially in the 2004 one;

+ The second is the way President Bush deals with the conventional paradoxes in the political speeches linguistically to live up to the public expectations.

These attempts, though done on only a particular case, are hoped to serve as a vivid instance of how power and ideology are achieved via language. Also, it is expected to enhance the awareness the role of language in general, and of Critical Discourse Analysis in particular.

Specifically, I purport to answer the following research questions:

+ What and how are ideologies reflected lexically and syntactically in each speech?

+ What are the differences and similarities in the realization of ideologies in the two speeches in question?

+ What linguistic strategies does the speaker employ to solve the paradoxes of fellowship and authority in the two speeches?

6.Methodology

The study bases itself on the common sense assumptions that there are ‘implicit conventions according to which people interact linguistically’ (Fairclough: 2001). Regarding the presidential speeches, there exist some aspects influencing the lexical and syntactical choice of the speaker. It then follows the inductive approach, that is all underlying patterns and principles are drawn from description of data and generalization of findings.

In carrying out this research, the author relies on the following procedure:

Firstly, several approaches to CDA are reviewed so that an appropriate theoretical framework suited to the aims and subject of the study could be mapped out. The study is not based on a particular approach; rather, it is drawn upon a combination of two most outstanding approaches proposed by two CDA practitioners, Fairclough and van Dijk.

Secondly, qualitative data related to the U.S. presidential election 2000 and 2004, particularly the speeches by G.W. Bush made on two Inauguration days are assembled for the analysis, which is done in two phases:

1, General textual description of the speeches is made in terms of lexis and syntax towards the uncovering of underlying ideology in the speeches;

2, Comparative analysis of the speeches is made on the basis of elements discerned in the earlier part. This is to find out the similarities and differences of the two speeches in terms of how ideology is linguistically realized. Although the study is examining two speeches at the same time, it is not pure contrastive analysis that is the purpose of the research. Instead, this serves as the underpinning for the interpretation and explanation of the findings later on.

7.Design of the study

The study consists of three parts and two chapters, which are organized as follows:

Part 1: Introduction states the reasons of the study, its significance, its scope, aims and research questions, its methodology.

Part 2: Development

Chapter 1: Theoretical Background & Literature review reviews CDA history, approaches, Systemic Functional Grammar and some background information of the data speeches.

Chapter 2: Methodology and analysis procedures describes the data collection and the procedure of analyzing data.

Part 3: Conclusion: summarizes the findings in the previous sections, discusses the findings of the research, provides concluding remarks and implications and suggestions for further studies.

Development

Chapter ONE: Theoretical Background & Literature review

1.1.Background to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)

References

In english

1. Billig, M. (2003) Critical Discourse Analysis and the Rhetoric of Critique. In Weiss, G. and Wodak, R. (Eds) (2003) Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Disciplinarity. Palgrave Macmillan
2. Blommaert, J. (2005) Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge University Press
3. Boyd-Barrett, O. (1994) Language and Media: A Question of Convergence. In David Graddol & Oliver Boyd-Barrett (Eds.). Media texts: Authors and readers (pp. 22-39). Clevendon: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
4. Chouliaraki, L. and Fairclough, N. (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University Press.
5. CohenJ. E (1997) Presidential Responsiveness and Public Policy-Making, University of Michigan
6. Fairclough, N. (1992) Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman
7. Faiclough, N. (1993) Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public Discourse: The Universities. Discourse and Society.
8. Fairclough, N. (1995) Media Discourse. London. Edward Arnold
9. Fairclough, N. (1996) A Reply to Henry Widdowson’s Discourse Analysis: A Critical View (reprinted in Seidlenofer, B. (2003) Controversies in Applied Linguistics. OUP)
10. Fairclough, N. (1997) Critical Discourse Analysis: the Critical Study of Language. London and New York: Longman.
11. Fairclough, N. (2001)/1989a) Language and Power.(Second Edition) Pearson Education Limited.
12. Fairclough N. Critical Discourse Analysis and Change in Management Discourse and Ideology: A Transdisciplinary Approach to Strategic Critique
13. Retrieved 30 December 2004 from the World Wide Web:
    Fairclough N.L.
14. Fairclough N. Blair’s Contribution to Elaborating A New ‘Doctrine of International Community’ Retrieved 30 December 2004 from the World Wide Web:
    
15. Fowler Et al. (1979)Language and Control. London and New York: Rouledge.
16. Ha, N.T.T (2004) A Critical Discourse Analysis of President Bush’s Ultimatum to President Saddam Hussein, unpublished MA Thesis, Vietnam National University. College of Foreign Languages
17. Halliday, M.A.K. (1978) Language as a Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold
18. Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar, first and second edition. London, Anold, New York: Oxford University Press
19. Huong, P.T.(2005) News Reporting on America’s War on Terrorism: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Unpublished MA Thesis. Vietnam National University. College of Foreign Languages
20. Lafoff, R.T. (1990) Talking Power: The Politics of Language in Our Lives. New York: Basic Books.
21. Richards, J. et al (1985) Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics, Longam
22. Martin, J.R. et al. (1997) Working with Functional Grammar. London: Arnold
23. Meyer, M. (2002) “Between theory, method and politivs:positioi\ning of, the approaches to CDA’, in R. Wodak, and M. Meyer (Eds) (2002) Methods of Critical Analysis. London: Sage Publications. pp.14-31
24. Pennycook, A. (2001) Critical Applied Linguistics: A Critical Introduction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers: Mahwah .
25. Davies A. & Elder C. (?) Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Blackwell; Oxford University Press
26. Rogers, R. (2004) An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education. London, Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
27. Sheyholislami, J. (2001) Yesterday's "Separatisis" are Today's "Resistence Fighters" A critical Discourse Analysis of the representations of Iraqi Kurds in The Globe and Mail and The New York Times. Unpublished MA Thesis
28. Smith, L. (1987) Discourse Across Culture Prentice Hall
29. Teo, P. (2000), Racism in the News: A Critical Analysis of News Reporting in two Australian Newspapers’ Discourse and society 11(1), pp.7-49
30. Thompson, G. (1996) Introducing Functional Grammar London: Arnold
31. Threadgold T. (2003) Cultural Studies, Critical Theory and Critical discourse Analysis: Histories, Remembering and Futures. Linguistics Online 14
32. van Dijk. Teun A. (1988) News as Discourse. London: Academic Press .Cambridge, M.A:Blackwell
33. Van Dijk. A. (1991) Racism and the Press. London: Routledge.
34. van Dijk. Teun A. (1998a) Critical Discourse Analysis. Retrieved 30 December 2004 from the World Wide Web:
    
35. van Dijk. Teun A. (1998b) Opinions and Ideology in the Press. In Allen and Peter Garrett (Eds) Approaches to Media Discourse (pp 1-63) Oxford: Blackwell
36. van Dijk. Teun A. The Discourse –Knowledge Interface. In Weiss, G. and Wodak, R. (2003) Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Disciplinarity. Palgrave Macmillan.
37. van Dijk Teun A. Editorial:Discourse Analysis with a Cause. Retrieved 30 December 2004 from the World Wide Web
    
38. van Dijk Teun A. Ideological Discourse Analysis. Retrieved 30 December 2004 from the World Wide Web
    
39. van Dijk Teun A. Critical Context Studies. Retrieved 30 December 2004 from the World Wide Web
    
40. Van. T.. H.(2005) Views of America’s war on terrorism in Vietnamese newspapers. Unpublished MA Thesis. Vietnam National University. College of Foreign Languages
41. Weiss, G. and Wodak, R. (2003) Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Disciplinarity. Palgrave Macmillan.
42. Widdowson, H. (1995) Discourse Analysis: A Critical View(reprinted in Seidlenofer, B. (2003) Controversies in Applied Linguistics. OUP)
43. Widdowson, H. (1996) A Reply to Fairclough: Discourse and Interpretation: Conjectures and Refutations (reprinted in Seidlenofer, B. (2003) Controversies in Applied Linguistics. OUP)
44. Wodak, R. (1996b) Critical Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis'. In: J. Verschuenren (ed.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam:Benjamins.
45. Wodak, R and Meyer, M. (2002) Methods of Critical Analysis. London: Sage Publications.

In Vietnamese