2010
DOI: 10.29302/jolie.2010.3.4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A critical discourse analysis of the debates between Republicans and Democrats over the continuation of war in Iraq

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
14
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(The Nation: Response to India) Editorials from the Pakistani side used the strategy, i.e., Example/Illustration, because examples have more emotional impact, so they are more persuasive. Every group, according to their ideologies, gives illustrations (Rashidi & Souzandehfar, 2010). In the examples given below, once again, India is being illustrated negatively that it is not the first time that she is blaming Pakistan (us-group) for the Pulwama attack, such allegations Pakistan has already faced in Uri attack in 2016.…”
Section: Negative Other Presentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(The Nation: Response to India) Editorials from the Pakistani side used the strategy, i.e., Example/Illustration, because examples have more emotional impact, so they are more persuasive. Every group, according to their ideologies, gives illustrations (Rashidi & Souzandehfar, 2010). In the examples given below, once again, India is being illustrated negatively that it is not the first time that she is blaming Pakistan (us-group) for the Pulwama attack, such allegations Pakistan has already faced in Uri attack in 2016.…”
Section: Negative Other Presentationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is mainly concerned 'with analyzing opaque as well as transparent structural relationships of dominance, discrimination, power and control as manifested in language' (Reisigl and Wodak, 2009). Commenting on the efficiency of CDA, Rashidi and Souzandehfar (2010) remark that CDA is the right place to perform autopsy on discourse, either written or spoken, so as to uncover the ideologies underlying it. For its suitability, van Dijk's (2004) model of CDA is adopted for analysis in this study.…”
Section: Theoretical and Analytical Tools: Van Dijk's Critical Discoumentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There was also, the use of "these" in reference to Facebook as a tool "we didn't do enough to prevent these tools from being used for harm ..."). It could be an attempt to create a distance, a polarisation (Rashidi & Souzandehfar, 2010), between the people of Facebook and their creation, casting suspicion over the legitimacy of its ownership.…”
Section: Legitimacy Of the Senate Speechmentioning
confidence: 99%