CHAPTER 2

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

In this chapter, the writer includes the theories and information that are used

to support this research.

2.1 Discourse

In the language context, discourse is said as language use. In Oxford

Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 8th edition, discourse is defined as ‘the use of

language in speech or writing in order to produce meaning; language that is studied,

usually in order to see how the different parts of a text are connected: spoken/written

discourse.’

Brown and Yule (1983: p.1) delivered that

“The analysis of discourse, is necessarily, the analysis of language in use. As such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the purpose or functions which these forms are designed to serve in human affairs.”

Brown and Yule tried to point out that the analysis of language in use is not only

limited to the textual analysis or the structure of a certain text, but it is also purposed

to relate the language in use in social fields. Both definitions show that discourse is

how the speaker uses the language in order to inform the intended information to the

addressee.

Discourse covers many aspects in social life, such as politics, economic,

culture, and media. According to Adam Jaworski and Nikolas Coupland (2006: p.3)

in the introduction chapter of The Discourse Reader, discourse is ‘language use

relative to social, political, and cultural formations – it is language reflecting social

order but also language shaping social order, and shaping individuals’ interaction

with society.’ Language is being analyzed in a certain context to get the proper

meanings that the speaker or the addresser is intended. This made the language use

on a certain context is seen as the social practice.

7

8

2.1.1 Critical Discourse Analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis or CDA is the approach which is used to explore

and study the relationship between discourse and social and cultural aspects in the

society. This approach does not analyze discourse in a text only from its linguistics

characteristics and structures but more than that. Jan Blommaert (2005: p.25) argues

that ‘CDA focuses its critique on the intersection of language/discourse/speech and

social structure.’ The intervention of CDA in specific discursive situations is figured

to uncover assumptions through the language use and unmask their claims to

authority.

CDA has some assumptions about discourse. Chris Barker and Dariusz

Galasinski (2001: p.65-69) point at five assumptions which are ‘discourse is socially

constitutive; discourse is a system of options; discourse is ideological; text is

multifunctional; and text is intertextual’.

The first assumption points at CDA’s perspective on discourse (written and

spoken) as the social practice. It leads to the close relationship between discursive

practices and the contexts when they appear. Discursive practices are realized as an

important form of social practice that gives contribution to the social world including

social identities and social relations. Therefore, discourse and society are constitutive

to one another, i.e. ‘society is not possible without discourse and discourse cannot

exist without social interaction’ (Flowerdew in Advances in Discourse Studies 2008;

196).

Second, CDA views discourse as a system of options. As discourse is viewed

socially constitutive, the assumption that discourse is as a system of options from

which language users make their ‘choices’ occurs (Choularki: 1998). The third

assumption is that discourse is ideological. The term of ideology here will have the

connection with the power in society. Philips and Jorgensen in Discourse Analysis as

Theory and Method (2002: p.60) stated that ‘In critical discourse analysis, it is

claimed that discursive practices contribute to the creation and reproduction of

unequal power relations between social groups – for example, between social classes,

women and men, ethnic minorities and the majority…understood as ideological

effects.’ Furthermore, Foucault’s idea of power or knowledge points at ideology

constituted by discourses which have specific consequences for power relations at

whole levels of social relationship. The existence of power in text has been studied

by Shayegh and Nabifar (2012) through their analysis entitled Power in Political

9

Discourse by Barack Obama. From their research, they found that Obama’s

linguistics mechanism reflects the power through the statements of religion,

persuasion, and future plan.

Ideologies build social constitution in and through power. By understanding

the ideologies, it will be helpful for researchers or analysts to interpret the meanings

of discourse in social relations. Fairclough’s idea about ideology and linguistics

background have been showed in a research by Bayram (2010) by analyzing the

discursive strategies of the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan in World

Economic Forum’s debate within the context of ideological, cultural, and language

background of the Prime Minister. The result points that ideology lies within

language in various ways at various level and that ideology belongs to structures and

events. Meanwhile, in other study entitled A Critical Discourse Analysis of the

Debates Between Republicans and Democrats Over The Continuation of War In Iraq

by Rashidi and Sauzandehfan (2010) discovered that ‘in political discourses, CDA

provides a great opportunity to discover the realities which according to Fairclough

(1995) has been distorted and naturalized as “non-ideological common sense”’.

The fourth assumption is that text is multifunctional. Multifunctional here

means that text serves all its functions at the same time. According to Halliday

(1975) theory of systemic and functional linguistics, there are three functions of texts

which are ideational, interpersonal, and textual. Ideational function refers to the

speaker’s perspective towards the realities outside him/her which reflects in texts. It

includes the speaker’s cognitions, emotions, perceptions, and acts of speaking and

understanding. On the other hand, interpersonal function refers to the interaction

between the speaker and the addressee through the text. The utterances of the

speakers can express an attitude or evaluation. Furthermore, speakers also can build a

social relationship towards the addressees. Textual function refers to the relevance of

discourse with its context that can be reflected through a text.

The final assumption is that text is intertextual. According to Philip and

Jorgensen (2002: p.73), intertextuality is “the condition whereby all communicative

events draw on earlier events”. It can also be implied that meanings depend on other

meaning. Fairclough (1995) added that intertextual analysis is important in

discovering the trails which texts move from one form to another form. Lawson

(2008) found the interview that he analyzed contains intertextuality in it, however,

10

when the text move into another form (from interview to published article), the text

is being changed or even edited.

2.1.1.1 Fairclough’s Three-Dimensional Model

Fairclough (1992) looks at the concept of discourse in three different ways.

First, in the abstract perspective, he perceives discourse is a language used as social

practice. Second, he points discourse as the kind of language used within a specific

field, for example, political or economic discourse. Third, in the concrete sense, he

believes discourse is used as a way of speaking which gives meaning to experiences

from a particular perspective.

Discourse, Fairclough believes, could give contribution to the construction of

social identities, social relations, and systems of knowledge and meaning. Therefore,

three functions of discourse has emerged which are an identity function, a relational

function, and an ideational function. In any analysis, there are two dimensions as

important focal points which are the communicative event and the order of discourse.

The concepts of discourse, which has been mentioned earlier, have been

developed into the frameworks for Critical Discourse Analysis. Fairclough (1992)

three dimensional frameworks model for critical discourse analysis are consisting of:

Text, which can be in form of speech, writing, visual image, etc;

Discursive practice which involves the production, distribution, consumption,

and interpretation of text; and

Social practice, in which ideological effects and hegemonic processes of

discourse are emerged.

11

It also can be described through the figure 2.1 below.

Figure 2.1 Three-dimensional model for critical discourse analysis by Fairclough (1992b: 73)

The analysis of text dimension is developed by Fairclough (1992) from the

previous theory of Halliday (1975) Systemical Functional Grammar (SFG). It

focuses mostly on linguistics features analysis of a text. Text analysis includes the

formal features of a text such as genre, tenses, modality, pronouns, semantic

relations, and grammatical relations in order to find certain discourses and genres. It

might actually discuss more than these features. Text analysis also may point at

collocation, repetition of words which occur in text, and frequent words which occur

in text.

In the second dimension, discursive practice covers text production and text

consumption. At this level, the analysis is focused on the way the addressers of texts

draw on the existing discourses and genres to create and build texts, and the way the

addressees of texts also interpret the texts by applying the existing discourses and

genres. Philip and Jorgensen (2002: p.70) stated that discursive practices role in

achieving the social order in social change have been become the focus of the main

aim of CDA in exploring the connections between language use and social practice.

This means that discursive practice links texts and social practice. The texts which

are produced and consumed in discursive practice shape and are being shaped by

social practice.

text production

SOCIAL PRACTICE

text consumptionTEXT

DISCURSIVE PRACTICE

12

In the social practice level, it is believed to be the wider social practice to

which the communicative event belongs. Norman Fairclough (1999) in Jaworski and

Coupland (2006: p.154) stated that

“The network of social practices is described from a specifically discoursal perspective as an ‘order of discourse’ consisting of discourses and genres in particular relationships with each other, but with an orientation in boundaries within and between orders of discourse as part of social and cultural change.”

In this statement, Fairclough emphasizes that the order of discourse is seen as a form

of connection which relates discourses and genres as a process in social and cultural

change. It also mediates the link between linguistic features of text and interactions,

and social and cultural structures and processes. In this dimension, discourse may

bring out the ideological effects and hegemonic processes.

2.1.2 Ideological Discourse Analysis

Ideology can be defined as a system of belief which could also be used for

interpreting the world. The members of a certain ideology have their own social

values and norms based on the group goals and interests. Dijk (1995: p.138) pointed

that “through other social representations, such as attitudes and socio-cultural

knowledge, ideologies also influence this specific knowledge and beliefs of

individual language users”.

Specifically, Dijk (1995: p.147) suggested that ideological discourse in text

can be identified through self-identity descriptions, activity descriptions, goal

descriptions, norm and values descriptions, position and relation descriptions, and

resource descriptions.

2.1.2.1 Self-identity Descriptions

Self-identity descriptions involved the group that its identity is being

threatened, insecure, or marginalized. This aspect is more relevant for the groups

which have attributed characteristics, such as gender, race, ethnicity, age, religion,

language, and origin. It can be reflected in some questions such as: who are we?

Where do we come from? What are our properties? What is our history? What are we

proud of? Who will be admitted?

13

2.1.2.2 Activity Descriptions

Activity descriptions is typical for groups who are defined by what they do,

such as professionals and activists. This aspect may include some questions, such as:

what are our tasks? What do we do? What is expected of us? What are our social

roles?

2.1.2.3 Goal Descriptions

Goal descriptions refer to positive activities which make ideological and

social sense. This aspect is commonly focused on good goals of a group’s activities.

For example, saving nature and keeping the sustainability of environment are the

goals for environmentalists.

2.1.2.4 Norm and Value Descriptions

Norm and value descriptions refer to the meanings that involve norms and

values, about good and bad, right or wrong, and what the action and goals try to

respect. For example, minority groups may emphasize equality and justice for their

groups.

2.1.2.5 Position and Relation Descriptions

Position and relation descriptions reveal the identity, activities, and goals of

a group, including the relation to other groups. It can be said that this category may

also put attention on group relations, conflict, polarization, and negative other-

presentation (derogation). For example, lecturers with respect to their students or

feminists with respect to chauvinist men.

2.1.2.6 Resource Descriptions

Resource descriptions point that groups can generally exist and subsist only

when they have access to general or specific resources. In the intergroup conflict and

when the access is limited and threatened, ideological discourse will largely focus on

the resource. For example, journalists will do anything to protect their information

sources.

14

2.2 Rhetorical Power

Speeches tend to be performed directly in front of many people or the

audience. A speech is considered successful when it changes people’s perspective or

inspires people to do something. It is expected through the content of the speech. The

secret of a great speech lies on the rhetorical power which is expressed in the content

of the speech. According to Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary 8th edition,

rhetoric is defined as ‘the skill of using language in speech or writing in a special

way that influences or entertain people’. From the definition, it can be concluded that

rhetoric is an art to make use the language as the main communication tool to

persuade other people.

Looking back on the history, Aristotle pointed that rhetoric means ‘the art or

discovering all the available means of persuasion’. In ancient Greek era, rhetoric was

usually used in the court by people to present their cases because they did not have

lawyer to speak on behalf of them. As the time went on, the art of rhetoric developed

as an interesting subject to be learned further. The art of rhetoric was believed tobe

taught and developed as a discipline.

Aristotle, in his book entitled Rhetoric, delivered that ‘it is clear, then, that

rhetorical study, in strict sense, is concerned with the modes of persuasion’. From the

quote, it is obvious that Aristotle wants to emphasize that the rhetoric art has strong

connection to persuasion. Furthermore, Aristotle explained that “persuasion is clearly

a sort of demonstration, since we are most fully persuaded when we consider a thing

to have been demonstrated”. He also added three means of effecting persuasion.

First, the person who applies rhetoric should have logical reasons. Second, the person

needs to understand human character and goodness in their various forms. Third, the

person has to understand the emotion.

The art of rhetoric has related to persuasion since the ancient time. In

addition, argument is apparently also crucial in rhetoric. Persuasion and argument, in

fact, are two important elements in rhetoric that really close with human. Persuasion

may appear in everyday activities and interactions between people. For example, in a

conversation at work, a person may attempt to influence his colleagues to accept his

view of today’s economic. It simply shows that people are actually really close with

rhetoric. Herrick (2005: p.13) pointed that “rhetoric seeks persuasion by employing

various resources of symbol systems such as language”. Furthermore, he suggested

four resources of symbol to achieve the goal of persuasion: arguments, appeals,

15

arrangement, and aesthetics. Herrick (2005: p.7) also described five characteristics of

rhetoric, which are planned, adapted to an audience, shaped by human motives,

responsive to a situation, persuasion-seeking.

There are plenty of rhetorical devices which are available for the analysis of

text. However, this study will only use 5 rhetorical devices. They are anaphora,

antithesis, parallelism, amplification, and metaphor. (Harris, 2013)

2.2.1 Anaphora

Anaphora is the repetition of the same word or words at the beginning of

successive phrases, clauses, or sentences. Anaphora usually appears along with

parallelism and climax. As an example, it can be found in the sentence by Abraham

Lincoln,

“But in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate, we cannot consecrate, we cannot hallow this ground . . .”.

2.2.2 Antithesis

Antithesis makes a clear, contrasting relationship between two ideas by

joining them together. Antithesis can be used to deliver a complexity in ideas by

admitting opposite or nearly opposite truths. This device also can be used to present

two contrasting ideas deliberately in a sentence. For example:

“If we try, we might succeed; if we do not try, we cannot succeed.”

2.2.3 Parallelism

Parallelism pointed at several parts of a sentence or several sentences are

expressed in a similar way to emphasize the ideas are equal in importance. Moreover,

the sentences also have the same grammatical structures. The forms of parallelism

can be verbs and adverbs, verbs and direct objects, the objects, prepositional phrases,

participial, infinitive, and general gerund phrases. A quote by Benjamin Franklin

may be considered as the example of Parallelism,

“Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I may remember. Involve me and I will learn.”

16

2.2.4 Amplification

Amplification includes repeating a word or expression with additional details

for emphasizing what might otherwise be passed over. It emphasizes the important

main idea expressed in the discussion. For example,

“I know I have but the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart of a king, and of a king of England, too.” – Queen Elizabeth I.

2.2.5 Metaphor

Metaphor involves the comparison of two different things by speaking of one

term in the other. The metaphor is being used in order to beautify the speech or

writing to make it more interesting to be listened or read. According to Aristotle in

Rhetoric, “It is metaphor above all else that give clearness, charm, and distinction to

style.” From this quotation, it can be withdrawn that metaphor adds the effect which

can be remembered by the audience.

Knowles and Moon (2006: 9) suggested that there are three elements in

traditional approach to analyze metaphors: vehicle, topic, and grounds. Vehicle refers

to the metaphor identified in the text. Topic refers to the metaphor’s intended

meaning while the grounds is the relationship between literal and metaphorical

meanings, which provide the key of the vehicle’s effectiveness (p.10). As an

example,

Context: Be prepared for a mountain of paperwork

Metaphor/vehicle: mountain

Meaning/topic: a large amount

Connection/ground: ideas of size, being immovable, and difficult to deal with

(Moon and Knowles, 2006, p.9)

2.3 African-Americans in United States History Timeline

The history of African-Americans in United States can be drawn into a

timeline. The history of African-Americans in US works as the context to process the

meaning interpretation of I Have A Dream text. It shows the African-American

struggling journey in gaining their rights from time to time. The timeline is made

according to Free At Last: The U.S. Civil Rights Movement.

17

Table 2.1 African-Americans History in United States Timeline

YEAR EVENT(S)1619 Negros were captured from a Spanish ship in Carribean, and

brought to Virginia.1770 The number of Negro population was growing. This

condition encouraged Southern elites enacted the children of slave were also slave.

1793 ‘Fugitive Slave’ laws enacted for seizure and return of runaway slave.

1800 Underground Railroad system was established by the Quackers to help the slaves to escape.

1808 The abolishment of slave trade in some Northern states, e.g. California, Iowa, Winsconsin, Ohio, and Indiana.

1831 Virginia slave rebellion led by Nat Turner.1835 An anti-slavery meeting were held in Boston.1841 William Llyod Garrison, leading white abolitionist,

sponsored anti-slavery convention in Nuntucket, Massachusets alongwith Frederick Douglass, an escaped slave, journalist, and publisher.

1849 Harriet Tubman was known as the famous abolitionist who was active in Underground Railroad to save the slaves to escape.

1850 Fugitive Slave law renewed with heavy punishments for people who helped the slaves to escape.

1860 Abraham Lincoln was elected as President.1861 American Civil War began.1863 President Lincoln signed Emancipation Proclamation.1865 American Civil War ended.

Congress passed a law providing equal pay for black soldiers.

President Lincoln was assassinated.1866 Civil Rights Act: All persons born in United States were

citizens, without regard to race, color, and previous condition.

1870 Fifteenth Amandmend to the constitution: Blacks were given right to vote.

1877 South governments adopted segregationist laws that separating the races in every aspect of everyday life, known as Jim Crow system.

1896 US Supreme Court decided ‘separate but equal’ treatment to African Americans through the case Plessy v. Ferguson.

1905 W.E.B DuBois found Niagara movement, i.e. protest to Booker T. Washington’s policy of accommodation to white society.

1910 W.E.B DuBois and African American activists found the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP).

1940 Thurgood Marshall became the chief of NAACP legal fund.1952 Malcolm X appeared by becoming a minister of the nation of

18

Islam.1954 Brown v. Board case declared racial segregation in schools

was unconstitutional.1955 Rosa Parks was arrested because she refused to give her seat

to a white man in a bus in Montgomery. As the response of Rosa Parks arrest, Montgomery black

community launched bus boycott in Montgomery for a year.1956 Bus boycott in Montgomery ended.1957 Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)

established by Martin Luther King, Jr., Charles K. Steele, Fred L.

1960 Some black students took white only seats at a local Woolworth department store.

1961 Freedom Ride was held from Washington DC to Florida.1963 Martin Luther King, Jr. was arrested and jailed during anti

segregation protests in Birmingham. During in jail, he wrote Letter from a Birmingham Jail.

The March on Washington (August 28), the largest political demonstration, was held. In this event, Martin Luther King, Jr. performed I Have A Dream speech to around 250,000 people.

1964 President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act (July 2) that prohibited discrimination of all kinds based on race, color, religion, or national origin.

Martin Luther King, Jr. received a nobel prize.1965 Malcolm X was assassinated on February 21.

In August 10, Voting Rights Act of 1965 in South was released. It allowed Southern blacks to register to vote.

Bloody Sunday. State troopers violently attacked peaceful demonstrators led by Martin Luther King, Jr. when they crossed Pettus Bridge in Selma.

1967 Supreme Court rules in Loving v. Virginia that prohibited interracial marriage is unconstitutional.

Thurgood Marshall appointed to the Supreme Court by President Johnson.

1968 Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in Memphis on April 4.

President Johnson signed Civil Rights Act of 1968 which was prohibiting discrimination in sale, rental, and financing of housing.

2.4 Martin Luther King, Jr.

19

As the supporting materials for this study, Martin Luther King, Jr.’s personal

background and his involvement in Civil Rights Movement are added in this chapter

adapted from www.thekingcenter.org.

2.4.1 Personal Background

Martin Luther King Jr. was born in 15 January 1929 in Atlanta, Georgia. His

grandfather and father were served as pastors of the Ebenezer Baptist Church in

Atlanta. Born in the religious family background had made Martin Luther King Jr. to

have a strong faith in God. He also served the church along with her father. In his

young age, Martin Luther King Jr. attended segregated public schools in Georgia. He

then continued his study in Boston University where he met Coretta Scott and later

married to her.

In 1954, Martin Luther King was a pastor of Dexter Avenue Baptist Church

in Montgomery, Alabama and also a member of the executive committee of National

Association for the Advancement of Colored People. He had a strong will in

struggling for the equality for the members of his race. During his struggle in

achieving the equality for his race, he experienced many things that were threatening

his life. He was arrested, his house was bombed, he was accused of personal abuse,

but these things did not make him surrender.

2.4.2 Involvement in Civil Rights Movement

Martin Luther King, Jr. started to emerge and join the Civil Rights Movement

in 1955. At that time, he was chosen to be a spokesperson for the Montgomery Bus

Boycott in Alabama which happened as the response of Rosa Parks arrest. A year of

Montgomery Bus Boycott resulted in U.S. Supreme Court ruled that racial

discrimination in transportation was unconstitutional.

In 1957, Martin Luther King Jr. was elected as the president of the Southern

Christian Leadership Conference which aimed for the civil rights movement. The

ideals of the organization adapted from Christianity and Gandhi’s techniques. He

was really active in persuading the people to be aware and fight for the injustice

which had been going on for many years. He served as the head of SCLC until the

day he was assassinated in 1968. He traveled to many places in America and spoke

more than twenty-five hundred times about the injustice, protest and action.

20

In 1963, Martin Luther King, Jr. was arrested and brought into a jail in

Birmingham because of the protest and nonviolent campaign in Birmingham which

was known as the most segregated city in United States. He also wrote the ‘Letter

from a Birmingham Jail’ when he was in the campaign. On the same year, he led The

March on Washington on August 28 which was known as the biggest political

demonstration with around 250,000 audiences. In this chance, he performed the most

memorable speech in America history entitled I Have A Dream. Martin Luther King

Jr. was named as the Man of the Year by Time magazine in 1963 and regarded as the

symbolic leader of African-American.

In 1964, a Nobel Peace Prize was rewarded to Martin Luther King, Jr. for his

hardwork in the Civil Rights Movement. In 1965, he led a march from Selma to

Montgomery in order to celebrate Voting Rights Act which was passed by the

Congress. In 1968, Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated on April 4 at the

Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. He has done thirteen years of nonviolent

leadership in Civil Rights Movement.

2.5 Previous Studies

In order to support the analysis of I Have A Dream speech by Dr. Martin

Luther King, Jr., some scientific articles have been added as the previous studies

which have the similar topic and theories of the new research.

The first scientific article entitled Rhetorical Devices of Politicians (On the

Material of Barack Obama’s Speeches) which was taken from a Russian journal by

Bokayeva. This study focused on the meaning interpretation of politicians speeches

by analyzing rhetorical devices used in them. It was purposed to find out how the

speeches performed by politicians could persuade the audience. Most politicians use

the linguistic devices in their speeches in order to achieve their certain goals. They

usually have the rhetoric skill to convince and influence other people. This research

was using both qualitative and quantitative methods while doing the research. The

media that the study used were 20 different speeches of Barack Obama, U.S.

President. Meanwhile, the linguistic devices, such as metaphors, repetitions, and

rhetorical questions, were tools for analyzing the speeches. The study identified the

frequent techniques which were used by Barack Obama in his speeches by describing

the features and determining their pragmatic force. The analysis results found out

that Barack Obama frequently uses the rhetorical devices which were known since

21

ancient Greek. These rhetorical devices make the speeches more attractive and

impressive and are able to influence and persuade the audience allows the politician

to reach their purposes.

The second previous research entitled Ideological Discourse Structures in

Political Speeches by Matic. The article was published in Komunikacija I Kultura

Online Vol.3 Issue 3. The purpose of this article was to identify and compare, using

tools offered by critical discourse analysis, political discourse structures, such as

semantic macrostructures, local meanings, and linguistic devices. The speeches of

two American President’s candidates in 2008 election were chosen as the media of

this study. In specific, this article analyzed semantic marcrostructures (topics), local

meanings and lexical style within speech acts, rhetorical devices, forms of

indirectness and strategies especially aimed at positive self-presentation and negative

other-presentation.

The analysis process started with the analysis of social, political, economic,

and the current issues at that time, so the linguistic choices of the speakers in certain

discourse was revealed. After that, the analysis process continued on the analysis of

the production, distribution, and consumption of texts. The general meaning of the

speeches by both speakers will be analyzed using semantic macrostructures to

describe the pattern and the sequence of the topics in the speeches. The process will

be followed by the analysis of local meanings which also include lexical unit and

positive or negative self-presentation.

The results of the whole analysis have shown that both of speakers have

similarities as well as the differences in political discourse structures within

ideologies strategies used to express political stance in their speeches. Both of

speakers were using intertextual and interdiscursive examples to express objection

and criticism directly and indirectly as well as to make the audience were empathy.

Besides that, both of the speakers were also using implicatures and presuppositions

to mislead the interpretation as well as commissives to deliver promises. There are

some differences between Speaker 1 (John McCain) and Speaker 2 (Barack Obama).

In the perspective of ideological strategies, Speaker 1’s recontextualization

the Speaker 2’s expression was lack of precise information because he was lack in

providing more explanation of what makes him different from the current

government and more qualified than his opponent. In other hand, Speaker 2 used

strategy of referring to important political figures in the past to emphasize that he has

22

trustworthy quality to the public. With his knowledge of political and economic, he

can make the audience to be empathy in order to achieve the common goal. He

offered positive emotions, such as hope and pursuit of happiness, to the audience,

unlike Speaker 1.

The third scientific article entitled Power in Political Discourse of Barack

Obama by Shayegh and Nebifar. The article was published in Journal of Basic and

Applied Scientific Research Volume 2 Issue 4 in 2012. The article explored how the

ideological contents and socio-political relations of power existed in Barack

Obama’s interviews based on Hallidayian Systemic Functional Grammar from

Norman Fairclough’s perspective. In order to find out the ideology matters which

contained in the interviews, the study chose to use transitivity and modality. The

analysis continued on the analysis of hesitation, persuasion, threat, religious

statement and illusive speech in each clause.

The results have shown that from the interviews which have been analyzed, it

was found that Obama tend to use simple words and short sentences to be closer with

the audience. By analyzing transitivity, there can be found material process which

showed what government has achieved and its future plans, and also to build the

audience’s confidence toward president and his government in the following four

years. Furthermore, by analyzing modality, there were found certain modal verbs,

tenses, and first person pronouns that Obama used to make his audience more easily

to understand and accept political speeches. Obama tried to shorten the distance

between him and the audience by using first person pronouns and religious faith.

The fourth study entitled Ideology and Political Discourse: A Critical

Discourse Analysis of Erdogan’s Political Speech by Bayram. This study focused on

language use in political discourse with an aim to identify the identity and

background by using Norman Fairclough’s assumptions in CDA. The media was

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan speech during debate in the World

Economic Forum in January 2009. From the study, the results proved Fairclough’s

notions of ideology exists in text that “ideology invests language in various ways at

various levels” and that “ideology is both property of structures and of events”. For

further explanation, Erdogan used powerful social tool to present his characteristics.

His linguistic style and attitude during the debate were reflecting a particular social

group.

23

The fifth article entitled Words as Weapons: The Metaphorical Attack of

Michelle Obama in US Print Headlines by Thomas. The study aimed to examine the

discourse surrounding Michelle Obama and reveal whether the coverage was biased,

negative, and attacking. The media were US newspapers during 10 months of 2008

Presidential election which related to Michelle Obama. As the comparison, the study

also conducted the analysis of newspaper discourse surrounding Cindy McCain

during the same time. The analysis used the socio-cultural Critical Discourse

Analysis (CDA) by Teun van Dijk.

Analysis processes involved the headlines of the chosen US Newspapers for

content (topic covered) and rhetorical strategies used in the framing of the headlines.

From the analysis, the results have appeared. First, the headline analysis has shown

that the media coverage of Michelle Obama was biased, negative, and attacking. It

can be seen from the syntactic structure of the metaphorical verbs of attack, violence,

and aggression used in 6% of headlines directly referencing Michelle Obama. In

other hand, the same critical coverage and metaphorical verbs of attack also were

shown in headlines referencing Cindy McCain with 4%.

From the five scientific articles which are used as the supporting materials for

the study, there are some things that can be concluded from them. Most of the

scientific articles are using Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as the base to analyze

the texts. The studies tried to connect the linguistic features which are used in the

texts with the social (and also political) condition when the texts were produced.

Most of the text analyses of the studies also reveal that the speakers or addressers

used their rhetorical skill while delivering the texts. The analyses were done by using

some analysis tools such as rhetorical devices and linguistic structures. Furthermore,

linguistic features of the texts are important because they are influenced the meaning

interpretation of the texts.

In this new study, the base of analysis is also using Critical Discourse

Analysis (CDA) from the perspective of three-dimensional framework by Norman

Fairclough. The analysis of I Have A Dream speech by Martin Luther King, Jr. will

also be analyzed by using rhetorical devices, (such as anaphora, antithesis,

parallelism, amplification, and metaphor) and Ideological Discourse Analysis from

the perspective of van Dijk which includes self-identification descriptions, activity

descriptions, goal descriptions, norm and values descriptions, position and relation

descriptions, and resource descriptions. These theories are expected to reveal the

24

historical background and rhetorical power of Martin Luther King, Jr. on his people

and also to find out the ideological purpose of African-Americans in the I Have A

Dream text.