Critical Discourse Analysis of Barack Obama Speech
DOI:
10.29303/jipp.v7i2c.659Published:
2022-06-27Downloads
Abstract
Critical Discourse Analysis is often applied to analyze political discourse including public speaking. The analysis of this thesis is based on a theory of CDA and its analysis methods which were represented by Thomas N. Huckin. Whereas the discussion used the descriptive qualitative research method which deals with data that are in the form of words, rather than statistics and attempts to arrive at a rich description of something systematically. It starts by analyzing some features in the text as a whole. Then, it is continued by analyzing some features at sentence-level and word levels. Since it is a critical discourse, therefore those features are analyzed critically. In a fact, it is found a deficiency in analyzing each feature based on the speech of Obama. The last is by doing contextual interpretation; it is summarized what language expression is used by Obama to uncover power and ideology. The interpretation is also based on the results from the two previous analyses. The result shows that CDA can explore the relationships between language, power, and ideology. Through the language used, it can be known the strength of power and the purpose of the speaker, which the power is strongly felt, and the ideology is seen as well as understandable.
Keywords:
critical discourse analysis, ideology, language, powerReferences
Buchstaller, I. (2013). Quotatives: New trends and sociolinguistic implications. John Wiley & Sons.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. SAGE publications.
Corson, D. (2000). Emancipatory Leadership. International Journal of Leadership in Education. 3(2), 93-120.
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London and New York. Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. Vintage.
Hamad, I. (2007). Lebih dekat dengan analisis wacana. Mediator: Jurnal Komunikasi, 8(2), 325-344.
Huckin, T. N. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. Functional approaches to written text: Classroom applications, 87-92.
Jaworski, A., & Coupland, N. (Eds.). (1999). The discourse reader (Vol. 2). London: Routledge.
Jenlink, P. M., & Townes, F. H. (Eds.). (2009). The struggle for identity in today's schools: Cultural recognition in a time of increasing diversity. R&L Education.
Knapp, P., & Watkins, M. (2005). Genre, text, grammar: Technologies for teaching and assessing writing. UNSW Press.
Kress, G. (1985). Linguistic processes in sociocultural practice. Victoria: Deakin University Press.
Leech, G. (2006). Glossary of English grammar. Edinburgh University Press.
McCarthy, M. (1991). Discourse analysis for language teachers. Cambridge University Press.
Raine, P. (2010). An application of the Sinclair and Coulthard (1975) method of discourse analysis. Retrieved January 2011.
Samovar, L. A., Porter, R. E., McDaniel, E. R., & Roy, C. S. (2017). Communication between cultures. Nelson Education.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2): 249-283.
Dijk, Teun A. (2014). Discourse and Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (2008). Text, context, pretext: Critical issues in discourse analysis, John Wiley & Sons, 12, 2: 34-45.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
klik di sini 
