WEIGHING IRAN’S NUCLEAR: CONSTRUING REALITY THROUGH ITS OPPOSITION

Habiba Al Umami

Abstract


Political speech has been an interesting social phenomenon to study. The languageinterplays within political discourse discover more than what is said. This studyanalyzes Benjamin Netanyahu speech in the United Nations General Assembly(UNGA) 2013 under the discussion of nuclear Iran. The study focuses on therepresentation of nuclear Iran based on Benjamin’s perspective and uncovers thepower strata between Iran and Israel. The study is conducted under a qualitativeapproach by using the three stages model of Critical Discourse Analysis andSystemic Functional grammar approach. The result of the study indicates thatnuclear Iran has the capability to contribute several impacts in the energy sector,peace and resolution process worldwide, and terrorism sphere in the Middle East.Benjamin’s speech also mirrors the power strata between Iran and Israel. Morespecifically, Benjamin implicitly acknowledges Iran as a powerful party within thediscourse.

Keywords


Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG), Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), politics, power

Full Text:

PDF

References


ACA Research Staff. 2013. An Arms Control Association Briefing Book:Solving the Iranian Nuclear Puzzle. Retrieved from https://www.armscontrol.org/files/ACA_Iran_Briefing_Book_2013.pdf

Alameda, Angela. (2008). SFL and CDA: Contributions of the Analysis of the Transitivity System in the Study of the Discursive Construction of National Identity (Case study: Gibraltar).

Bache. 2010. “Hjelmslev’s Glossematics: A source of inspiration to Systemic Functional Linguistics”. Published in Journal of Pragmatics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language Studies Vol 42 no. 9 page 2562-2578. Elsevier Ltd.

Barlett and Grady. 2017. What is a system? What is a function? In Elissa Asp. 2017. The RoutledgeHandbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics Routledge. https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9781315413891.ch3

Butt et.al. 2001. Using Functional Grammar; An Explorer’s Guide. Sydney:Macquarie University.

Dijk. 2006. “Politics, Ideology and Discourse”. Published in Elsevier Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics: Volume on Politics and Language page 728-740. Elsevier Ltd. Retrieved March 8, 2011, from http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/Politics,%20Ideology%20and%20Discourse.pdf.

Endarto, Ignatius. (2017). Systemic Functional Linguistics: A Brief Introduction.

Fairclough, Norman. 1989. Language and Power. Jurong: Longman Singapore Publisher (Pte). Ltd.

Halliday, A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). London, Melbourne, Auckland:Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.

Horvarth. 2009. Critical Discourse Analysis of Obama’s Political Discourse. Presov: University of Presov.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.550012

Janks, Hilary. 1997. “Critical Discourse Analysis as a Research Tools”. Published in Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education 18.3 (1997): 329- 342. Routledge. Retrieved May 25, 2014, from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0159630970180302?journalCod e=cdis20

Kahl, Dalton and Irvine. 2012. Risk and Rivalry: Iran, Israel and the Bomb. Center for a New American Security. Retrieved from https://www.google.co.id/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwj8lOf-_q3MAhVHB44KHQvLC1wQFggaMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnas. org%2Ffiles%2Fdocuments%2Fpublications%2FCNAS_RiskandRivalry_Kahl_0.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGs7b3geuSI0ZvHXIPhv_Fkozoqhg.

Martin, J.R., 1996. “Types of structure: deconstructing notions of constituency in clause and text”. In: Hovy, E., Scott, D. (Eds.), Burning Issues in Discourse: A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Heidelberg: Springer.

Melissen, J. (Ed.). (2005). The new public diplomacy (pp. 292-31). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Merriam. 1988. Case Study Research in Education, A Qualitative Approach. London: Jossey Bass Publishers.

Nader. 2013. Nader. 2013. Iran After the Bomb; How Would a Nuclear-Armed Tehran Behave?. Pittsburgh: RAND Corporation.

Nick, Stanko. 2001. “Use of Language in Diplomacy”. Published in Language and Diplomacy Ed by J. Kurbalija and H. Slavik. Academic Training Institute. Retrieved June 30, 2014, from http://www.diplomacy.edu/books/language_and_diplomacy/texts/pdf/nick.pdf

Pelinka, Anton. 2007. Language as a political category: the viewpoint of political science. Journal of Language & Politics 6(1). 129–43

Wenden. 2005. “The Politics of Representation: A Critical Discourse Analysis of an Aljazeera Special Report”. Published in International Journal of Peace Studies, Volume 10, Number 2, Autumn/Winter 2005 page 89-112. International Peace Research Association (IPRA).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.18860/prdg.v3i2.10444

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Member of:

Crossref

Indexed by:

SintaGoogle Scolar Sinta  MorarefSintaSintaSinta

Editorial Office

Department of English Literature

Faculty of Humanities, Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang
Jalan Gajayana 50 Malang, Jawa Timur, Indonesia 65144
Phone (+62) 341 551354, Facsimile (+62) 341 572533
e-mail: paradigm@uin-malang.ac.id

Creative Commons License
PARADIGM: Journal of Language and Literary Studies by Department of English Literature is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at http://ejournal.uin-malang.ac.id/index.php/paradigm.

View My Stats | Follow Us on Instagram