Abstract
CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT THREAT IN SELECTED POLITICAL SPEECHES
Post-World War II is regarded as the period at which the world has experienced the rise of two great forces : the United States and Soviet Union that never interact and agreed with each other and were controlled by many leaders , among them were Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin who face with threat the recent issues most of which are the war on terrorism and the issue of Ukraine. Consequently, the study is expected to answer some of the following questions: What are the linguistic features most frequently used by the presidents in their threat? Which of the presidents reflects more certainty in his threatening speech? What social practices do the Russian and American presidents want to achieve through threat? The current study aims at examining the linguistic features most frequently used by presidents in performing their threat, investigating whether Trump or Putin seems to be more certain of his threat and revealing the social practices that presidents seek to achieve through threat. The study hypothesizes that the most frequently used linguistic tools are figurative language and active –passive verbs and Putin seems to be more certain in conducting his threat than Trump. It also hypothesizes that the two presidents seek to minimize the social effects of persecution and show their hegemonic power with it , and they can end that persecution.
This study adopts an eclectic model of Fairclough (1989). It reveals that Putin and trump use cohesive devices and figurative language more than other linguistic elements and Putin seems to show more certainty than Trump. Also the study reveals that the presidents depend on the context and situation in which they tend to threat to minimize peoples’ suffering, misbehaviors regimes and to keep showing their solidarity and power among the world.
Keywords
Threat, Direct Threat , Indirect threat , Critical Discourse Analysis, figurative language.
