Rhetorical Strategies and Political Persuasion: An Analysis of Discourse Markers in Pita Limcharoenrat's Speeches in Four Election Campaigns
Keywords:
Discourse Markers, Rhetorical Strategies, Political PersuasionAbstract
The objectives of this study were: 1. to investigate the types of discourse markers (DMs) utilized in Pita Limcharoenrat's pre-election of the general election of Thailand in 2023, 2. to analyze the frequencies of discourse markers used and 3. to explore the intended meanings conveyed in the speeches. In this study, theoretical framework of Swan (2005) which has twenty-one DMs lists were conducted to this study. There are speeches of election campaigns as the data which were shorter (speech1 and 2) and longer (speech 3 and 4). The quantitative data was collected by using twenty-one lists of DMs and analyzed the frequency of each DMs within four speeches. The qualitative data was conducted by exploration throughout the intended meaning of the speeches.
The findings of the study displayed as follow; 1. Fourteen of twenty-one types of discourse markers were utilized by Pita Limcharoenrat's speeches of four election campaigns. 2. The study founded DMs were less employed in shorter speeches than the longer. The study also revealed the categories of DMs "Concession and Counter Argument" had the highest frequency, appearing 19 times, followed by "Adding" and "Logical Consequence," which appeared 16 and 14 times, respectively. On the other hand, some categories of DMs, including "Similarity," "Contradicting," "Generalizing," and "Persuading," were not utilized, indicating that these types of markers were either not deemed necessary or not strategically chosen for these particular speeches. The data shown that the speaker employed discourse markers more frequently and diversely in longer speeches, using them to build complex arguments and maintain logical coherence. 3) The intended meaning of discourse markers was employed to range the structure of contents, contrast and emphasize the ideas, and concede and counter-arguing. As the result, the speaker employed DMs to straightforward and concentrated, often serving as simple transitional elements or basic connectors between ideas in shorter speeches. While the longer speeches, the speaker demonstrated a nuanced use of DMs to weave a complex narrative across various socio-political issues.
References
Abusalim, N., Zidouni, S., Alghazo, S., Rababah, G., & Rayyan, M. (2022). Textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in political discourse: A case study. Journal of Political Discourse Analysis, 14(1), 75-92.
Ali, A., Rashid, A., & Abbas, S. (2020). Metadiscourse markers in political discourse: A corpus-assisted study of hedges and boosters in Benazir Bhutto's speeches. doi:10.31703/GSSR.2020(V-III).06
Mai, H. (2016). An intercultural analysis of meta-discourse markers as persuasive power in chinese and american political speeches. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 4(6), 13-22.
Ni’ma RASHID, B. (2020). Discourse Markers in Selected Political Speeches: a Descriptive Analysis. Journal of Current Researches on Social Sciences, 10(10 (4)), 891–920. doi.org/10.26579/jocress.436
Rasheed, E. (2019). Discourse markers in political speeches. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 15-30.
Srichanyachon, N. (2012). Teacher questions in English classrooms: What lies beyond them? Journal of Education and Practice, 3(12), 42-56.
Sukhovetska, L. (2021). Lingual markers of precedent strategy in everyday English political discourse. Philological Treatises, 13(1), 259- 265.
Zand-Moghadam, A., & Bikineh, L. (2015). Discourse markers in political interviews: A contrastive study of Persian and English. Language and Translation Studies, 48(3), 19-34.
Rotar, N. (2022). Transformation of markers of the deliberative democracy theory in modern political science. Mediaforum : Analytics, Forecasts, Information Management, 10, 2542. https://doi.org/10.31861/mediaforum.2022.10.25-42
Thuube, L., & Ekanjume-Ilongo, B. (2017). Media and the understanding of political discourse. Media Studies Journal, 31(4), 19-34.
Amir Zand-Moghadam, & Bikineh, L. (2015). Discourse markers in political interviews: A contrastive study of Persian and English. International Journal of Society, Culture & Language, 3(1), 47–61.
Redeker G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics,29(6):1139-1172 doi:10.1515/ling.1991.29.6.1139
Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse Markers. Cambridge University Press. doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841
Hyland, K. (1990). A Genre Description of the Argumentative Essay. RELC Journal, 21(1):66-78 doi:10.1177/003368829002100105
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of MCU Humanities Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.