Critical Discourse Analysis of Imran Khan Speech in United Nation

Abstract

The aims of this paper to highlight the conceal meaning of Imran khan speech in United Nation. I applied three model of Fairclough text analysis, practical analysis and social culture analysis. As we know that political speeches are contextual, inside political text hidden messages possess. All these covered texts are explored by means of Fairclough three-dimensional model. I answered all the research questions that is how Imran khan targeted other nations as the cause of islamophobia in his united nation speech, how he clarified that Islam is a peaceful religion as well as all religions and is there any power in his speech.

Introduction

CDA first aims is to explore the implicit of any discourse (written or spoken) that is produced by powerful figures in any context (Van Dijk, 1985).

CDA helps in expose the implicit ideas of political or another dominant person. It was introduced as new field in Britain in 1989, when a work with a name of language and control was published. By means of CDA the person can analyze the positive and negative views in a person spoken or written text. It is not only concern with political field, we can apply it on advertisement, newspaper, body language, movie drama, documentary etc. In CDA we use different critical theories that is feminism, nationalism, Marxism, capitalism, racism, fascism etc. By all these theories we critically analyze anyone speech or written work. For example, when we read or listen someone work or speech, automatically in our mind these theories come, then we apply on it.

Critical relationships between discourse and a social group of people is itself a cause securing power and hegemony. The concept of hegemony was proposed by Antonio Gramsci (1971). In a Gramscian view, politics is seen as a struggle for hegemony. Leadership purpose is to how authority is achieving agreement and the importance of ideology. Discourse analysis (CDA) is a branch for Discourse Analysis commonly used for analyzing political spoken and written texts. Fairclough (1995),an expert in a new era CDA, defined it as: The kind of discourse analysis which objectives to orderly highlight often hidden links of causality and determination between (a) discursive practices, events and texts, and (b) wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; to investigate how such practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power; and to explore how the opacity of these in sustaining relations of power.

According to Fairclough (1995) he defined CDA as it is kind of discourse analysis through which we reveal implicit meaning or ideology, power exercising of political person. Language has relation with social realities, it means what we observe in the society it become the part of our discourse. The aim of this paper is to discover how Imran khan targeted other nations as the cause of islamophobia in his united nations speech, how he clarified that Islam is a peaceful religion and Is there any power in his speech? We have different approaches for CDA that is Van Dijk linguistic, cognitive and social theories, Ruth Wodok’s framework is based on text in a specific field and Fairclough model consist of analysis of text, analysis of practice and analysis of discursive events.

Literature Review

In Critical Analysis of candidates' speech, we can suppose that one of the most crucial reason for political candidates to achieve favorable result in any election campaign is the use of versatile language and their ability to induce and make an impression on their audiences. Discourse is not just a mental and lingual issue, but it possess thoughts, emotions and excitements. The importance of a discourse is not essentially rooted in reasoning power of that discourse, but the importance of a discourse is a differences of cognitive and rational factors on one part and emotional, inductive and persuasive factors on the other part. It is important state that discourses are half and positioned, and social variations are manifest in the diversity of discourses within cultural contexts. In this direction, the portion of political lies are absoultly important in political election ground The more a political discourse is mixed to the general political culture of a society, the more the success chances of that discourse will be. One important area in political-critical discourse analysis is that a meaningful political discourse is the one that moves to the expected expectation’s and desires of a society. In Iran, for example, there are various cultural criteria that help a political discourse to be dominant in election campaigns, including: being management-oriented and program-oriented, having religious thoughts, fighting with immorality and corruption, bravery toward foreigners, willingness to stability and safeguarding the interests of the people, willingness to social and cultural freedoms, submitting effective strategies to have suitable meeting with others, simple-living and stopping of luxury and so on.

Fairclough (1995) defines a discourse analysis as an analysis technique which composed of linguistic description of the language text,explanation of the relationship between the (productive and interpretative) discursive processes and the text, and explanation of the relationship between the discursive processes and the social processes. In addition, McCarthy (2000) states that discourse analysis is deal with that language depends upon context in which it is used. In addition, discourse analysis does not deal with only the pattern of language, but it is also considering the text according to situation

Shabanali Bahrampoor (2001) pointed out to the objectives of DA as follows:

• To show the link between author, reader and text 
• To highlight the deep structure of text production or discourse analysis process
• To highlight the effect of text (general linguistic system) and text according to situation(social, historical, political, cultural, …) on discourse 
• To clarify special conditions of discourse maker
• To clarify variability of meaning
• To manifest the link between text and group of people believes
• To made a new method and technique in studying text, media, politics and so on. 

There are some areas of Discourse Analysis such as speech act theory, meaning according to context, conversation analysis, genre analysis, theories of politeness, indirectness, general discourse, discourse and cultures and critical discourse analysis. I used CDA in order to fulfill its objectives.

Mrs. Sh. –was the editor-in-chief of a weekly publication (Farzan Dane Gil) – used media discourse analysis CDA as a main focus of her campaign lie in City Council Election time so the nature of power link present in her discourse is not completely okay; because of this, Mrs. Sh.' discourse consist of opaque link of power as Fairclough called it 'power behind discourse'. Media discourse is type of one-sidedness discourse in which students doesn't understand who is among the listeners and what they say is transferred message to ideal matter candidates have various types of techniques for issue vanishing. By means of deep discussions of a long list of her vision and programs in her weekly publication, Mrs. S attempts to clarify how much issues exist in Rasht City and how she struggles to stop them; by this cunning technique, she brings the sense of hope in audience. In respect to the women's role she stressed on more active presence of women in city management just on case to power the position of women in their social and public face. She used the words 'emphasize' and 'point out' she clarifies a type of power in her statement. Another characteristic of Mrs. Sh.' statements is that she used Van Leeuwen personification technique saying 'media helped me...' that is a compensatory ability to put influences on teaching each of the people handled in mass as an individual. In her last statement, Mrs. S mentioned the phrase 'Islamic Government'. Although she never tell about her political ability this phrase is the nodal point of Principality party in our country; his requesting technique because he uses feeling full language to make a taste of consensus in listeners, and the other technique is using of relational value that is we , you people etc because of politeness in his speech. Also, through describing his vision he took help from Argumentative technique of issue vanishing collecting relational parts of conversational discourse. When he says, 'all of us should' portrayed solidarity with relational elements of a more conventional political discourse type and when he mentioned of modal verb 'should' he expresses power in his speech, so we can also say that power element exist in his speech . Mr. A frequently used face-to-face discourse during his campaign lie in City Council Election and he considered that it was the most effective measure in his succession. In face-to-face discourse he made his contributions for the specific people he was meeting with. He knew who his listeners were, so he struggled to used the language he adapted and to decide to keep this adapting based on the out come he got from his listeners The most features of face-to-face discourse is that the nature of power relation enacted in it is often transparent In his tracker, Mr. A mentioned many responsibilities undertaken in several companies. According to Faircloughs that responsibility word in political discourse highlights the power. He also requested people for helping him. In his book 'Language and Power', Fairclough claims that choice of words in any speech shows the person power ,ideology mission , vision . The main position of Mrs. Sh. is a female, so she used of another strategy to claim solidarity with women and articulate their desire, hope and wills. She also used relative pronoun by using pronoun 'we'. Cultural values were also the main reason of her success. She achieved a lot of votes because of her justifiable appearance, great character and religious opinions showing the social identity of the woman political candidate in Islamic country.

In the start of his speech, Mr. A introduced himself as a common person in front of his audience . By using grand words he influences all his audience and he also criticized women that they are not able to participate and can do political activities. He was against towards female politicians. According to Fairclough, politicians criticised one another because to show their power. Person who criticised a person it means he or she has a power.

Methodology

I analyzed Imran khan speech by using Fairclough three-dimensional framework for conceiving of, and analyzing, discourse. The first dimension is discourse as text that is choice of words, sentences structure, turn taking. In simple word in this dimension we focus on grammar.

The second dimension is discourse as discursive practice, i.e. discourse as something which is produced, circulated, distributed and consumed in society. Approaching discourse as discursive practice means that after the analysis of vocabulary, grammar, cohesion, and text structure, attention should be given to speech acts, coherence, and intertextuality – three aspects that link a text to its wider social context.

The third dimension is discourse as social practice, i.e. the ideological effects and hegemonic processes in which discourse is seen to operate.

Critical Discourse Analysis

He used the word leaders it means that he considered himself powerful as leaders. In the beginning he was talking generally, he did not mention Pakistan that facing different problems. He highlighted that we have chance to discuss the problems the world is facing. He used’’ we’’ it refers to the world that all nations have problems not only Pakistan. By unity we can abolish these problems. He used must in statement one above. It is referring to order not advising or persuading.

In the second text Imran khan targeted the previous government of Pakistan that involve in money laundering. The elite people use poor people taxes for personal affairs. He also implicitly targeted united nation that help with corrupted politicians. He said that when we try to find their western account, we are facing difficulties to check their balance accounts.

Imran khan targeted America the cause of islamophobia. Post 9/11 islamophobia spread throughout the world. Due to islamophobia Muslims in the globe considered as terrorist. They are facing different problems because of the name terrorism associated with Islam. He claims that Hindus, Jews they all did suicide, but no one blame them as terrorist. He said that Islam is peaceful religion as well as every religion. He mentioned no religion is responsible for terrorism, every religion teaches good things. The main purpose of him is to remove a word terrorism from Islam and Pakistan. When the word terrorism is attached with Pakistan there will no investors come, or investment happens. He changes the mind of the world toward Pakistan and Islam. Humanity element is present in his speech because he used the verb are and common noun Muslims which refer to humanism. He was not only talking about Pakistani Muslims but Muslims in the world in his UN speech.

In his speech he said that There are radical fringes in every society, but the basis of ALL religion is compassion and justice. he used ALL and considered every religion perfect because in UN every religion people exist that is Muslims, Christians, Jews in order to avoid criticism on any religion and his purpose was not to blame other religions but to influence the audience by his language.

Other cause of islamophobia and Pakistan as terrorist country is India. He wants good relationship with India but everywhere India is trying to put Pakistan in blacklist. India spy in Baluchistan was creating violence’s. A lot of people were dying in terrorism because of India and America. But these nations blame Pakistan as a terrorist.

Humanism element is more present in above five number paragraph. He is trying for Kashmiri people self- determination. He rises voice for their rights. He also targeted united nation indirectly that you have not been doing anything for Kashmir issue. Kashmiri people are in trouble because of racial discrimination in India. Indian government considered itself superior than the Muslims live in India.

6 a good guy it refers to Pakistan doesn't get justice…. he picks up a weapon, it refers to nuclear power and a whole cinema united nation cheers him on. What has been the response of the world community on any atrocities in the Muslim world?

In simple words he is threating UN that stop India to create violence in Pakistan and Kashmir otherwise we will fire nuclear bomb on India then the whole world will in trouble.

Conclusion

Imran khan involves America implicitly in islamophobia a. He did not directly say, that US is the cause of terrorism in Pakistan because to maintain good relationship with US. but he associated US to the part of violence’s in the region by talking about 9/11 attack. He targeted India to stop bloodshed in Pakistan, when India did not stop it then UN will responsible. Humanity is present in his speech, he used common noun that is Muslims in world, people which shows no discrimination among Pakistani Muslims and other Muslims. Is there any power in his speech? He used MUST word, which indicate to political power because we use must for order and the authoritative person can command. He gave nuclear threat to India it also shows defense power. He gave different references from Islam in order to clear the negative attitudes towards Islam. Islam is a peaceful religion. But Europe regarded it as intolerable religion.

References

1. Halliday, M. A. K. (1979). Linguistic function and literary style: an inquiry into the language of William Golding’s The Inheritors. In Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse. ed. Jonathan Webster. 88-125. Peking: Peking University Press.
2. Wei Fang. (2005). Language Feature Analysis and Translation Method of Political Speeches. Journal of Peking Printing College Volumn13, issue 4.P75
3. Jalai, M. S. N. (2014). European journal of social sciences education and research. A critical Discourse Analysis of Four Candidates of Rasht City Council Election in 2013, with a view of Fairclough Approach, 1(2).