Baskadia

Introduction

The primary goal of this study is to examine a politician's speech in a societal context. Critical Discourse Analysis is becoming increasingly significant in education. Critical Discourse Analysis is essential in both written and spoken form. The primary goal of this research is to evaluate political speeches and discover the hidden meanings and objectives.Critical Discourse Analysis refers to how language works and how meanings are generated in various social contexts and situations. It can be applied to written, spoken, verbal, and nonverbal communication such as gestures and tone, among other things. The goal of CDA is to ensure that the message is accurately understood.It differs from other approaches, ways that concentrate solely on language use. It emphasizes on social characteristics and the methods people employ to achieve certain results such as building trust, creating doubt, eliciting emotions, managing stress, and so on.

Critical Discourse Analysis is another name for Critical Linguistics. Discourse Analysis investigates how language works or how speakers perceive communication in their context. A methodology is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). Using this research, we can learn how people perceive or interpret a message in their whole social and linguistic context.Instead than focusing on tiny bits, discourse analysis focuses on the wider contents of language or communication. Critical Discourse Analysis examines the text on any level, no matter how tiny or large (Vocabulary, Grammar, Register, and Genre, for instance).

Norman Fairclough distinguished three phases of conversation. "Description" (vocabulary, grammar, lexical form) is the first step, while "Interpretation" (intention, hidden meanings) is the second. Austin and Searle's "Speech Act Theory" is also covered in the second stage. "Explanation" (Social background, time like Racism, Feminism, etc.) is the third stage.The fundamental basis of Critical Discourse Analysis and other pragmatic theories is the Systemic Functional Grammar, also known as Systemic Functional Linguistics, which was developed by Australian linguist Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday (M.A.K Halliday).A significant discussion about CDA has been published in the magazine Discourse & Society, which was founded in 1990 and is edited by Van Dijik. The journal has achieved amazing popularity with academics and students alike.

Every one of the studies mentioned above has some problems and constraints, such as inadequate data sets, problems with model implications, etc. On CDA, numerous research authors worked. The CDA model was the foundation for some earlier research that looked at political speeches. The analysis of foreign politician speeches is a popular method used by educational academics.This study uses a corpus approach and is based on the CDA model. The Fairclough model of CDA serves as the foundation for the analysis, theoretical framework, and technique. Certain research rely on the Van Dijik model, while others on the Fairclough model. These voids compel scholars to investigate the intent behind American Politician Speeches. The present investigation's research questions are:

What is the outline of President's speech?

What is the type of (vocabulary,

grammar) sentences?

What is the hidden meaning or purpose of this speech?

Why president focuses on all these topics?

LITERATURE REVIEW

“According to Fairclough (1993), CDA is a type of discourse analysis that reveals peculiar connections between various social and ethnic groupings. He focuses on text and sequential occurrences, connecting them to a wider socio-cultural view of people's discourse to uncover unequal and ideologically structured power relations. He investigates the ways in which the hegemonic mindset and elite ideology are used to wield power in a society.”

“Three steps are explained for discourse analysis by Fairclough (1992). The speaker's knowledge and personal experience are analyzed in the first stage of CDA while taking his beliefs into consideration. Secondly, the impact of social ties on the discourse; and thirdly, the realization of reality and identity by the speaker. According to him, a speaker's identity and social background can be inferred from language choices they make in a speech, such as their choice of vocabulary and syntactic constructions. He contends that language creates discourse and various sociopolitical viewpoints, which in turn leads to the exercise of power relations. According to Fairclough (1992), speakers within a particular social group exhibit distinct relational and expressive norms that are evident in their discourse. This demonstrates the close relationship that exists between the language and social variables. Analyzing the text in the context of social theory of language and the operation of political and ideological processes is the main goal of CDA.”

“Intertextuality is the quality of any text in which fragments of other texts are incorporated into the text itself, according to Fairclough (1992). Whether it supports or contradicts the notion presented in the original book, the passage borrowed from another work becomes an integral part of the original. "Manifest intertextuality" and "constitutive intertextuality" are the two categories into which he separates intertextuality. The first kind is when quotations are used within the texts to support and bolster the argument. When writing an essay or speech, some quotes are inserted in the inverted comas. Including another text in this way is referred to as evident intertextuality. The other has to do with discourse systems and how they produce original texts. According to Fairclough, one can examine this type of text through linguistic analysis.”

“According to Ruth Wodak (2001) and Meyer (2001), the definition of "critical" in CDA refers to the examination and comprehension of language that is ingrained in social, political, and economic viewpoints. The goal of CDA is to create links between the language-based powers and a larger sociopolitical framework. Since writing represents the ideological and identity foundations that are created and developed through social relations, it appears that text is the primary focus. According to them, CDA offers chances to question and critique social practices in addition to highlighting the power dynamics within them.”

“Carroll (2004) argues that critical discourse serves as both a theoretical framework (theory) and a method (how to use data for the analysis), giving us numerous aspects for the examination of a text or voice. Critical discourse analysis highlights the characteristics of a post-modern and sociological viewpoint on discourse analysis. The functional aspect of language in the development and explanation of social connections is linked to sociological features. It focuses on how language functions in conversation and how hegemony and power affect interpersonal relationships. Through the perspective of language, CDA examines the hegemonic mindset and abuse of power. The latter examines the discourse's dimensions and context.”

“Although discourse generally refers to written or spoken communication, In These Researches, Has Specifically Concentrated On How The Dominant Ideologies Or The ‘Racist’ Ideologies Are Created And Provoked By Virtue Of Discourses Van Dijk (1998) Demonstrated That There Is A ‘Resistance’ Because Dominant Ideologies’ Opponents Might, To An Extent, Also Have Ideologies (Which Are Apparently Against The Dominant Ideologies), And This Resistance Is Because Of The Sociocognitive Aspects In Terms Of Culture, Principles And Values. Ideologies Could Be Interpreted, From The Cognitive Linguistics Perspective, Through The Roles Of ‘Metaphors’ Used In Discourses That Constitute The Political Stand Or Framing Specific Policy For Instance meanings and intentions using CDA.”

Bayram (2010) carried out a study. The main focus of this essay is how language and perception interact. This study work focused on the discursive approach of Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Recep Erdogan in order to assess the language basis and ideological component. This essay demonstrates how having language skills aids in understanding oneself and others. Understanding a text or any message requires context (Van Dijik, 2006).

In 2020, Carlo carried out an analysis of US President Donald Trump's political speeches, and former Italian Prime Minister Berlusconi conducted the survey. In the 1970s, while Trump was expanding his father’s property business from Queens into aspirational Manhattan, Berlusconi was busy elbowing his way out of middle-class anonymity into Italy’s industrial aristocracy, often by any means necessary. His 1986 acquisition of soccer team AC Milan was intended to crown him as one of the elite, on par with the Agnelli family, who ran Fiat and owned Juventus FC. Trump also sought a status symbol in keeping with the gilded classes and purchased the Plaza Hotel in 1988.

Despite this fanfare, or perhaps because of it, Trump and Berlusconi were never quite accepted by their countries’ establishments, at least beyond the confines of business. Indeed, much has been written in the U.S. and Italy about how the anger projected by these two leaders derives from class resentment. Trump’s campaign railings against coastal elites are sincere, albeit hypocritical if one defines a member of the “elite” by the size of his or her checkbook. In addition to giving more challenging speeches than Berlusconi, Trump speaks in a way that incites fear and rage by using language that is more universal, sentimental, and acceptable.

“In 2020, Blommaert and Bulcaen carry out a research study. The Fairclough's CDA model is well explained in this work. There was discussion of the key programmatic aspects, inquiry domains, ideology, inequality, and power dynamics. This essay claims that the primary goal of CDA is to use language to examine the relationships between power, dominance, control, and bias (Wodak 1995).Details on the three-dimensional model are also included. This model has three faces: discourse as social practice (third facet) explaining (hegemony process and ideological effects), discourse as text (first facet) describing (choices, patterns, vocabulary grammar, text structures, etc.); discourse as practice (second facet) interpreting (cognitive aspects to produce something, coherence, intertextuality, etc.); and discourse as text (third facet) (Fairclough, 1992a).”

THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK AND RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1. Research tools:

This research tool uses Fairclough's CDA model as its foundation. This concept has three primary phases.During these phases, the message is straightforward and simple to understand.

3.2. Sampling and Population

The President of the United States, Joe Biden, gave a speech on October 10, 2023, and the sample for this corpus-based study was obtained from www.whitehouse.gov.

President Biden's remarks regarding the terrorist attacks in Israel.Analyzing the ideology or objective of this speech is the main goal of this research.

3.3. Data Collection

The internet was used to gather the data for this study, which included the US President Joe Biden's speech dated October 10, 2023.The Fairclough model was utilized as a theoretical framework to evaluate the purpose or motive of speech.

RESULTS, FINDINGS, AND ANALYSIS

The most important aspect of interpreting the message is CDA. With the use of the CDA models, we are able to comprehend the hidden meanings.

The below given main points have been taken/ identified from the President of USA Joe Biden Speech delivered in 10/18/2023, for analysis.

# Terrorism ( see paragraph #1)

# Israel & Hamas ( see paragraph #1)

# US stands with Israel (see paragraph #2)

# Strong Democracies and their actions (see paragraph #3)

# warning to the advantage takers (see paragraph #3)

# European Allies (see paragraph #4)

# Jewish's rights (see paragraph #4)

# Peace (see paragraph #5)

(1) THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon.

"You know, there are moments in this life — and I mean this literally — when the pure, unadulterated evil is unleashed on this world.

The people of Israel lived through one such moment this weekend. The bloody hands of the terrorist organization Hamas — a group whose stated purpose for being is to kill Jews.

This was an act of sheer evil.

More than 1,000 civilians slaughtered — not just killed, slaughtered — in Israel. Among them, at least 14 American citizens killed.

Parents butchered using their bodies to try to protect their children.

Stomach-turning reports of being — babies being killed.

Entire families slain.

Young people massacred while attending a musical festival to celebrate peace — to celebrate peace.

Women raped, assaulted, paraded as trophies.

Families hid their fear for hours and hours, desperately trying to keep their children quiet to avoid drawing attention.

And thousands of wounded, alive but carrying with them the bullet holes and the shrapnel wounds and the memory of what they endured.

You all know these traumas never go away.

There are still so many families desperately waiting to hear the fate of their loved ones, not knowing if they’re alive or dead or hostages.

Infants in their mothers’ arms, grandparents in wheelchairs, Holocaust survivors abducted and held hostage — hostages whom Hamas has now threatened to execute in violation of every code of human morality.

It’s abhorrent.

The brutality of Hamas — this bloodthirstiness — brings to mind the worst — the worst rampages of ISIS.

This is terrorism.

But sadly, for the Jewish people, it’s not new.

This attack has brought to the surface painful memories and the scars left by a millennia of antisemitism and genocide of the Jewish people."

The president Joe Biden shows sympathy towards Israel's people which were affected in Hamas attack in his speech. He said that in our life some moments such occurs in which bare evil unleashed. Same kinds brutality is done by Hamas against the Israel's people. Its solo purpose is to kill the Jews. In attack one thousand Israel's people and fourteen American was killed and several are wounded. Children were killed, women raped and adults were assassinated when they were celebrating the peace in club. Those who's family members are killed and those who are injured, how they can come out from traumas. And this is terrorism which was done by Hamas.

(2) "So, in this moment, we must be crystal clear: We stand with Israel. We stand with Israel. And we will make sure Israel has what it needs to take care of its citizens, defend itself, and respond to this attack.

There is no justification for terrorism. There is no excuse.

Hamas does not stand for the Palestinian people’s right to dignity and self-determination. Its stated purpose is the annihilation of the State of Israel and the murder of Jewish people.

They use Palestinian civilians as human shields.

Hamas offers nothing but terror and bloodshed with no regard to who pays the price.

The loss of innocent life is heartbreaking.

Like every nation in the world, Israel has the right to respond — indeed has a duty to respond — to these vicious attacks."

President Biden openly declared that they are with Israel in this moment and assured that they will support them if they need any kind of help. "Hamas does not stand for the Palestinian people's right to dignity and self-determination" Hamas doing nothing in spite of spreading terror. As other nations have right to defend as Israel has to respond these vicious attacks, said the president.

(3) "I just got off the phone with — the third call with Prime Minister Netanyahu. And I told him if the United States experienced what Israel is experiencing, our response would be swift, decisive, and overwhelming.

We also discussed how democracies like Israel and the United States are stronger and more secure when we act according to the rule of law.

Terrorists purpo- — purposefully target civilians, kill them. We uphold the laws of war — the law of war. It matters. There’s a difference.

Today, Americans across the country are praying for all those families that have been ripped apart. A lot of us know how it feels. It leaves a black hole in your chest when you lose family, feeling like you’re being sucked in. The anger, the pain, the sense of hopelessness.

This is what they mean by a “human tragedy” — an atrocity on an appalling scale.

But we’re going to s- — continue to stand united, supporting the people of Israel who are suffering unspeakable losses and opposing the hatred and violence of terrorism.

My team has been in near constant communication with our Israeli partners and partners all across the region and the world from the moment this crisis began.

We’re surging additional military assistance, including ammunition and interceptors to replenish Iron Dome.

We’re going to make sure that Israel does not run out of these critical assets to defend its cities and its citizens.

My administration has consulted closely with Congress throughout this crisis. And when Congress returns, we’re going to ask them to take urgent action to fund the national security requirements of our critical partners.

This is not about party or politics. This is about the security of our world, the security of the United States of America.

We now know that American citizens are among those being held by Hamas.

I’ve directed my team to share intelligence and deploy additional experts from across the United States government to consult with and advise the Israeli counterparts on hostage recover- — recovery efforts, because as president I have no higher priority than the safety of Americans being held hostage around the world.

The United States has also enhanced our military force posture in the region to strengthen our deterrence.

The Department of Defense has moved the USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group to the Eastern Mediterranean and bolstered our fighter aircraft presence. And we stand ready to move in additional assets as needed.

Let me say again — to any country, any organization, anyone thinking of taking advantage of this situation, I have one word: Don’t. Don’t."

He further said that he has called with the Prime Minister of Israel Netanyahu and suggest him that to take swift and decisive action against that. But that official stressed that no decisions have been made and that the question of how the US supports Israel’s current war is a complicated one. There are other levers that the administration could potentially pull, they said, including those related to military aid writ large or the United Nations, as well as drastically shifting Biden’s public rhetoric about his administration’s support for the war. And he said that let me reiterate: My advice to any nation, organization, or individual considering to take advantage of this circumstance is to simply say, "Don't." Don't."

(4) "Our hearts may be broken, but our resolve is clear.

Yesterday, I also spoke with the leaders of

France, Germany, Italy, and the UK to discuss the latest developments with our European allies and coordinate our united response.

This comes on top of days of steady engagement with partners across the region.

We’re also taking steps at home. In cities across the United States of America, police departments have stepped up security around centers for — of Jewish life.

And the Department of Homeland Security and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are working closely with state and local law enforcement and Jewish community partners to identify and disrupt any domestic threat that could emerge in connection with these horrific attacks.

This is a moment for the United States to come together, to grieve with those who are mourning. "

In last, he said tha