Construction of the Indonesian Presidents’ Speeches at the UN: Historical Discourse Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v10i1.27085Keywords:
historical discourse analysis, Indonesian president, argumentation strategy, nomination strategyAbstract
The construction of the speeches of the four presidents lies at the complex intersection of sociohistorical practices, where the disciplines of psychology, political science, history, sociology, and anthropology were formed. The aim of this study was to analyze the corpus-based construction of the Indonesian Presidents’ speech at the UN. This research method used a descriptive approach. This type of qualitative research was oriented towards historical discourse analysis. This research data consisted of words, phrases, and sentences obtained from speeches by four Indonesian presidents at the UN. The data corpus of the four Indonesian presidents' speeches was obtained from the YouTube channel. The collection of corpus data in this research was carried out through observation to find out whether the videos of the four presidents' speeches were sound and complete. The available data corpus was analyzed based on Wodak's analysis of historical discourse (HDA). The research results indicated that the construction of the four Indonesian presidents’ speeches at the UN included the use of discursive strategies, namely argumentation and nomination. The findings of this research also showed that the argumentation strategy used topics that were divided into the past, present, and future. This topic refers to intrinsic topics in the form of reality, economy, justice, health and urgency, while extrinsic topics include reality, history, economics, threats, justice, health, and urgency. The nomination strategy found the use of personal deixis in the form of I, we, and us as identity markers in the Indonesian presidents’ speeches at the UN. The conclusion of this research indicated that the topic analysis and identity markers used by the four Indonesian presidents were different. This can be seen from the use of the number of words that appear in the four speech data corpus, which showed how the four presidents opened their talks and how they identified themselves, defined their countries, and described their attitudes.
Downloads
References
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyżanowski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2008). A Useful Methodological Synergy? Combining Critical Discourse Analysis and Corpus Linguistics to Examine Discourses of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK press. Discourse and Society, 19(3), 273–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088962
Bamman, D., Eisenstein, J., & Schnoebelen, T. (2014). Gender Identity and Lexical Variation in Social Media. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18 (2), 135–160. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12080
Bondi, M. (2009). Polyphony in Academic Discourse: A Cross-Cultural Perspective on Historical Discourse. Cross-Linguistics and Cross-Cultural in Perspective on Academic Discourse, 83–108.
Boyd, M. S. (2009). De-Constructing Race and Identity in US Presidential Discourse: Barack Obama’s Speech on Race/La Deconstrucción de Raza e Identidad En El Discurso Presidencial de Barack Obama. Atlantis, 31(2), 75–94. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41055365
Bruxelles, S., Ducrot, O., & Raccah, P. Y. (1995). Argumentation and The Lexical Topical Fields. Journal of Pragmatics, 24(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)94776-5
Chilton, P. & Schaffner, C. (1997). Discourse and Politics. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as a Social Interaction: Discourse Studies: a Multidisciplinary Introduction. In Blackwell (Vol. 2).
Collins, C. (1990). English Grammar. Collins ELT.
Crilly, D., Hansen, M., & Zollo, M. (2016). The Grammar of Decoupling: A Cognitive-Linguistic Perspective on Firms’ Sustainability Claims and Stakeholders’ Interpretation. Academy of Management Journal, 59(2), 705–729. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0171
Dahnilsyah. (2017). The Implied Power Through the Use of Personal Pronouns in Obama‟s Speeches: Critical Discourse Analysis. International Journal of Educational Best Practices (IJEBP), 1(2), 59–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.31258/ijebp.v1n2.p59-71
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Text: Linguistic and Intertextual Analysis within Discourse Analysis. Discourse and Society, 3(2), 193-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926592003002004
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2000). New Labour, New Language. Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. Pearson Education.
Fairclough, N. (2003). 1st Edition Analysing Discourse Textual Analysis for Social Research. Routledge.
Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. In T. A. van Dijk M. Alemi et al./ International Journal of Society, Culture & Language. Discourse as Social Interaction: Discourse Studies 2 (A Multidisciplinary Introduction), 6(1), 258–284.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Language and Social Identity (Vol. 2). Cambridge University Press.
Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, Grammar and Ideology: Functional and Cognitive Perspectives. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Hutchby, I. (1996). Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries, and Power on Talk radio. Psychology Press.
Ingólfur, Á. J. (2010). The Politics of Historical Discourse Analysis: A Qualitative Research Method? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(2), 251–264.
Jenkins, R. (1996). Social Identity. Routledge.
Khosravinik, M. (2010). The Representation of Refugess, Asylum Seekers and Immigrants in British Newspaper: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Journal of Language and Politics, 9(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.9.1.01kho
Koller, V. (2012). How to Analyse Collective Identity in Discourse – Textual and Contextual Parameters. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines, 5(2), 19 – 38. https://doi.org/10.7311/tid.16.2022.11
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. Routledge.
Lemba, V. C., Lawet, P. W., Puka, A. O. B., & Maran, K. U. (2023). Identitas Ekofeminisme Perempuan Lamaholot dalam Mitos Besi Pare Tonu Wujo. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 9(1), 269-284. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v9i1.24302
Levine, J. (1983). Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory GAP. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64(4), 354–361.
Lotte, F. (2015). Signal Processing Approaches to Minimize or Suppress Calibration Time in Oscillatory Activity-Based Brain–Computer Interfaces. Proceedings of the IEEE, 103(6), 871–890.
Lu, L. W. L., & Ahrens, K. (2008). Ideological influence on BUILDING metaphors in Taiwanese presidential speeches. Discourse & Society, 19(3), 383-408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926508088966
MacCannell, D. (1984). Reconstructed Ethnicity Tourism and Cultural Identity in Third World Communities. Annals of Tourism Research, 11(3), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-7383(84)90028-8
Miltersen, E. H. (2016). Nounself Pronouns: 3rd Person Personal Pronouns as Identity Expression. Journal of Language Works-Sprogvidenskabeligt Studentertidsskrift, 1(1), 37–62. Retrieved from https://tidsskrift.dk/lwo/article/view/23431
Muyassaroh, M. (2021). Dimensi Gender dalam Novel-novel Indonesia Periode 1920-2000-an Berdasarkan Kajian Kritik Sastra Feminis. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 7(2), 366–387. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v7i2.16558
Nursalam, N., Sulaeman, S., & Mustafa, I. (2021). Analisis Istilah Wacana Kebijakan Pembatasan Sosial Covid-19 di Indonesia. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 7(2), 388–405. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v7i2.16500
Oddo, J. (2011). War Legitimation Discourse: Representing ‘Us’ and ‘Them’ in four US Presidential Addresses. Discourse & Society, 22(3), 287-314. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926510395442
Risaldi, A. (2023). Power Through the Use of Personal Pronouns in E-Mail Interactions of Pedophil: Critical Discourse Analysis. Retorika: Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 16(1), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.26858/retorika.v16i1.37111
Risaldi, A., Santoso, A., & Syahri, M. (2021). Modalitas sebagai Fitur Lingual Praktik Kuasa dalam Komunitas Pedofilia. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 7(2), 241–255. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v7i2.17682
Stockwell, P. (2019). Cognitive Poetics: An Introduction. Routledge.
Subuki, M., Sholeha, M., Hudaa, S., & Hariyanto, B. (2023). Konstruksi Argumentasi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Gunung Sitoli No. 07/Pid. B/2013/PN-GS: Kajian Linguistik Forensik. KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya, 9(1), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.22219/kembara.v9i1.24279
Taylor, J. R., & Cooren, F. (1997). What Makes Communication ‘Organizational’?: How the Many Voices of a Collectivity Become the One Voice of an Organization. Journal of Pragmatics, 27(4), 409–438. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00044-6
Ten Have, P. (1991). Talk and Institution: A Reconsideration of the Asymmetry of Doctor-Patient Interaction In D. Boden & D. H. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and Social Structure: Studies in Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis. Polity Press.
Thomas, P., John, W., & Owen, L. (2013). Constructing ‘the History of Strategic Management’: A Critical Analysis of the Academic Discourse. Business History, 55(7), 1119-1142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00076791.2013.838039
Tracy, K., & Haspel, K. (2004). Language and Social Interaction: Its Institutional Identity, Intellectual Landscape, and Discipline‐Shifting Agenda. Journal of Communication, 54(4), 788–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02654.x
Van Dijk, T. (2002). Critical Discourse Studies: A Socio Cognitive Approach. Sage.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2008). Discourse and Context. A Socio-Cognitive Approach. Cambridge University Press.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2004). Metalanguage in Social Life. Language Power and Social Process, 11, 107-130.
Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford University Press.
Van Leeuwen, T., & Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing Immigration Control: A Discourse Analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445699001001005
Watss, E. (2007). Creating the Academy: Historical Discousre and the Shape of Community in the Old Academy. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 127, 106–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0075426900001634
Wodak, R. (1994). The Development and Forms of Racist Discourse in Austria Since 1989. In G. Graddol & S. Thomas (Eds.). In Language in Changing Europe. Multilingual Matters.
Wodak, R. (1996). Disorders of Discourse. Longman.
Wodak, R. (2006). Mediation Between Discourse and Society: Assessing Cognitive Approaches in CDA. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606059566
Wodak, R. (2009). The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh University Press.
Wodak, R. (2015). Critical Discourse Analysis, Discourse‐Historical Approach. The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction, 1–14. https://doi.10.1002/9781118611463/wbielsi116
Wodak, R., de Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., & Liebhart, K. (1999). The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh University Press.
Wodak, R., Nowak, P., Pelikan, J., Gruber, H., de Cillia, R., & Mitten, R. (1990). Wir Sind Alle Unschuldige Taterl: Diskurshistorische Studien Zum Nachkriegsantisemitismus. Suhrkamp.
Wodak, R., & Salomi, B. (2015). European Identities and the Revival of Nationalism in the European Union: A Discourse Historical Approach. Journal of Language and Politics, 14(1), 87-109. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.14.1.05wod
Yoosun, P., & Rupaleem, B. (2012). Whom Should we Serve? A Discourse Analysis of Social Worker’s Commentary on Undocumented Immigrants. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 23(1), 18–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10428232.2011.605745
Yoosun, T. (2006). Constructing Immigrants: A Historical Dicourse Analysis of the Representations of Imigrants in US Social Work, 1882-1952. Journal of Social Worl, 6(2), 169–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017306066673
Žagar, I. (2010). Topoi in Critical Discourse Analysis. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 6(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10016-010-0002-1
Zundel, M., Robin, H., & Andrew, P. (2016). Using History in the Creation of Organizational Identity. Management & Organizational History, 11(2), 211–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2015.1124042
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with The KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya (e-Journal) agree to the following terms:
Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY 3.0).
Under the CC-BY license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their article, but authors grant others permission to use the content of publications in KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya (e-Journal) in whole or in part provided that the original work is properly cited. Users (redistributors) of KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya are required to cite the original source, including the author's names, KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya (e-Journal) as the initial source of publication, year of publication, volume number and DOI (if available).
Authors may publish the manuscript in any other journal or medium but any such subsequent publication must include a notice that the manuscript was initially published by KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya (e-Journal).
Authors grant KEMBARA: Jurnal Keilmuan Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya (e-Journal) the right of first publication. Although authors remain the copyright owner, they grant the journal the irrevocable, nonexclusive rights to publish, reproduce, publicly distribute and display, and transmit their article or portions thereof in any manner.
_.png)
