Critical-Cognitive Analysis of Identity Circles in the Resolutions of 22 Bahman Ceremonies from 2011 to 2021

Authors

1 Ph.D. in Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University

2 Ph.D. in linguistics, Shiraz university

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the identity-based positive and negative foundations in the context of the resolutions of 22nd of Bahman ceremonies (as the most important document of the Islamic revolution anniversary) in the 2010s. Therefore, it questions, “how the Islamic republic of Iran has represented its identity borders with its discursive others “the USA and Israel” in the resolutions of 22nd of Bahman ceremonies”. Answering this question is done through a two-level approach, having (critical) discourse analysis and cognitive linguistics. In this approach, the cognitive linguistics (CL) tools, especially Leonard Talmy (2000) force-dynamic patterns are applied in the micro level and the discursive analyses make the macro level to describe the study’s issue. The micro level defines how the resolutions formulate the entities Talmy introduces in his approach, the relation between these entities, Iran on the one hand and the USA and Israel on the other, which is generally understood in the framework of the global imperialism and oppression. The force-dynamics patterns describe the intrinsic tendency of these entities, their impingement state, and the result of this impingement. The macro-level data analysis is achieved through Laclau and Mouffe’s (2001) discourse theory.

Keywords

References

Fairclough, N. (1996). Language and Power. 10th ed. (1st. 1989), Essex: Longman Group UK Limited.
Hart, C. (2010) Critical Discourse Analysis and Cognitive Science: New Perspectives on Immigration Discourse. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hart, C. (2011) “Force-interactive patterns in immigration discourse: A Cognitive Linguistic approach to CDA”. Discourse & Society. 22 (3): 269-286.
Hart, C., et al. (2005). "Analysing political discourse: Toward a cognitive approach". Critical Discourse Studies. 2(2), 189-201.
Jørgensen, M., L. Phillips (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London & Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Kovecses, Z. (2000) Metaphor and Emotion; Language, Culture, and Body in Human Feeling. Cambridge University Press.
Kövecses, Z. (2009). “Metaphor, culture, and discourse: The pressure of coherence”. Metaphor and discourse. A. Musolff & J. Zinken (Eds.). Palgrave Macmillan, London, 11-24.
Laclau, E. (1990). New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time, London and New York: Verso.
Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and political discourse: analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. Palgrave Macmillan.
Laclau, E., & C. Mouffe (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. Verso Books.
Talmy, L. (2000) Toward a Cognitive Semantics (2 vols). Cambridge: MA: MIT Press.
 
Language and Linguistics
Volume 17, Issue 34
January 2023
Pages 309-340

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics