Phân tích diễn ngôn phê phán bài phát biểu phát động chiến dịch tranh cử tổng thống mỹ năm 2015 của hillary clinton

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES
*********************

NGUYỄN THU HẰNG

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF HILLARY CLINTON‟S 2015
PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN LAUNCH SPEECH

Phân tích diễn ngơn phê phán bài phát biểu phát động chiến dịch
tranh cử Tổng thống Mỹ năm 2015 của Hillary Clinton

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201.01

Hanoi, 2018


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POSTGRADUATE STUDIES
*********************

NGUYỄN THU HẰNG

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF HILLARY CLINTON‟S 2015
PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN LAUNCH SPEECH

Phân tích diễn ngơn phê phán bài phát biểu phát động chiến dịch
tranh cử Tổng thống Mỹ năm 2015 của Hillary Clinton

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics
Code: 8220201.01
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. Nguyễn Hoà

Hanoi, 2018


DECLARATION
I hereby certify that the thesis entitled “A critical discourse analysis of Hillary
Clinton‟s 2015 Presidential Campaign Launch Speech” is the result of my own
research for the Degree of Master of Arts at the University of Languages and
International Studies, Vietnam National University, and that this thesis has not been
submitted for any other degrees.

Hanoi, 2018

Nguyễn Thu Hằng


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Dr.
Nguyễn Hoà for helping me complete this study. This paper would not have been
accomplished

without

his

expert,

constant

and

valuable

guidance

and

encouragement. His patience and helpful criticism helped me confidently express
my ideas into this paper.
I also wish to express my sincere thanks to all my lecturers at the Faculty of
Postgraduate Studies, University of Languages and International Studies for their
valuable lectures which have helped me a great deal in gaining a lot of theoretical
background as well as practical knowledge.
My special thanks also go to my friends and colleagues for their enthusiastic help
and support with my working schedule at school which gave me precious time to
deal with my thesis.
Finally, I would also like to express my deep gratitude and love to my family who
gave me time and encouragement to overcome all obstacles during the completion
of this study.

ABSTRACT

In the light of CDA framework suggested by Norman Fairclough, this study
attempts to uncover underlying discursive structures in Hillary Clinton‘s
presidential campaign discourse. The specific aim is to identify elements of
gender references, persuasive techniques and social inclusion and exclusion. The
analysis shows that gender references are marked by implicitness, and Clinton
performs both stereotypical masculine and feminine genders. As for social
inclusion and exclusion, Clinton‘s use of pronouns revealed her attitude towards
her supporters and opponents. According to the results, it might seem that
Clinton‘s main purpose of her campaign discourses is to construct an image of
herself as President of the United States of America, and additionally, she
contributes to eliminating the boundaries of the historical perception of the
American presidency in regards to gender.


TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION..........................................................................................................i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................. iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ...........................................................................................iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ....................................................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES ........................................................................ vii
PART A: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................1
1. Rationale ..................................................................................................................1
2. Significance of the study ......................................................................................... 2
3. Scope of the study ...................................................................................................3
4. Aims and objectives of the study ............................................................................3
5. Design of the study ..................................................................................................4
PART B: DEVELOPMENT .....................................................................................5

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND ................................................5
1.1 Hillary Clinton‘s background ................................................................................5
1.2 An overview of CDA ............................................................................................. 5
1.2.1 History of CDA ............................................................................................ 5
1.2.2 What is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)? ..............................................6
1.3 Key concepts in CDA ............................................................................................ 7
1.3.1 Ideology .......................................................................................................7
1.3.2 Power ...........................................................................................................8
1.4 Three principal approaches to CDA ......................................................................8
1.4.1 The socio – cognitive approach by Teun van Dijk ......................................9
1.4.2 The discourse – historical approach by Ruth Wodak ..................................9
1.4.3 The dialectical - relational approach by Norman Fairclough ....................10
1.5 Review of previous studies .................................................................................13
1.6 Five common features among the approaches ....................................................14
1.7 Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) in CDA ...................................................15
1.8 Chapter summary ................................................................................................ 19


CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ...... 20
2.1 Research questions restated................................................................................. 20
2. 2 Methods of the study .......................................................................................... 20
2.3 Data of the study ................................................................................................. 21
2.4 Analysis procedure of the study .......................................................................... 21
CHAPTER 3: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF HILLARY
CLINTON‟S SPEECH............................................................................................ 23
3.1. Functions of Hillary Clinton‘s underlying ideology in the speech .................... 23
3.1.1. Ideology as a weapon of positive self-representation of ―us‖ and negative
other representation of ―them‖ ........................................................................... 23
3.1.2 Ideology as a weapon of persuasion .......................................................... 26
3.1.3 Ideology as a weapon of negotiation ......................................................... 28

3.1.4 Ideology of personality profiling ............................................................... 30
3.2. Textual description and Analysis ....................................................................... 31
3.2.1 Vocabulary use .......................................................................................... 31
3.2.2 Grammatical features ................................................................................. 34
3.2.2.1 The use of personal pronouns ........................................................ 34
3.2.2.2 The use of voice ............................................................................. 35
3.2.2.3 Modes of the sentence.................................................................... 36
3.2.2.4 Modality ......................................................................................... 37
3.2.2.5 Connective values of the text ......................................................... 39
3.2.3 Transitivity................................................................................................. 43
3.2.4 Thematization ............................................................................................ 44
3.3 Interpretation of the relationship between the productive and interpretative processes53
3.4 Explanation of the relationship between discourse and social processes ........... 54
3.5 Chapter summary ................................................................................................ 55
PART C: CONCLUSION....................................................................................... 56
1. Summary of findings ............................................................................................. 56
2. Implications ........................................................................................................... 57
3. Limitations of the study and Recommendations for further study ....................... 58
APPENDICES ......................................................................................................... 61


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CDA

Critical Discourse Analysis

CL

Critical Linguistics

MR

Members‘ Resources

SFG

Systemic Functional Grammar

SFL

Systemic Functional Linguistics


LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Table 1: Overview of process type (Halliday, 1994:143) .........................................17
Table 2: Components of a multiple theme (adapted from Halliday, 1994:54) .........18
Table 3: Lexical items for ‗in – groups‘ and positive terms .....................................32
Table 4: Lexical items for ‗out – groups‘ and negative terms ..................................33
Table 5: Frequency of personal pronouns .................................................................35
Table 6: Summary of modes of the sentences ...........................................................36
Table 7: Summary of relational modality .................................................................37
Table 8: Summary of expressive modality ...............................................................38
Table 9: Summary of transitivity analysis data .........................................................43
Table 10: Summary of thematic analysis ..................................................................44

Figure 1: Interpretation (Fairclough, 2001, p.119) ...................................................12
Figure 2: Explanation (Fairclough, 2001, p.136) ......................................................12
Figure 3: Aspects of interpersonal management. (Thompson, 1996:69) ..................17

PART A: INTRODUCTION

1. Rationale
Discourse is a form of socially important interaction and communication. The
nature of a discourse is determined by the speaker, the listener and the context in
which it happens. Therefore, the knowledge of how to affect other people with a
well – constructed discourse is a very powerful tool to influence people in all the
fields in general and political world in particular where one‘s words are the means
of communicating visions, ideologies, power relations in society and/or finally
making people advocate wholeheartedly or even comply with strict orders.
We all know that political speeches, especially speeches delivered by Presidents are
highly well – organized discourses. Hence, in the light of the recent American
presidential election, I find that it is really interesting to place political discourses
in the framework of Critical Discourse Analysis. Despite the fact that the current
situation for women has improved enormously in comparison with the social
context from several decades before, and there are a variety of laws that guarantee
the well-being of every citizen, especially women and children. It cannot be
denied that the women in many situations are still considered as inferior to their
male counterparts. And that is this situation has inspired the interest of many
researchers who are ready to devote their time to analyzing the role of women
within the traditional and modern society and how gender inequalities influence
their public image.
Having the same perspective with the previous researchers, the focus of my
research will be centered on the story of Hillary Clinton. First and foremost, she is
an active candidate who has launched her candidacy for the presidency of the
United States in the present. And another reason for choosing Hillary Clinton‘s
speech comes from my own personal interest. As far as I can remember, that was

my 18th birthday and it was also my first time in Hanoi. After class, I strolled along
a street named Trần Quốc Hoàn where lots of old books are on sale on the


pavement. I came across a book called "Living History" by Hillary Clinton, and this
is the first memoir I have ever read that was by the First Lady. I read that book and I
must admit that I enjoy it so much that I could not put it down. Then I decided to
buy it as my own birthday present for the age of 18, an unforgettable and fantastic
present. Living History is her revealing memoir of life through the White House
years. It is a story of her life, with a little background on her family, and how she
came to be where she is now. She grew up with a strong Christian belief and has
worked tirelessly all her life to help people. She worked hard for women and
children's rights, health care, better working conditions, and the betterment of her
country. Intimate, powerful, and inspiring, Living History captures the essence of
one of the most remarkable women of our time and the challenging process by
which she came to define herself and find her own voice—as a woman and as a
formidable figure in American politics.
Therefore, through critical discourse analysis, the aim of this paper is firstly to
conduct an analysis on appraising Hillary Clinton‘s Campaign Launch Speech from
2015 in order to analyze how she characterizes herself as a woman, to discover
hidden factors such as gender, ideology, persuasive techniques, pronouns, family
models and coordinating conjunctions.
2. Significance of the study
This research is carried out in the hope to discuss on how ideology is embedded in
political discourse by means of language use, specifically focusing on the Hillary
Clinton‘s Campaign Launch Speech from 2015. In a political environment,
politicians also use effective and appropriate elements of language to persuade and
convince the target listeners.
Theoretically, this study provides support to CDA theories, though at a minimum
scale. From an objective view as linguists when approaching discourses, CDA

analysts can find out identity and ideology hidden behind words.
Practically, this study may provide me another approach to language teaching and
learning: looking at language teaching and learning from CDA viewpoint.


Moreover, with the investigation of Hillary Clinton‘s speech, the study is hoped to
help English language learners as it is commonly seen that they usually find
discourses difficult to fully understand. This is mainly due to their failure to
interpret the authors‘ underlying assumptions. The awareness of the ideological
meanings of the discourse will enable the comprehensive understanding of
discourses, especially political ones.
3. Scope of the study
The analysis of Hillary‘s speech is confined to verbal aspects of the speech and the
social context in which the speech was delivered. Nevertheless, the limitations of
the time and the intellectual capacity of author preclude discovering all the available
features in the data. Only salient points relating to the aims of the thesis are being
concerned. The study also excludes paralinguistic (intonation, speed, loudness, etc.)
and extra – linguistics (body languages such as facial expressions, eye contact, etc.)
factors although the author is fully aware of the fact that these ones are very
influential in conveying the speaker‘s ideology and identity.
This is a pure linguistic study and for academic purpose only. I will not express my
own political view. And this study is not for or against any parties or to change
anyone‘s political viewpoint.
4. Aims and objectives of the study
The study aims to discover the connection between discourse and power as well as to
raise the awareness of using CDA as an effective way in social studies. Moreover, the
study is also expected to contribute to the development of English language
education, especially in studying CDA by giving some suggestions for the learners.
In order to achieve these above aims, the objectives are specified to:
- Provide a theoretical background of CDA – its concepts, its analysis procedures as

well as its role in social scientific research in general and linguistics in particular.
- Figure out how ideologies are expressed via linguistics elements of the speech
given by Hillary Clinton.
Research questions:


In order to achieve the aims and objectives of the investigation, the researcher
attempts to give answers to the following questions:
a, What are the functions of ideology Hillary Clinton expressed in the speech?
b, How are they realized linguistically?
Methodology
CDA as an approach will be applied in the speech analysis to uncover hidden
power/struggle and ideology. The three stages of CDA given by Norman Fairclough
(2001) will be used. To put it more specifically, following are three stages involving
in the analysis.
Description: A general textual description of the speech is made in terms of lexis
and syntax in order to uncover ideologies in Hillary‘s discourse.
Interpretation: is concerned with the relationship between the text and interaction –
with seeing the text as the product of a process of production, and as a resource in
the process of interpretation.
Explanation: The speech is placed in social context to see how it is determined by
social structures and what productive effects it has on those structures vice versa.
5. Design of the study
The thesis consists of these following parts:
Part A: Introduction: This part presents the rationale, significance, scope, aims and
objectives, methodology and design of the study.
Part B: Development: This is the main partand it consists of three chapters:
Chapter 1: Theoretical Background and Literature Review: This chapter gives an
overview of CDA – definition, its principal approaches and a review of previous
studies is carried out and the theoretical background is provided.

Chapter 2: ―Data analysis and Discussions‖: This chapter presents the analysis of
the address in three stages: description, interpretation and explanation.
Part C: Conclusion: This part summarizes the main findings of the study, gives
important conclusions and implications. It also presents some limitations and offers
some suggestions for further research.


PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter presents the theoretical framework on which this study is based. The
breakdown includes: Hillary Clinton‘s background, an overview of CDA, key
concepts in CDA, three principal approaches to CDA, review of previous studies,
five common features among the approaches, differences between the approaches
and SFG in CDA.
1.1 Hillary Clinton‟s background
Hillary Clinton was born on October 26, 1947, in Chicago, Illinois, the United
States going on to earn her law degree from Yale University. She married a fellow
law school graduate Bill Clinton in 1975. She later served as the First Lady from
1993 to 2001 when her husband was elected as the United States president in the
elections of 1992. Since then, she has had an active career in the political life until
now. In 2000, she was elected as senator of New York, becoming the only first lady
of the United States who sought elective office from 2001 to 2009. In early 2007,
Clinton announced her plans to run for the presidency. During the 2008 Democratic
primaries, she conceded the nomination when it became apparent that Barack
Obama held a majority of the delegate vote. After winning the national election,
Obama appointed Clinton secretary of state. She was sworn in as part of his cabinet
in January 2009 and served until 2013. In the spring of 2015, she announced her
plans to run again for the U.S. presidency. In 2016, she became the first woman in
U.S. history to become the presidential nominee of a major political party. After a

polarizing campaign against GOP (Grand Old Party) candidate Donald Trump,
Clinton was defeated in the general election that November.
1.2 An overview of CDA
1.2.1 History of CDA
CDA was first known as Critical Linguistics (CL), which as developed by a group
of linguists and literary theorists at the University of East Anglia in the 1970s


(Fowler et al., 1979). Their approach was based on Halliday‘s Systemic Functional
Linguistics (SFL). They tried to marry a method of linguistic text analysis with a
social theory of the functioning of language in political and ideological processes.
The paradigm of Critical Discourse Analysis is not homogeneous. The British
variety, represented by such figures as Gunther Kress, Robert Hodge, Roger
Fowler, Norman Fairclough and Theo van Leeuwen have drawn upon Foucault‘s
theory of discourse and, in its linguistic dimension, is closely associated with the
systemic linguistic theory formulated by William Firth and M.A.K Halliday.
The cognitive-oriented approach of Dutch Critical Discourse Analysis exemplified
by the work of Teun van Dijk, has used triadic model to show how personal and
social cognition mediates between social structures and discourse structures.
German CDA, as practiced by Utz Maas, Siegfried Jager and Jurgen Link, has been
influenced even more strongly by Foucault‘s concept of discourse than has the British.
CDA concentrates on authentic everyday communication in media, political or
other locations rather than in sentences or texts constructed in linguistic minds.
CDA regards both spoken and written discourse as a form of social practice
(Fairclough and Wodak, 1997). It assumes a relationship between discursive acts
and the situations, institutions and social structures in which they are embedded.
The situational, institutional and social contexts shape and affect discourse, and in
turn, discourses influence social and political reality. In other words, discourse
constitutes social practice and it is at the same time constituted by it.
1.2.2 What is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)?

By the 1990s, the terminology Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) came into existence
and rapidly emerged as ―a distinct theory of language, a radically different kind of
linguistics‖ (Kress, 1990, quoted in Wodak & Meyer, 2001, p.5). The terms CL and
CDA are sometimes interchangeably utilized by some linguists until nowadays.
According to Leeuween (1993), CDA is, or should be concerned with discourse as
the instrument of power and control as well as with discourse as the instrument of
the social construction of reality.


In Van Dijk (1998a)‘s point of view, CDA is a field that is concerned with studying
and analyzing written and spoken texts to reveal the discursive sources of power,
dominance, inequality and bias. It examines how these discursive sources are
maintained and reproduced within specific social, political and historical contexts.
Fairclough (2001:229) defines that CDA aims to show non – obvious ways in which
language is involved in social relations of power and domination.
From these above statements, it can be easily seen that CDA is a type of discourse
analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse, dominance
and inequality are enacted, reproduced and resisted by text and talk in the social and
political context.
1.3 Key concepts in CDA
1.3.1 Ideology
Ideology is an important feature of CDA. The notion of ―ideology‖ was first
invented by a French philosopher Destutt de Tracy at the end of the 18th century:
―Ideology was nothing less than a general "science of ideas" (the study of "how we
think, speak and argue…"), something what today would be called psychology or
even 'cognitive science‘.
According to Thompson (1990:12), ―ideology refers to social forms and processes within
which, and by means of which, symbolic forms circulate in the social world. Ideology is
an important aspect of establishing and maintaining unequal power relation.‖
For Thompson, the study of ideology is the study of the way in which meaning is

constructed and conveyed by symbolic forms of various kinds. This study also
investigates the social contexts within which symbolic forms are used and not used.
―A dominant ideology typically owes its success not to brute power and conscious
imposition, but to the ability to convince people that it is not in fact a matter of
ideology at all, but simply natural, ‗the way things are‘. We refer to this process as
‗naturalization‘. This use of the term ‗naturalization‘ does not necessarily refer to
biological naturalness, but to people‘s sense of what needs no explanation‖. (Eckert
& Mc Connell Ginet, 2003).


We will always have a set of values, beliefs and feelings that guide our behavior,
determining how we think, feel and act. These may change over time and we will
probably be aware of changes we have gone through in our own life. But in losing
one ideology we replace it with another. This is not a bad or good thing but it is just
the way things are. We may think that some ideology is better than others but it is
simply used to describe the state we live in.
1.3.2 Power
Power is a fundamental feature of CDA studies. Being distinguished from other
linguistic analysis, CDA seeks to uncover and understand power relationships in the
society through an examination of language, which is closely entwined in social
power and power is a central condition of social life (Wodak, 2007c).
According to Fairclough (2001), ideologies are closely linked to power because the
nature of ideological assumptions embedded in particular conventions, and the
nature of those conventions themselves, depend on the power relations which
underlie the conventions. Moreover, ideologies are closely linked to language,
because using language is the commonest form of social behavior where we rely
most on ‗common sense‘ assumptions.
For CDA, language is not powerful on its own – it gains power by the use of
powerful make of it. Wodak explains why CDA often chooses the perspective of
those who suffer and critically analyses the language use of those in power, those

who are responsible for the existence of inequalities and who also have the means
and the opportunity to improve conditions.
1.4 Three principal approaches to CDA
In spite of the fact that all the approaches to CDA present the concepts of ideology,
critique, and power, they still differ in terms of theoretical foundations and the tools
they use to analyze discourse. In addition, they emphasize the interdisciplinary
nature of CDA and show the dialectic relationship between language, culture,
society, and politics.


1.4.1 The socio – cognitive approach by Teun van Dijk
Teun Van Dijk is one of the leading figures and pioneers of study and research in
domain of CDA. Most of his critical works are concerned with prejudice and racism
in discourse. As early as the 1980s, Teun van Dijk started to apply his discourse
analysis theory to texts mainly focusing not only on what he called structural
analysis (including the grammatical, phonological, morphological and semantic
level but also the ―higher level properties‖ such as coherence, overall themes and
topics of news stories and the whole schematic forms and rhetorical dimensions of
texts), but also on the production processes (the influence of journalistic and
institutional practices as well as of economic and social practices on the creation of
the media discourse) and on the reception processes (the comprehension,
―memorization and reproduction‖ of news information).
The innovative aspect of van Dijk‘s approach lies especially in the interest taken in
sociocognition, i.e. social cognition (―the system of mental representations and
processes of group members‖) and personal cognition (indirectly influenced by
ideologies as mental representations in the act of comprehension of discourse
among other actions and interactions). On that basis, Van Dijk (1998b, pp.61-63)
suggests a procedure in making CDA including five main steps:
1. Examining the context of the discourse: historical, political or social background
of a conflict and its main participants.

2. Analyzing groups, power relations and conflicts involved.
3. Identifying positive and negative opinions about Us versus Them
4. Making explicit the presupposed and the implied.
5. Examining all formal structure: lexical choice and syntactic structure, in a way
that helps to (de)emphasize polarized group opinions.
1.4.2 The discourse – historical approach by Ruth Wodak
Ruth Wodak and his colleagues at Vienna University have chosen to work within
the sociological model for their CDA studies. This model is based upon Bernstein‘s
tradition in sociolinguistics and Frankfurt School, especially Jurgen Habermas. The


distinctive feature of this approach is that it attempts to use all the background
information in analyzing different layers of a spoken or written text.
Wodak (2001b: PP. 69-70) has put forward some features for the historical
approach to CDA as follows:
i. This approach is interdisciplinary. Like other critical linguists, Wodak
acknowledges the intricacy of the relationship between language and society. As a
result he believes that CDA is interdisciplinary in nature.
ii. This interdisciplinary nature could be seen both in theory and practice. She
combines argumentation theory and rhetoric with Halliday‘s Functional Linguistics.
iii. This approach is problem-oriented rather than emphasizing some special
language issues.
iv. Methodology and theory are chosen through eclecticism.
v. In this approach the analyst is always on the move between theory and empirical data.
vi. Historical context will go under investigation and will be incorporated into the
analysis of discourse and texts.
1.4.3 The dialectical - relational approach by Norman Fairclough
Fairclough is considered to have the most significant contribution to the field of
CDA. His model may be the core section of the entire field of CDA, because he was
the first to create a theoretical framework, which provided guidelines for future

CDA research.
Fairclough believes that our language, which shapes our social identities and
interactions, knowledge systems, and beliefs is also shaped by them in turn. Like Kress
and Van Leeuwen, he bases his analyses on Halliday‘s systemic-functional grammar.
Norman Fairclough in his book Language and Power (2001) provides a more
detailed and clearer method. In his opinion, ―The systemic-functional theory of
language is particularly helpful in textual analysis (Halliday 1978; 1985; Hodge and
Kress 1988; Thibault 1991), both because its approach to studying grammar and
other aspects of language form is a functional one, and because it is systematically
orientated to studying the relationship between the texture of texts and their social


contexts‖ and ―Systemic-functional linguistics also has a view of texts which is a
potentially powerful basis not only for analysis of what is in texts, but also for
analysis of what is absent or omitted from texts.‖ (Fairclough, Linguistic and
intertextual analysis within discourse analysis, 1992). As a result, Fairclough
suggests first of all structural analysis of the context, and secondly interactional
analysis, which focuses on linguistic features such as: agents, time, tense, modality,
and syntax. More concretely, he sets out three stages of CDA as follows.
Three stages of CDA are description, interpretation and explanation. Description is
the stage which is concerned with the formal properties of the text. Interpretation is
concerned with the relationship between text and interaction – with seeing the text
as a product of a process of production, and as a resource in the process of
interpretation. And explanation is concerned with the relationship between
interaction and social context – with the social determination of the processes of
production and interpretation, and their social effects. Fairclough (2001: 21-2)
In the first stage, ten main questions and a number of sub-questions introduced by
Fairclough could be useful when analyzing a text in terms of formal features. This
is not intended as an exhaustive or all-encompassing list, but is a suggested list of
possible directions or areas that could be investigated. The ten questions are divided

into three main groups including: vocabulary, grammar and textual structures
followed by sub – questions (See Appendix I).
Values of textual features only become realized when they are put in social
interaction. In other words, texts are produced and interpreted against the
background of common-sense assumptions (part of members‘ resources - MR).
Here, the second stage interpretation is needed to deal with these discourse
processes and their dependence on background assumptions. A summary of
interpretative procedures are shown in Figure 1.
Explanation is the third stage in CDA. According to Fairclough, the objective of
this stage is to portray a discourse as part of a social process, as a social practice. It
tries to show how discourses are determined by social structures, and what


reproductive effects discourses can have on those structures, sustaining them or
changing them. These social determinations and effects are mediated by MR: that is
social structures shape MR while MR in turn shape discourses; and discourses
sustain or change MR, which in turn sustain or change structures. These processes
can be summarized in Figure 2.

Figure 1: Interpretation (Fairclough, 2001, p.119)

Figure 2: Explanation (Fairclough, 2001, p.136)


1.5 Review of previous studies
There are a variety of perspectives and studies on CDA regarding political speeches
in general and the position of women in society in particular. These topics have
been becoming a matter of main interest in doing researches.
For example, a Chinese researcher, Junling Wang (2010) used M.A.K Halliday‘s
Systemic Functional Grammar in ―A Critical Discourse Analysis of Barack

Obama‘s Speeches‖ in terms of three meta-functions: ideational functions,
interpersonal function and textual function in order to find out the relationship
among language, ideology and power and how Obama used language features to
persuade the public to support him in presidential campaign.
Cooray (2012) examined the influence of women‗s suffrage and democracy on
gender equality in education in a sample of 80 countries, covering Asia, Africa, the
Middle East, South America and Eastern Europe. The findings revealed countries
with a longer duration of suffrage tend on average to perform better in terms of
gender equality in education. In general, results from studies present a fact that
women even in the past or in recent years, are still under discrimination and gender
in equality need right solutions.
The third previous research ―American Political Discourse as Manifested in Hillary
Clinton's Interviews: A Critical Approach‖ by Doha Mahmoud Abdel-Moety (2014)
concerned with American political discourse of interview genre. The study attempts
an analysis of a number of TV interviews with the former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton. It adopts a critical discourse analysis approach that draws on work from
different disciplines, namely, genre theory, systemic functional grammar, and
critical discourse analysis. The study aims at achieving a number of goals. First, it
attempts to explore some characteristics of American interview genre. Second, it
aims at depicting features of Clinton's political discourse. Third, it tries to unravel
the use of power through language. Fourth, it aims at exploring the hidden strategies
that are involved in conveying ideological messages.


Generally, after review the previous researches, the difference of this research is
mostly on the purposes of the research. The aim of this research is to figure out the
ideologies that Hillary Clinton used in her speech and how these ideologies were
expressed via linguistics elements of the speech given by Clinton. Although Junling
Wang‘s research also aims to find out the ideology but the theory is different.
Junling Wang applied Halliday‘s theory, meanwhile the theory used in this research

was developed by Norman Fairclough.
1.6 Five common features among the approaches
Among the different approaches to CDA, five common features can be identified. It
is these that make it possible to categorize the approaches as belonging to the same
movement. The following account is drawn on Fairclough and Woodak‘s overview
(1997: 271ff.).
i. The Character of Social and Cultural Processes and Structures is Partly Linguistic
– Discursive.
Discursive practices – through which texts are produced (created) and consumed
(received and interpreted) – are viewed as an important form of social practice
which contributes to the constitution of the social world including social identities
and social relations. It is partly through discursive practices in everyday life
(processes of text production and consumption) that social and cultural
reproduction and change take place.
ii. Discourse is Both Constitutive and Constituted
For critical discourse analysts, discourse is a form of social practice which both
constitutes the social world and is constituted by other social practices. As social
practice, discourse is in a dialectical relationship with other social dimensions. It
does not just contribute to the shaping and reshaping of social structures but also
reflects them.
iii. Language use should be Empirically Analyzed within its Social Context.
Critical discourse analysis engages in concrete, linguistic textual analysis of
language use in social interaction.


iv. Discourse Functions Ideologically.
In critical discourse analysis, it is claimed that discursive practices contribute to the
creation and reproduction of unequal power relations between social groups – for
example, between social classes, women and men, ethnic minorities and the
majority. These effects are understood as ideological effects.

v. Critical Research
Critical discourse analysis does not, therefore, understand itself as politically neutral
(as objectivist social science does), but as a critical approach which is politically
committed to social change. In the name of emancipation, critical discourse
analytical approaches take the side of oppressed social groups.
1.7 Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) in CDA
As Fairclough‘s model is chosen as basis for my study, his method and analyzing
procedure have been presented in detail. Besides Fairclough‘s model, Systemic
Functional Linguistics (SFL) is also taken into account and the following part is a
brief look at SFL and the reason why and how it is used in CDA.
Systemic functional grammar (SFG) or systemic functional linguistics (SFL) is a
model of grammar that was developed by Michael Halliday in the 1960s. It is part of
a broad social semiotic approach to language called systemic linguistics. The term
"systemic" refers to the view of language as "a network of systems, or interrelated
sets of options for making meaning". The term "functional" indicates that the
approach is concerned with meaning, as opposed to formal grammar, which focuses
on word classes such as nouns and verbs, typically without reference beyond the
individual clause.
It now can be seen that both CDA and SFL approach functionally to textual analysis
through studying grammar and other aspects of language form, and they are
systematically orientated to studying the relationship between the texture of texts and
their social contexts. This also explains why SFL is of great help in doing CDA.
According to Halliday (1985), language simultaneously conveys three kinds of
meanings: ideational or experiential, interpersonal and textual. The following
quotation illustrates the relationship among these meanings or metafunctions: