LANGUAGE IN INDIA

Strength for Today and Bright Hope for Tomorrow

Volume 25:2 February 2025
ISSN 1930-2940

Editors:
         Sam Mohanlal, Ph.D.
         B. Mallikarjun, Ph.D.
         A. R. Fatihi, Ph.D.
         G. Baskaran, Ph.D.
         T. Deivasigamani, Ph.D.
         Pammi Pavan Kumar, Ph.D.
         Soibam Rebika Devi, M.Sc., Ph.D.

Managing Editor & Publisher: M. S. Thirumalai, Ph.D.

Celebrate India!
Unity in Diversity!!

HOME PAGE

Click Here for Back Issues of Language in India - From 2001

Poetic Encounter
Available in https://www.amazon.in/dp/B09TT86S4T

Poems
Naked: the honest browsings of two brown women
Available in https://www.amazon.in

Decrees
Available in https://www.amazon.com

BOOKS FOR YOU TO READ AND DOWNLOAD FREE!

REFERENCE MATERIALS

BACK ISSUES

  • E-mail your articles and book-length reports in Microsoft Word to languageinindiaUSA@gmail.com.

  • PLEASE READ THE GUIDELINES GIVEN IN HOME PAGE IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE LIST OF CONTENTS.

  • Your articles and book-length reports should be written following the APA, MLA, LSA, or IJDL Stylesheet.

  • The Editorial Board has the right to accept, reject, or suggest modifications to the articles submitted for publication, and to make suitable stylistic adjustments. High quality, academic integrity, ethics and morals are expected from the authors and discussants.

Copyright © 2024
M. S. Thirumalai

Publisher: M. S. Thirumalai, Ph.D.
11249 Oregon Circle
Bloomington, MN 55438
USA
Custom Search

Language in Conflict Situation: Investigating Discursive Strategies in President Joe Biden’s Speech on the Russian-Ukraine War

Isaiah Aluya, PhD and Bagaiya Zidyeb N.

Abstract

This paper focuses on the language used in former President Joe Biden's Political Speech on the Russian-Ukraine war, which is relevant in today's political landscape. The objective is to investigate the types of discursive strategies used to validate and invalidate the decisions and actions of both warring parties and describe the linguistic features through which these discursive strategies are realised and their functions in the speech. The study adopts van Leeuwen's (2008) framework for legitimisation and delegitimisation, complemented with a qualitative descriptive method in examining fifteen texts purposively sampled from a political speech delivered by the former president on February 21, 2023. The analysis indicates that the discursive strategies of authorisation (personal authority, impersonal authority, and authority of tradition), moral evaluation (evaluation and analogies), rationalisation (instrumental and theoretical rationalisation), and mythopoesis (cautionary tales and single determination) serve to legitimise the United States and NATO's support for the Ukrainian government in its defensive fight against Russia and delegitimise Russia's aggressive confrontation of Ukraine. The study underscores the pivotal role of language in shaping political narratives and influencing public perception. The legitimisation and delegitimisation strategies foreground positive and negative representations of two political camps (The "US" vs "Them") in the speech. The "Us (denoting The United States, NATO, and Ukraine) vs. Them (denoting Russia)" dichotomy in Biden's speech reflects a desire to justify "our" (i.e., NATO's) actions and policies by showing that they are correct, beneficial, and carried out following international law, while "their" (i.e., Russia's) actions and policies are not in line with the normative order because they are perverse, deviant and pose a threat to the Ukrainian people's lives. The study concludes that language is an effective tool by which political gladiators legitimise their actions and delegitimise those of their rivals.

Keywords: Language conflict, Joe Biden, De-legitimization, discursive strategies, legitimisation, Russian-Ukraine Conflict.

Introduction

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which began in February 2014 in response to the Ukrainian Revolution of Dignity, is one significant political issue that has recently drawn much attention. Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine and backed pro-Russian separatists who were battling the Ukrainian military in the Donbas war. As Russian and Ukrainian forces controlled the eastern border regions, the battle descended into an ongoing standoff marked by frequent bombardment and fighting along the frontlines. Russian armies attacked a completely unprepared Ukraine in February 2022 after Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a unique military campaign against the country (Wilson, 2001). Since the crisis began, leaders from various nations have given speeches that either legitimised or delegitimised the causes of the war and the acts of the presidents of both nations. In addition to the leaders of other nations, US President Joe Biden has also publicly stated whether or not he supports the choices and actions of the two nations. This study examines one of the political speeches delivered by Joe Biden, the former President of the United States, on 21 February 2023 to ascertain the discursive strategies used to legitimise or delegitimise the decisions and actions of the warring parties. It also describes the linguistic features used to realise these discursive strategies and their functions in speech.

Conceptual Review

Legitimisation and delegitimisation are two constructs relevant to this study. Legitimisation is constructing an action as productive, advantageous, correct, comprehensible, requisite and admissible in a specific context (Vaara, 2014). It is a fundamental aspect of language use that entails offering valid justifications for actions that have drawn criticism from others in the past or present (van Dijk, 1998). Legitimisation is the process by which speakers seek authorisation for actions and social relations and elucidate their positive actions to justify why they are rational and required. According to Fairclough & Fairclough (2012), legitimisation validates an action that can be acknowledged publicly. The process of legitimisation involves two levels of justification. The first level is the justification for action based on a reason, and the second level is the justification for that reason based on a system of widely accepted norms, values, and beliefs (Fairclough & Fairclough, 2012). The foregoing statement implies that interlocutors justify their demeanours by pointing out that they adhere to particular social standards, values, and beliefs (Ross & Rivers, 2017). The following are examples of legitimisation techniques: general ideological principles, charismatic leadership projection, boasting about performance, positive self-presentation, and arguments about voters' wants" (Chilton, 2004). Legitimisation in discourse parallels delegitimisation, which is the deliberate production and dissemination of unfavourable perceptions of the other (Screti, 2013). Delegitimisation involves questioning opponents' plans and demonstrating that they are not aligned with values and norms because they do not include any constructive, valuable, or moral action (Ross & Rivers, 2017). Delegitimisation encompasses presenting oneself negatively, condemning, oppressing, segregating, and criticising one's uprightness and rationality (Chilton, 2004).

This is only the beginning part of the article. PLEASE CLICK HERE TO READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE IN PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION.

Isaiah Aluya, PhD and Bagaiya Zidyeb N.
Department of English and Literary Studies
Bingham University Karu
Nasarawa State, Nigeria
Isaiah.aluya@binghamuni.edu.ng
08036756807
Custom Search
  • Click Here to Go to Creative Writing Section

  • Send your articles
    as an attachment
    to your e-mail to
    languageinindiaUSA@gmail.com.
  • Please ensure that your name, academic degrees, institutional affiliation and institutional address, and your e-mail address are all given in the first page of your article. Also include a declaration that your article or work submitted for publication in LANGUAGE IN INDIA is an original work by you and that you have duly acknowledged the work or works of others you used in writing your articles, etc. Remember that by maintaining academic integrity we not only do the right thing but also help the growth, development and recognition of Indian/South Asian scholarship.