A critical discourse analysis of barack obama’s farewell address

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATES STUDIES NGÔ THỊ MAI HẠNH A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF BARACK OBA

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST – GRADUATES STUDIES

NGÔ THỊ MAI HẠNH

A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

OF BARACK OBAMA’S FAREWELL ADDRESS ( Phân tích diễn ngôn phê phán bài phát biểu chia tay của Barack Obama)

M.A MINOR THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 822020101

Hanoi, 2019

Hanoi, 2019 Ngô Thị Mai Hạnh

interpretation, situational context, inter-textual context and the President‘s call

to believe in nation‘s democracy and system; and the President‘s call to foster solidarity and union are analyzed By explanation, the relationship between discourse and America‘s institution and social structure are explored Lastly, the finding and conclusion of the thesis prove the author‘s assumption about the ideological power relations in the speech

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Table 1 The occurrence of synonyms in the speech

Table 2 The occurrence of formal words in the speech

Table 3 The occurrence of personal pronoun in the speech

Table 4 Number and percentage of active and passive sentences in the

speechTable 5 The words with high frequency of using throughout the farewell

address by Barack ObamaTable 6 Summary of the findings

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Rationale 1

1.2 Aims of the research 2

1.3 Significance of the research 2

1.4 Scope of the research 2

1.5 Methodology of the research 3

1.6 Structure of the thesis 3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Previous studies 4

2.2 Theoretical background 6

2.2.1 A brief introduction on CDA 6

2.2.2 DA and CDA 9

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 12

3.1 Reason to choose the speech 12

3.2 Data collection techniques 12

3.3 Data analysis procedure 12

3.4 Fairclough’s CDA framework 13

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 18

4.1 Textual analysis 18

4.2 Analysis in terms of vocabulary 19

4.3 Analysis in terms of grammar features 24

4.3.1 The use of personal pronoun 24

4.3.2 The use of voice 27

4.3.3 Mode of sentence 29

4.3.4 Modality 30

4.3.5 Cohesive devices 32

4.4 Interpretation process 35

4.4.1 Situational context 35

4.4.2 Intertextual context 36

4.4.3 The President’s call to believe in nation’s democracy and system 38

4.4.4 The President’s call to foster solidarity and union 40

4.5 Explanation 45

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION 43

5.1 Recapitulation 43

5.2 Concluding remarks 43

5.3 Limitations of the research 45

5.4 Recommendations for further study 46

REFERENCES 47

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Rationale

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is an approach to study language which is different from discourse analysis (DA) CDA explores the relationship among language, ideology and power In this thesis, CDA is an important tool to find out how effective language can be in expressing Obama‘s ideas or ideology

Barack Hussein Obama was elected the 44th president of the United States on November 3, 2008 After defeating the other presidential candidates, he became the first African American president in American story He was a powerful person of high position holding the office He took office at the worst moment of America- the Great Depression happened At that time, America was on the verge of crisis ―a nation at war, a planet in peril, the American Dream itself threatened‖ However, under a visionary leadership of the U.S President Barack Obama, America was rescued from crisis and a stronger economy, a more equal society, a more secure nation was gradually stabilized After serving two terms in the White House, Obama left office and returned to his home town to give his presidential farewell speech Through his 50-minute speech, Barack Obama delivers a call to action as well as a subtle warning: the last major political rally of his career As an excellent politician, he has a great awareness of how language plays a significant role in any discourse Therefore, in his political speech, each word, each structure is carefully chosen as function of ideological communicative implication

Having a close look at his speech, it is obviously seen that the President Obama strategically produces the discourse just days before the inauguration of his successor with a view to show his ideologies and implications He takes advantage

of vocabularies, lexical, arguments and many other features of discourse structure in his speech He is the person who understands the power of language more than anyone else Especially, his farewell address on January 10, 2017 shows his power and ideology as he delivers his final public speech from a stage in his hometown of Chicago after the myriad accomplishments of his two-term presidency

For the above reasons, the author carries out the research entitled ―A critical

discourse analysis of Barack Obama’s farewell address”

1.2 Aims of the research

The research examines not only linguistics strategies but also the President‘s ideologies and power The study aims at presenting an analysis of the U.S President Barack Obama‘s farewell address under the light of critical discourse analysis Based on the theory of critical discourse analysis, some linguistic features of the speech are pointed out

In doing CDA of his speech, the author intends to answer the following question:

- What linguistic features does Barack Obama use to express his ideology in his farewell address?

1.3 Significance of the research

Regarding the theoretical significance, this study has not only attracted the interests of political scientists and historians, but also drawn much attention from linguists Linguists who carry out research on this field will take advantage of considerable knowledge of the concepts of critical discourse analysis and raise the awareness of how power and ideology are embedded in language in particular and the relation between language and society in general

Regarding practical significance, as a graduate of English language, the thesis is of great importance for me It helps me understand more about English language and then enhance my professional development Besides, I can gain much knowledge not only about language but also America‘s culture, society and politics Therefore, I have great understanding about America I hope that my thesis make contribution to CDA approach in particular and English studying in general

1.4 Scope of the research

This research is a case study Because scope of the research is limited, I only analyze one speech of Obama and apply Fairclough‘s approach instead of going deeply in functional grammar of Halliday

Based on Fairclough‘s theory of CDA, I focus on three stages: description, interpretation and explanation In descriptive process, I would like to point out

vocabulary, grammar features including the use of personal pronoun, the use of voice, mode of sentence, modality and cohesive devices In the second stage- interpretation, I go into detail these features above and analyze situational context and intertextual context And the last process is explanation

1.5 Methodology of the research

This study applies a discourse analysis in which one of the most comprehensive frameworks of CDA, that is, Fairclough‘s qualitative approach is used It involves three levels of discourse analysis: description, interpretation and

explanation This framework is presented more clearly in 3.4 Fairclough’s CDA framework

1.6 Structure of the thesis

The study is divided into 5 chapters as follow:

- Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION includes rationale, aims, specific objectives,

scope and significance of the study

- Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW presents previous studies on critical

discourse analysis of the President Barack Obama‘s speech This chapter also introduces theoretical background that being in charge of the theories used in the study including the definition of DA and CDA, key concepts in critical discourse analysis, discourse and power

- Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY mentions the reasons to choose

the topic, data collection techniques, data analysis procedure and Fairclough‘s CDA framework

- Chapter 4: A CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF BARACK

OBAMA‘S FAREWELL ADDRESS shows the result of the study The analysis of data and the findings are also indicated in this chapter

- Chapter 5: CONCLUSION summarizes main findings and providing

concluding remarks, limitations of the current research as well as suggestions for further study

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Previous studies

Among a variety of studies on CDA of the U.S President Barack Obama‘s

speech, there is a similar study named A critical discourse analysis of Barack

Obama’s speeches, 2010 by Junling Wang This study applies Halliday‘s systemic

functional grammar in CDA theory to analyze the speech and show readers the ideology and power of the President

According to Halliday‘s systemic functional grammar, the study indicates some features of Barack Obama‘s speech as follow Firstly, the way he uses simple words, short sentences and colloquial language shortens the distance between him and the audience Secondly, from transitivity analysis, it is clearly seen that material process- a process of doing used most in his speeches shows us what the government has achieved, what they are doing and what they will do Thirdly, in terms of modality, we can see that the audience can easily understand and accept Barack Obama‘s political speech by means of modal verbs, tense and first personal pronouns Furthermore, the use of first personal pronouns shortens the distance between the speaker and the audience, makes the audience feel close to the speaker and his points

By applying CDA, it is obvious that the study shows the President‘s ideology and power through his linguistic strategies It also provides implications of CDA for teaching and studying English Moreover, the study also shows the linguistic strategy which is used to express the ideology and power of the U.S President Barack Obama However, the research‘s importance should be emphasized from beginning by clearly pointing out rationale, aims and significance of the research Also, to make reader well understand outline of the research as well as to make the research become more coherent and logical, the author should give structure of the research It presents main information in each part of the research so that readers can have a brief overview and easily follow what the author is analyzing Besides the research needs to focus more on theoretical background because it includes the essential framework which provides a sound basis for the author to depend on and develop his ideas

Another study named ―Critical discourse analysis of Barack Obama’s 2012

speeches: Views from systemic functional linguistics and rhetoric‖, 2014 by

Bahram Kazemian and Somayyeh Hashemi is an obvious example applying CDA The authors apply Halliday‘s ideational grammatical metaphor, rhetoric and CDA

in order to investigate and analyze Barack Obama‘s 2012 five speeches

It is obvious that there are multiple linguistic and rhetorical strategies exploited so as to achieve the efficiency in the speeches The tendency to apply more nominalization, passivization and modal verbs in Obama‘s speeches is the main key to make his language powerful, impressive, persuasive and ambiguous as well Besides, nominalization is a useful way to assist him to expand his discussion cohesively Finally, nominalization contributes to generalization, impersonality, objectification, cohesion, ambiguity and of course, beauty of the texts Upon listening as well as reading Obama‘s speeches, it is apparent that President Obama relies heavily on rhetorical devices, particularly, parallelism tropes and unification strategy Rhetorical devices investigated in the study are used to enhance persuasiveness, improve the effectiveness, clarity and beauty of the speeches The aims of these strategies above are to persuade and convey personal ideologies, to signify differentiation and to demonstrate speaker‘s solidarity with audience

In general, the study shows Barack Obama‘s ideologies through a wide range

of linguistic strategies Besides, the study shows political purposes and some implications for political reading and writing, for translators and instructors entailed

in reading and writing pedagogy However, the research also has its own limitations From the very beginning of the analysis, rationale, aims and significance of the research should be pointed out in order to make reader understand clearly the purpose of this research Another point is that the author should give structure of the research so that readers can have a brief overview and easily follow what the author is analyzing Moreover, in every research, theoretical background and framework are of great importance because it is a firm basis for researchers applying to their analysis However, Bahram Kazemian and Somayyeh Hashemi‘s theoretical background does not go into detail, especially theory about CDA and some concepts related in critical discourse analysis

Next, the study named ―A critical discourse analysis of the U.S President

Barack Obama’s Inaugural speeches in 2009 and 2013‖ by Nguyễn Thu Trang1is another example applying CDA The study uses Fairclough‘s approach and Systemic Functional Grammar (SFL) by M.A.K Halliday The speeches are also analyzed in terms of transitivity and thematization in order to find out the power and ideology hidden behind words

The study covers in details three levels of discourse analysis: Description,

Interpretation and Explanation In descriptive part, the author analyzes vocabulary

and grammar features For grammar features, she points out the use of personal pronouns, the use of voice, mode of sentence, modality, cohesive devices, transitivity, thematization and macro-structure of the text In terms of interpretation, the authors analyze situational context and intertextual context

The study is quite well-organized with 5 chapters including: introduction, literature review, methodology, a critical address of the text and conclusion Through the author‘s analysis, we can see how language could transfer the power and ideology of Barack Obama However, the study only points out features of DA and CDA separately without telling the difference between them This distinction is necessary because readers can understand why author chooses CDA instead of DA Besides, in chapter 3: methodology, the author should divide each part again in order to avoid overlap Next, in terms of interpretation, it should be better if the analysis of Obama‘s ideology and power is deeply pointed out instead of only examining situational context and intertextual context

2.2 Theoretical background

2.2.1 A brief introduction on CDA

According to Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer (2001), CDA is a term used to denote a former theory known as critical linguistics It first originated in Britain in

1980s when the work Language and Control was published Both the term CDA

and CL can be used interchangeably

Van Dijk (1993) stated that CDA is a type of discourse analytical research that aims at addressing social problem such as social power abuse, dominance and

1

Nguy ễn Thu Trang, 2016.A critical discourse analysis of the U.S President Barack Obama’s Inaugural speeches in 2009 and 2013

inequality According to Fairclough (1989), CDA is a ―transdisciplinary approach‖

to the study of discourse and discourse analysis, which views ―language as a form

of social practice‖ and concentrates on the ways social and political domination and how the distribution of ―social goods‖ are represented and reproduced through text and talk Critical discourse analysts try to understand and resist social inequality (Van Dijk, 1985)

The object of CDA tends to be public speech, such as newspaper, advertisement, political propagandas, inaugural address, farewell address, official documents and so on Its aim is to explore the relationships among language, ideology and power CDA comes up with an explicit and implicit objective which represents language as an indispensable tool for the manipulation of unrevealed intent In other words, CDA tries to explore the relationship between text and events

in social and cultural discourse practices which may not appear explicit to others Fairclough (1989) stated in ―CDA as dialectical reasoning: critique,

explanation and action‖ that ―the power behind discourse rather than just power in

discourse, how people with power shape the order of discourse as well as the social order in general, versus how people with power control what happens in specific interactions‖ (P.2) The research makes people realize the importance of language

to the domination of some people by others

Moreover, the author emphasizes contextual knowledge and the connection

of CDA and explanation how it relates to the existing social reality In ―Discourse

studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, 2006‖, he claims that ―CDA sees itself not

as a dispassionate and objective social science, but as engaged and committed, a form of intervention in social practice and social relationship‖ (P.358) Fairclough

(1993: 135) defines CDA as ―discourse analysis which aims to systematically

explore often opaque relationships of causality and determination between (a) discursive practices, events and texts, and (b) wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; to investigate how such practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power; and to explore how the capacity of these relationships between discourse and society is itself a factor securing power and hegemony‖

Ruth Wodak agrees that ―CDA is rooted on the idea that there is unequal

access to linguistic and social resources, resources that are controlled institutionally in which the pattern of access to discourse, social practices and communicative events is an essential element for CDA‖ (P.253) Accordingly, CDA

aims at examining critically social, political and cultural inequality Fairclough (1995) considers CDA as an approach that tends to exam the relationship between discursive practices and the social structures in which they are employed The relationship is not usually open to the reader or listener Therefore, CDA investigates to unpack the causal and determinative relation existing between the two

Moreover, CDA explores the ways such practices are constructed by the ideology which is shaped by the power relations practiced in the community According to Fairclough (1995, 2002), language is of great importance in both revealing social processes and interactions in practice and constructing them; it glazes through ―the thick-opaque side of social life: social structures, social practices and social events‖ Fairclough (1989:22) regards language as ―a form of social practice‖ By viewing language as ―a socially conditioned process‖, Fairclough (1989) considers that language does not only play role as a passive reflection of the society and the social interaction but it is also an necessary part of the social process Hence, Fairclough and Wodak (1997: 353) summarize the key point of CDA as follow:

- CDA addresses social problems and shows that power relations are

discursive

- Besides, discourse constitutes society and culture, and it does ideological work where the link between text and society is mediated Discourse analysis is interpretative and explanatory that oftentimes is historical in the form of social action

In conclusion, the main focus of CDA is to answer the question of language and power, discovering the connection among discourse practices, social practices and social structures

2.2.2 DA and CDA

It is evident that the two concepts CDA and DA (discourse analysis) do not mean the same thing According to Jorgensen and Phillips (2002:12), DA belongs to interdisciplinary approaches that can be used to examine many different social domains in a variety types of studies It means that discourse analysis can be applied to all areas of research and uses a method of analysis intrinsically linked to its theoretical and methodological foundations Brown & Yule (1983:26) claim that doing discourse analysis involves not only ―doing syntax and semantics‖, but also

―doing pragmatics‖

In terms of CDA, it ―focuses on social problems, and especially on the role

of discourse in the production and reproduction of power abuse or domination‖ (van Dijk, 2001:96) CDA, then, tends to explore relationship between language and power In that sense, Wodak (2001) considers it as ―fundamentally concerned with analyzing opaque as well as transparent structural relationships of dominance, discrimination, power and control as manifested in language‖

Related to the difference between CDA and DA, Rogers (2004:3) views that CDA makes distinction between other discourse analysis methods in that it includes

a description and interpretation of discourse in context and gives an explanation of why and how discourses work as well

According to Wodak (2001), the distinctions between CDA and other DA may be most clearly seen through the general principles of CDA In that regard, Fairclough and Wodak (1997, cited in van Dijk, 1993) explain eight basic principles

of CDA which, as viewed by Rogers (2004), ―are a useful starting point for researchers interested in conducting CDA‖

Locke (2004) claims that in common parlance, the word ―critical‖ refers to the evaluation of an object or situation based on a system of rules, principles and values With regard to CDA, ―critical‖ does not always means criticizing, or being negative Wodak (2001) claims that ―critical‖ means ―opening up complexity, challenging reductionism, dogmatism and dichotomies, being self-reflexive in one‘s research, and through these processes, making opaque structures of power relations and ideologies manifest‖ Therefore, ―critical‖ does not imply the common sense

meaning of ―being negative‖- rather ―skeptical‖ Rogers (2004:3) believes that with this framework of ―critical‖, the analyst has intention to explore power relationships and find out inequalities embedded in society

In general terms, CDA is an approach that combines some sort of textual (linguistic) theories and analysis with sociopolitical and critical theories and analysis (Gee 2004) The significant difference between CDA and other kinds of

DA is that CDA is the constitutive problem-oriented interdisciplinary approach and

it does not focus on linguistic units per se, but on complex social phenomena which are necessarily complex and thus require a multi-transdisciplinary and multi-methodical approach (Wodak/Meyer 2009) The objects under investigation do not have to be implied to negative or exceptionally ‗serious‘ social or political experiences or events Chilton, Tian&Wodak (2010) view that it is a frequent misunderstanding of the aims and goals of CDA and the term ‗critical‘ does not mean ‗negative‘ as in common sense usage From my point of view, any social phenomenon can be under critical investigation

Another approach to CDA rooted in postmodern theory from The University

of Texas views that CDA is not primarily related to linguistics nor to text analysis; rather, CDA is considered as a meta-approach to solving problems in a quite intuitive and unsystematic way (cf Wodak, 2011a):

[…] rather than providing a particular method, Discourse Analysis can be characterized as a way of approaching and thinking about a problem In this sense, Discourse Analysis is neither a qualitative nor a quantitative research method, but

a manner of questioning the basic assumptions of quantitative and qualitative research methods […] Expressed in today’s more trendy vocabulary, Critical or Discourse Analysis is nothing more than a deconstructive reading and interpretation of a problem or text […] Discourse Analysis is meant to provide a higher awareness of the hidden motivations in others and ourselves and, therefore, enable us to solve concrete problems – not by providing unequivocal answers, but

by making us ask ontological and epistemological questions

Besides, DA needs to deal with at least three components: a language, a practice and a context and they work as the triangle following:

Figure 1: The triangle of discourse analysis: language, practice and context (The Discourse Studies Reader by Johannes Angermuller, Dominique Maingueneau,

Language

Discourse analysis

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 Reason to choose the speech

It is clearly seen that citizens‘ solidarity and union is of great importance for

nation‘s democracy and system These issues are mentioned a lot in address of

many Presidents According to President Obama in the speech ―A more perfect

union‖ at the Constitution center on March 18, 2018, ―a union could be and should

be perfected over time‖ As President Thomas Bach highlighted the importance of

solidarity to the unity of the Olympic Movement at the meeting in the Qatari

capital, Doha: ―To achieve our mission, we must keep solidarity, political neutrality,

respect and unity in mind There can be no individual can put his or her interests first We must all put our mission first We must keep solidarity, respect and unity in mind‖ As Jean-Claude Juncker- President of the European Commission

emphasized in the speech ―State of the Union 2015: Time for honesty, union and

solidarity‖ that: ―If we want to promote a more peaceful world, we will need more

Europe and more Union in our foreign policy‖ It is evident that solidarity and

union are key factors to maintain nation‘s democracy and system When citizens in society unite, they create strength to defeat their enemies and protect their nation as well As a result, this topic is chosen in the study; in detail, I choose Obama‘s farewell address when he leaves office with a view to remind citizens to promote solidarity and union

3.2 Data collection techniques

The President Obama‘s farewell address is collected from the website: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov Although there are a wide range of websites including the President Obama‘s speech, https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov is highly reliable because it is the official website of the White House and is owned by the United States Government

3.3 Data analysis procedure

In this thesis, CDA is applied to find out how language and ideologies are related and explore ideologies hidden behind the discourse In particularly, CDA is used to see how the relation between ideologies and language are manifested

linguistically in Obama’s farewell address, and what his ideologies are constructed

The use of data analysis techniques is based on the theoretical background of the study The linguistics and grammatical features would be analyzed and then the insightful investigation is made to explore the ideological assumptions that are

hidden within discourse

Specifically, basing on the theory of Fairclough, the speech will be analyzed

in three stages In description stage, the speech will be examined in terms of lexical, grammatical characteristics and macro-structure In the second stage-interpretation, the situational context and intertextual context will be two aspects investigated

Situational context aims at answering four main questions: what is going on, who is

involved, what relationship is at issue, and what is the role of language In view of

intertextual context, the farewell address will be put in the relation with some other Obama‘s related speeches In explanation stage, the effects of the speech on American will be discussed in terms of institutional and societal levels

3.4 Fairclough’s CDA framework

According to Fairclough (1989), "discourse refers to the whole process of

social interaction of which a text is just a part" (p 24) He claims that critical analysts should not only concentrate on the texts, the process of text production and interpretation of the texts, but also examine the interrelationship among texts, production processes, and their social context From this point of view, Fairclough (1989; 1992; 2003) established his framework including three dimensions: text (speech, writing, visual images or a combination of these); discursive practice which involves the production and consumption of texts; and social and cultural context where discursive practices are embedded

Fairclough‗s three dimensional model for CDA thus suggests three main stages involved in CDA And this study follows Fairclough‘s framework of CDA including 3 stages They are 1) description of textual analysis, 2) interpretation of production and reception, 3) explanation of social conditions which affect production and reception as seen in Figure 2 below:

Figure 2: Three dimensional framework (Discourse and Social change, Fairclough, 1992:93)

Description

The very first stage is description It is of great importance to begin with dealing with the text itself or describing a particular property of a text by the use of particular words This stage of analysis encompassing linguistic features such as choices in vocabulary (wording), grammar (transitivity, passivization) and text structure (thematic choice, turn-taking system) On the other hand, this stage deals with lexical and grammatical parts of texts and discourses can also show an ideological role, identity and social power of any agents being represented Fairclough (1989) states that "description is the stage which is concerned with formal properties of text‖ (p 26) In other words, linguistic features of the text are

to be examined in the descriptive stage To make the purpose become clear, Fairclough (1989) provides us with a list of ten main questions and a number of sub-questions, which could be addressed when analyzing a text These questions are mainly involved with vocabulary section, grammar section, and textual structures section

1 What experiential values do words have?

- What classification schemes are drawn upon?

- Are there words which are ideologically contested?

- Is there rewording or over-wording?

- What ideologically significant meaning relations are there between words?

2 What relational values do words have?

- Are there euphemistic expressions?

- Are there markedly formal or informal words?

3 What expressive values do words have?

4 What metaphors are used?

Grammar

5 What experiential values do grammatical features have?

- What types of process and participant predominance?

- Is agency unclear?

- Are processes what they seem?

- Are nominalizations used?

- Are sentences active or passive?

- Are sentences positive or negative?

6 What relational values do grammatical features have?

- What modes (declarative, grammatical question, imperative) are used?

- Are there important features of relational modality?

- Are there pronouns we and you used? and if so, how?

7 What expressive values do grammatical features have?

- Are there important features of expressive modality?

8 How are sentences linked together?

- What logical connectors are used?

- Are complex sentences characterized by coordination or subordination?

- What means are used for referring inside and outside the text?

Textual structures

9 What interactional conventions are used?

- Are there ways in which one participant control the turns of others?

10 What larger-scale structures does the text have?

Interpretation

The second stage of CDA is supposed to be ―the interpretation which is concerned with the relationship between text and interaction with seeing the text as the product of a process of production, and as recourse in the process of

interpretation" (Fairclough, 1989) This stage deals with what is going on, who is

involved, what relationship is at issue, and what is the role of language It means

that a discourse analyst needs to analyze how and why one uses a particular kind of language within a specific field such as advertising, politics or feminist discourse CDA also needs to investigate how receivers of texts make use of those existing discourses to consume and interpret meaning (Jorgensen and Phillips, 2002, p.66)

In the interpretation stage, discourse is not only considered as text but also a discursive practice, which means beside analysis of linguistic features and text structure, attention should be drawn to other factors such as speech act and intertextuality These factors link the text to its context The dimension regards text

as discursive practice includes two processes They are: institutional process (editorial procedure), and discourse process (the alteration that the text goes through

in production and consumption) To make a better understanding of discourse process, this step explores inter-textual relations among discourse, texts and setting

In short, the interpretation process is summarized as the following figure:

Figure 3: Interpretation (Language and power, Fairclough, 2001:119)

Explanation

The third level of CDA is explanation ―which is concerned with the relationship between interaction and social context with the social determination of the process of production and interpretation, and their social effects", Fairclough (1989) This stage involves explaining the relationship between the processes and the social, cultural, environmental and historical conditions Besides, this part will investigate and explain the undiscovered information of power, ideology and language by two contexts, institutional context and societal context (Fairclough, 1995) In the stage of explanation, discourse would be seen as part of social practice, pointing out how it is determined by social structures more precisely

"socio-cultural practice‖ In this final stage, discourse analyst need to apply cultural and social theory to explore the links between the language used and social and cultural practice Moreover, factors like ideology or power are taken into consideration in order to fully explain the connection between social-cultural context and the production and consumption of texts

Figure 4: Explanation (Language and power, Fairclough, 2001: 122)

In short, the chapter Methodology mentions the reasons to choose the topic and data collection techniques, data analysis procedure of Barack Obama‘s farewell address and Fairclough‘s CDA framework

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Textual analysis

President Barack Obama serves as the 44th President of the United States for two terms from January 2009 to January 2017 He has a black African father and a white American mother He is the first African-American President so his voice has significant impact on both African and American community He is aware of the importance of his speech to express his power and ideology than anyone else Therefore, the way he uses every single words and clauses in the farewell address also serves for certain purpose On January 10th, 2017, President Barack Obama delivered his farewell speech to the American people in Chicago following a divisive election

The farewell address traditionally marks the end of the President Barack Obama‘s time in office and looks to the future In this case, it occurred following the election of Donald Trump Donald Trump won the electoral vote, however Hillary Clinton- his Democratic opponent won the popular vote This made many people become in despair and anger, which demonstrated by various protests Being

a Democrat, President Obama decided to make his speech to reassure all citizens of the US and begin a smooth transition of power The President opted to deliver the speech in his hometown of Chicago rather than hold the farewell address at the White House as usual because it was the place he started his political journey This context created a friendly atmosphere among the President and audiences The audiences tend to be closer to the leader and the leader regards them as his ardent supporters so that he can comfortably express his power and ideology

There are a wide range of issues that have been reflected frankly in his farewell address and the President is wise enough to talk about democracy first in the speech President Obama uses this speech to inspire the American people to continue upholding democracy and to believe in the system He focused on the state

of democracy in the nation and how it must improve Besides, President Obama praised the American people‘s ability to enact change and better the country for future generations In order to call on citizens to maintain faith in democracy and uphold the country‘s value, President Obama focused on combinations of organizational patterns, rhetorical devices, and styles Moreover, he also aims to use

this speech to serve as a warning against divisiveness between Americans of different backgrounds and a warning to people who oppose the American ideals of freedom and democracy even if he is no longer the President America will continue

to fight against those who threaten nation‘s solidarity In short, Obama‘s linguistics strategy using in this speech is supposed to be analyzed to show his power and ideology At the same time, we can see how the speaker effectively uses the speech

to persuade and influence the audience to follow his political perspective

4.2 Analysis in terms of vocabulary

From Fairclough‘s perspectives, vocabulary would be analyzed in terms of three types of values: experiential, relational and expressive

Firstly, with respect to ―experiential‖, Norman Fairclough (2001, p.93) states that ―A formal feature with experiential value is a trace of and a cue to the way in which the text producer‘s experience of the natural or social world is represented Experiential value is to do with contents, knowledge, and beliefs‖

In the farewell address, President Obama inspires the American people to continue upholding democracy and calls on US citizens to involve in politics and community life Before representing this point of view, Obama shows his negative attitude towards the difficulties that US citizen is facing

App.1

(line 39-41)

Yes, our progress has been uneven The work of democracy has always been hard

It's always been contentious

Sometimes it's been bloody

When mentioning some issues of America‘s democracy above, the speaker expresses his apology to the Americans and also gives great accomplishment of the

US coming after Moreover, the President cites Thomas Jefferson‘s saying in the Declaration of Independence (1776) so as to present the civil right:

App.1

(line 22 – 24)

It's the conviction that we are all created equal, endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness

This famous saying of ancestor establishes the connection between the past, present and future, and presents his concern about human rights as a national issue in the US His negative attitude is also expressed by the usage of negative words/phrases:

threatens that solidarity, a shrinking world, growing inequality; demographic change and the specter of terrorism (App.1, line 73 -75); stark inequality, left behind, the laid- off factory worker (App.1, line 94 – 97) Not only do the speaker‘s words and phrases

reveal his vision of reality but also show his point of view On the contrary, President Obama builds up a positive picture of America‘s accomplishment by using synonyms and antonym A wide range of words/ phrases which are near synonyms are used to imply the U.S country and people in the speech:

My fellow Americans line 5, line 349

Republic (line 31) >< tyranny (line 31)

Slaves (line 32) >< freedom (line 32)

Open up (line 46) >< shut down (line 47)

Two steps forward (line 41) >< one step back (line 41)

Growing, rising (line 81, 82) >< falling (line 83)

Many (line 88) >< less (line 88)

Poverty (line 83) >< the wealthy (line 83)

By using these antonymous words and phrases above, the President Obama puts particular emphasis on his ideology as creating a contrastive picture of the difficulties that America has to deal with and accomplishments to those issues Apart from synonyms and antonyms, the President also applies hyponymy in the speech

- That's why we cannot withdraw from big global fights — to expand

democracy, and human rights, and women's rights, and LGBT rights No matter how imperfect our efforts, no matter how expedient ignoring such values may seem, that's part of defending America For the fight against

extremism and intolerance and sectarianism and chauvinism are of a piece

with the fight against authoritarianism and nationalist aggression (line

232-237)

These words ―extremism”, “sectarianism”, “chauvinism”,

“authoritarianism”, “nationalist aggression” are hyponymous They refer to big

global battles which Americans fight against to defend America

Secondly, in terms of ―relational value‖, it deals with how a text‘s selection

of words depends on and assists in creating social relationship between participants Fairclough(1996), ―formality is a common property in many societies of practices and discourses of high social prestige and restricted access‖(p.65) It is evident that the President pays attention to use formal words to show his great respect to hearers, also to emphasize his position The example as following in the farewell address in 2017:

Touched line 5

The power of faith line 15

the quiet dignity line 15

Flawless line 36

peaceful protest line 142

Hopeful line 152

Willingness line 165

essential spirit of innovation line 183

the honor of my lifetime to be your

Commander-in-Chief

line 210

a deep debt of gratitude line 211

surveillance line 218

Table 2: Formal words

The usage of formality contributes to express the wise manner of the President and show the concerns about his audiences Moreover, the formal words also are of great importance in the solemn atmosphere of the farewell address The speaker meets necessary requirement of the speech‘s adequate politeness and achieves the strategy of enhancing close relation with audiences These points play

an important role in presenting his ideological intention

Thirdly, expressive value is ―a formal feature with expressive value is a trace

of and a cue to the producer‘s evaluation (in the widest sense) of the bit of the reality it relates to Expressive value is to do with subjects and social identities.‖ (Fairclough, 1996, p.93) In other word, it means the assessment of text producer about social reality

In the speech, expressive value is shown through the President‘s evaluation of

US individual‘s responsibility to involve in community life and more than that, he shows the core solution to those issues is the solidarity of the U.S people The

speaker claims that: ―America is exceptional — not that our nation has been

flawless from the start, but that we have shown the capacity to change and make life better for those who follow.‖ (line 37-39, App.1) ―You were the change You

answered people's hopes, and because of you, by almost every measure, America is

a better, stronger place than it was when we started‖ (line 52-53, App.1) He also

emphasizes: ―We, the People, through the instrument of our democracy, can form a

more perfect union‖ (line 25-26, App.1) And later in the speech, he said: ―Our

Constitution is a remarkable, beautiful gift But it's really just a piece of

parchment It has no power on its own‖ (line 257-258) A typical example of

expressive value is clearly pointed out through the President‘s assessment:

―Whether or not we stand up for our freedoms That's up to us America is no

fragile thing But the gains of our long journey to freedom are not assured‖ (line

247-249)

Through the expression above, the U.S President presents his own opinion and evaluation of US individual‘s responsibility as it is a part of reality, thus expressing that America‘s freedom and democracy entirely depends on each individual of the society of the United States The relationship between individuality and community is not competitive but cooperative, each enhancing the power of the other And the cooperation among citizens helps to create solidarity which is one of the most necessary factors forming a perfect union And this ideology is clearly seen through another expressive value by the President Obama:

―The freedom to chase our individual dreams through our sweat and toil and

imagination, and the imperative to strive together, as well, to achieve a common

good, a greater good‖ (line 25-27) In short, all the expressive values of vocabulary

above of the U.S President make great contribution to imply his ideology that individual‘s endeavoring helps to create something for the betterment of all

Regarding metaphors used in the speech, the word ―heart‖ is repeatedly said several times with a view to inferring people Here are examples for illustration of the use of metaphors:

- This is where I learned that change only happens when ordinary people get

involved and they get engaged, and they come together to demand it After eight years as your President, I still believe that And it's not just my belief

It's the beating heart of our American idea — our bold experiment in

self-government (line 17-20)

- But laws alone won't be enough Hearts must change (line 127)

Another metaphor in Obama‘s farewell address is illustrated through the word

―journey‖

- America is no fragile thing But the gains of our long journey to freedom are

not assured (line 247-248, App.1)

- I've watched you grow up, get married, have kids, start incredible new

journeys of your own (line 306-307, App.1)

Normally, ―journey‖ is the act of travelling from one place to another This

metaphor serves to express what Americans have experienced from the past to present and also the future

Apart from this metaphor, Obama utilizes another one with the image of

―bubbles‖

- For too many of us, it's become safer to retreat into our own bubbles,

whether in our neighborhoods or on college campuses, or places of worship,

or especially our social media feeds, surrounded by people who look like us and share the same political outlook and never challenge our assumptions

(line 152-155, App.1)

- And increasingly, we become so secure in our bubbles that we start

accepting only information, whether it's true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that is out there (line 158-

4.3 Analysis in terms of grammar features

4.3.1 The use of personal pronoun

In the farewell address, the President uses the personal pronouns ―We‖, ―I‖ and ―you‖

From the table above, it is evident that ―we‖ is the most frequently used pronoun in this speech However, firstly, I will analyze the pronoun that might cause the least difficulties when it comes to referential sources and that is the first person singular pronoun ―I‖

The pronoun ―I‖ is used quite many times during the whole speech and it

is very clear that he is referring to himself with several aims Most of the pronouns are used to express his trust and hope in citizens and grateful attitude toward American people

- Michelle and I have been so touched by all the well wishes that we've

received over the past few weeks (line 5-6, App.1)

- And every day, I have learned from you (line 10, App.1)

- So that faith that I placed all those years ago, not far from here, in the power

of ordinary Americans to bring about change — that faith has been

rewarded in ways I could not have possibly imagined And I hope your faith

has, too (line 285-287, App.1)

- I will be forever grateful (line 316, App.1)

Besides, the President also uses the first person singular pronoun ―I‖ to give the U.S citizens inspiration and the power of faith through what he has witnessed

- It was on these streets where I witnessed the power of faith, and the quiet

dignity of working people in the face of struggle and loss (line 15-16,

App.1)

- Over the course of these eight years, I've seen the hopeful faces of young

graduates and our newest military officers

- I've seen our scientists help a paralyzed man regain his sense of touch

The next pronoun I would like to look at is the second personal pronoun

―you‖ It might make people confused when it comes to terms of referential source since it could have both singular and plural references Almost all the pronoun

―you‖ refer to the audiences or possibly the whole American nation

- You made me a better President, and you made me a better man (line 10-11,

App.1)

- You were the change You answered people's hopes, and because of you, by

almost every measure, America is a better, stronger place than it was when

we started (line 50-51, App.1)

- So, you see, that's what our democracy demands It needs you (line 265,

App.1)

- You are the best supporters and organizers anybody could ever hope for, and

I will be forever grateful Because you did change the world You did (line

- Michelle — Michelle LaVaughn Robinson, girl of the South Side— for the

past 25 years, you have not only been my wife and mother of my children, you have been my best friend (line 289-291, App.1)

- Malia and Sasha, under the strangest of circumstances, you have become

two amazing young women (line 295, App1)

- To Joe Biden — the scrappy kid from Scranton who became Delaware's

favorite son — you were the first decision I made as a nominee, and it was the best (line 299-300, App.1)

- To my remarkable staff: For eight years — and for some of you, a whole lot

more — I have drawn from your energy, and every day I tried to reflect back what you displayed — heart, and character, and idealism (line 304-306,

App.1)

Generally speaking, whether the pronoun ―you‖ refers to anyone, the message

he wants to send by these utterances is quite obvious and they clearly state that all

of ―you are the best supporters and organizers anybody could ever hope for, and I

will be forever grateful‖ (line 314, App.1) President Obama uses pronouns

strategically to express his grateful attitude towards the whole American people including his audiences, his family, his staff and people out there Whether ―you‖

are ordinary or talented people, all of ―you‖ make great contribution to a better and

stronger America

This analysis will be continued by looking into Obama‘s use of the first

person plural pronoun ―we‖ As you can see in the table, ―we‖ is the one that

Obama prefers the most in this speech to emphasize on great unity of the American people and to point out that change can only be achieved if the whole nation works together towards shared goals

- We, the People, through the instrument of our democracy, can form a more

perfect union ( line 23-24, App.1)

- We remain the wealthiest, most powerful, and most respected nation on

Earth (line 58, App.1)

In short, whether using ―we‖, ―I‖ or ―you‖, these personal pronouns obviously convey Obama‘s authority, power and also express his own strategy and ideology

4.3.2 The use of voice

The way of using active or passive voice contributes to showing the President‘s implication and ideology

Total amount of sentence

Active voice Passive voice

Table 4: Number and percentage of active and passive sentences in the speech

From the table above, it is clearly seen that the active sentences outnumber the passive one The active in the speech aims at inspiring the American people to continue upholding democracy and to believe in the system It is also a warning to those who oppose the American ideals of freedom and democracy The President‘s intention is to raise people‘s awareness of the importance of unity and humanity for freedom and democracy of the U.S Therefore, the speaker does not only focus on vocabulary but also grammatical features in order to access audiences‘ mind to make a good communication Besides a small number of passive voices are used by

the speaker Some of these sentences clearly show the President‘s intention and ideology The very first passive voice below is a typical example:

- We are all created equal, endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable

rights, among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (line 21-22,

App.1)

The construction of this sentence expresses the President‘s concern about the human right as a national issue in the U.S By using the passive voice, the speaker

emphasizes on the objects that are enjoyed ―unalienable rights” such as ―life,

liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” That objects are not anyone else but ―we‖ –

all the American citizens in particular and all people around the world in general However, ―we‖, ―the People‖ need to use a basic tool called democracy so as to

―form a more perfect union‖ In short, the civic engagement is of great importance

to carry forward the basic premises of the government

Another outstanding passive voice used in the speech is: ―After all, we remain

the wealthiest, most powerful, and most respected nation on Earth Our youth, our drive, our diversity and openness, our boundless capacity for risk and reinvention

means that the future should be ours But that potential will only be realized if our

democracy works‖ (line 58-61, App.1) The omission of agent makes it possible to

avert focus from who take responsibility for making ―that potential be realized‖ Implicitly, the President‘s aim of using passive sentence is to emphasize on the

unity of people because the potential ―the future should be ours” become reality

when the democracy works And the democracy works when there is citizens‘

participation- ―Only if all of us help restore the sense of common purpose that we so

badly need right now‖ (line 62-63, App.1)

A passive voice in the President‘s final point strongly implies his

implication: ―Our democracy is threatened whenever we take it for granted‖ (line

232-233, App.1)

In the previous time, when talking about threats to the nation‘s democracy, the

speaker uses active voices such as ―There have been moments throughout our

history that threatens that solidarity‖ (line 69, App.1) ―There's a second threat to our democracy‖ (line 109, App.1) ―And this trend represents a third threat to our

democracy‖ (line 161, App.1) However, in the final point, the omission of agent

occurs once more time His aim is to focus on the object of the sentence-

―democracy‖ and its problem ―is threated‖ Therefore, the President emphasizes on his worry about the nation‘s tradition of democracy and also makes the American people realize this threat if they do not respect and fight for democracy Through the speech, it is evident that Obama employs an effective strategy throughout every single usage of not only vocabulary but also grammatical features

4.3.3 Mode of sentence

According to Norman Fairclough, there are three main modes of sentence including declarative, imperative and grammatical question With the declarative, the subject position of the President is that of a giver (of information), and the addressee‘s position is that of a receiver In case of the imperative, the President is

in the position of asking something of the addressee and the addressee is expected

to be a compliant actor In a grammatical question, the speaker is the one who asks something of the addressee and accordingly, the addressee is supposed to be the provider of the information In the farewell address, the President Obama uses all three modes of sentence but declarative one takes up the majority of the speech

By using declarative mode, the U.S President points out some achievements

of his administration such as: ―no foreign terrorist attack on US, more Americans with health insurance, the legislation of same-sex marriage, the killing Osama bin Laden‖ From this evidence, the President Obama wants to convince the U.S citizens to believe in democracy, then become engaged and uphold the values of the country, and represent some factors threatening to nation‘s democracy

Besides, only a few imperative sentences are used

- If you're tired of arguing with strangers on the Internet, try talking with one

of them in real life

- If something needs fixing, then lace up your shoes and do some organizing

- If you're disappointed by your elected officials, grab a clipboard, get some

signatures, and run for office yourself

- Show up Dive in Stay at it

These imperative sentences above are complicated than the normal one because they have form and structure of imperative mood but the speaker does not command the audiences to do anything He implies suggestion by telling them what should do

Apart from declarative and imperative mode, the speaker also uses several grammatical questions

- How can elected officials rage about deficits when we propose to spend

money on preschool for kids, but not when we're cutting taxes for corporations?

- How do we excuse ethical lapses in our own party, but pounce when the

other party does the same thing?

Unlike normal grammatical question, these grammatical questions do not have aim to ask the addressees something and also the addressees are not supposed to provide information The speaker uses grammatical questions with a view to make the audiences focus on information he gives The questions are evidences for his point that ―dishonesty‖ which makes politics ―dispiriting‖

By using declarative, imperative mood and grammatical questions, the President presents his ideology in both direct and indirect way Obama is the person who decides which appropriate information is passing out, what to include and to exclude Receivers are supposed to be the audience By combining three modes of sentences, he has reached the persuasive and appealing benchmarks of speech

4.3.4 Modality

Modality is of great importance in creating relational and expressive values in grammar Throughout the farewell address, modality is in form of auxiliaries and the frequency of their appearance as follow (see Appendix 2: Frequency of modality

in the speech for details):

The repetitive use of ―can‖ express possibility of the President and his administration to inspire the American people to continue upholding democracy and

to believe in the system

- We, the People, through the instrument of our democracy, can form a more

perfect union (line 23-24, App.1)

- We can argue about how to best achieve these goals (line 106, App.1)

- Now, we can and should argue about the best approach to solve the

problem (line 181, App.1)

Modal ―must‖ appears three times in the speech and brings a sense of duty and

necessity of the America

- Hearts must change (line 127, App.1)

- we, as citizens, must remain vigilant against external aggression, we must

guard against a weakening of the values that make us who we are (line

213-214, App.1)

By using ―must‖, the speaker wants to give emphasis on his opinion which is the U.S citizen‘s responsibility for protecting nation‘s democracy It is necessary for each person to become engaged and change the nation for the better

Modal ―should‖ is also found 8 times in the speech It indicates the U.S

citizen‘s obligation and duty Ex.: All of us, regardless of party, should be throwing

ourselves into the task of rebuilding our democratic institutions When voting rates

in America are some of the lowest among advanced democracies, we should be

making it easier, not harder, to vote (line 234-236, App.1) These sentences are not

only advice or suggestion but also responsibility of the American people

Modal ―could, might, would‖ respectively appears twice to three times in the

speech The President uses the modal ―would‖ to talk about the history: If I had told

you eight years ago that America would reverse a great recession, reboot our auto

industry, and unleash the longest stretch of job creation in our history — if I had

told you that we would open up a new chapter with the Cuban people, if I had told you that we would win marriage equality It could be easy to understand that the

speaker uses the modal ―would‖ to mention accomplishment that he and his administration achieve Hence, the audiences put their faith upon the America‘s democracy and system

The modal is analyzed from the most outweigh to the least one Throughout the analysis of modality in the speech, the President Obama conveys his ideas that the strongest possibility placed in responsibility and obligation, the mildest one placed in the happenings in near future

4.3.5 Cohesive devices

Cohesive devices are used to create logical relationship, sustain topic continuity and to link sentences, paragraphs or distinct parts of a discourse In the speech, means of cohesion are found in variety of types among which repetition of words and logical connectors are the most interest

Repetition is used to analyze instead of other types of cohesive devices because it clearly shows the author‘s ideology

Repetition plays an important role in vocabulary analysis which can be used

to create coherence and also to emphasize speaker‘s idea and intention In the speech, there are some words repeated lots of times with a view to reinforce a sense

of speaker‘s idea Firstly, it is obvious that the word ―democracy‖ has been repeated

so many times and it becomes the key word in his speech ―That's what I want to

focus on tonight: The state of our democracy‖ By using repetition with

―democracy‖, the President Obama wants to inspire the American people to continue upholding democracy and to believe in the system He also aims to warn to those who oppose the American ideals of democracy Secondly, the word ―change‖ and ―better‖ contribute to highlight his point of view He relies on the citizens who make important change for the America and the nation also becomes better thanks

to the American people ―You were the change You answered people's hopes, and

because of you, by almost every measure, America is a better, stronger place than it was when we started‖ (App.1, line 50-51) Repetition in this case helps the speaker

express his respect and believe in the U.S citizens Next, ―freedom‖ is another word with high frequency of using in the speech The idea of freedom has imposed on mind of many people And thanks to this repetition, the President wants to confirm that each person takes responsibility for obtaining and maintaining freedom In other word, freedom is a goal that all the U.S citizens need to strive for Finally,