THE SUMMARY OF CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

(NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH, THEO VAN LEEUWEN, TEUN A.

VAN DIJK, AND RUTH WODAK)
“Critical Analysis Subject”

By:

Octavia Lestari 211101010730

Radisti Meilanasari 211102010754
Salmah 211102010744
Tri Jaka Saputra 211102010741

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION
UNIVERSITAS IBN KHALDUN BOGOR
2024
 FOREWORD

Thank God Almighty for bestowing His mercy and inspiration so that we can complete the
summary of Critical Discourse Analysis according to Norman Fairclough, Theo Van Leeuwen,
Teun A. van Dijk, and Ruth Wodak. We would also like to thank all those who have provided
support and assistance throughout the research and writing process. Without their help, this paper
would not have materialized well.

Bogor, 31 March 2024

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ ii
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) ................................................................................................. 1
Norman Fairclough ......................................................................................................................... 3
“Theo Van Leeuwen” ...................................................................................................................... 7
Example: Theo Van Leeuweun Method ...................................................................................... 9
Teun A. van Dijk ........................................................................................................................... 11
Example: Teun A. van Dijk Method .......................................................................................... 15
Ruth Wodak’s ................................................................................................................................ 17
Example: Ruth Wodak’s Method .............................................................................................. 19

ii
 Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a theoretical framework used to analyze language and
communication in social contexts, focusing on power relations, ideologies, and social structures.
It originated in the 1970s and has since become a prominent methodology in various fields
including linguistics, sociology, political science, media studies, and cultural studies. Several
experts have contributed significant models to CDA, including Norman Fairclough, Theo Van
Leeuwen, Teun A. van Dijk, and Ruth Wodak.

The primary goal of CDA is to uncover how language is used to construct and maintain power
dynamics, social hierarchies, and ideologies within society. It examines not only the content of
discourse but also the linguistic and rhetorical strategies employed to convey meaning and shape
social reality.

The principles and techniques of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) include:

1. Social context analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) considers the broader social, political, and historical
context in which discourse occurs. This involves examining factors such as power
relations, social identities, institutional practices, and cultural norms.
2. Language and power
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) investigates how language is used as a tool of power
and domination. It examines how certain groups or institutions use language to maintain
their authority, control narratives, and marginalize others.
3. Ideology critique
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) seeks to uncover the underlying ideologies embedded
within discourse. It analyzes how language constructs and reinforces dominant ideologies,
such as sexism, racism, nationalism, or neoliberalism, while also exposing alternative
perspectives and resistance discourses.
4. Textual analysis
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) involves detailed analysis of texts, including written,
spoken, visual, and digital discourse. Analysts examine linguistic features, discursive
structures, rhetorical devices, and intertextuality to uncover layers of meaning and power
relations.

1
 5. Critical reflexivity
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) encourages researchers to reflect critically on their own
positions, biases, and assumptions. It emphasizes the importance of acknowledging the
researcher's subjectivity and positionality in relation to the research topic and participants.

Overall, Critical Discourse Analysis provides a framework for understanding how language shapes
and reflects social reality, and how it can be mobilized for both domination and resistance. It offers
insights into the complex interplay between language, power, and society, and has been applied to
a wide range of contexts, including media representations, political rhetoric, corporate
communication, education, and everyday interactions.

2
 Norman Fairclough
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a form of discourse analysis that emphasizes the role of
discourse in the production and reproduction of power and inequality in society. It's a
multidisciplinary approach that uses language analysis to uncover hidden ideologies and power
relations within texts and talks.

Norman Fairclough is an expert in the field of CDA. He revealed that discourse or language used
is not only about communicating, but he stated that language is also used as a way to understand
social practices and power dynamics that exist in society. In addition, according to Norman
Fairclough, language can influence and reflect social structures and an ideology. For example,
when someone uses language to give orders to others, it reflects how power is exercised. In society,
people with power often use their language to maintain their position and control others.

The idea of CDA according to Norman Fairclough focuses on themes that have a relationship of
language with ideology, and power. Then, with how discourse contributes to social change, then
he also added about the dialectical relationship between discourse and other social elements. He
emphasizes the analysis of language use in relation to broader social and cultural structures.
Fairclough’s work is divided into several themes, including:

→ Language, Ideology, and Power: Exploring how language relates to ideology and the
exercise of power. Example: A company uses language in their policies and procedures to
maintain a hierarchy of power among employees. For example, in the language of company
policies, superiors may use terms that reinforce their role as leaders and give authority,
while employees are more often represented in language that emphasizes obedience and
dependence on superiors.
→ Discourse and Sociocultural Change: Analyzing how discourse contributes to social and
cultural changes. Example: A government uses discourse in public campaigns to influence
people's perception of a particular issue. For example, in an anti-smoking campaign, the
government may use language that emphasizes the health risks associated with smoking to
change the culture of smoking in society.
→ Dialectics of Discourse: Investigating the dialectical relationships between discourse and
other social elements. Example: A non-profit organization conducted a campaign to raise
awareness about environmental issues. They use discourse in various media to highlight

3
 the link between industrial pollution and climate change. However, they also have to deal
with large industries that have an economic interest in maintaining the status quo. This
shows the dialectical conflict between pro-environmental discourse and pro-industry
discourse.

Norman Fairclough's model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a comprehensive framework

that examines language as a form of social practice. It's designed to uncover the connections
between discourse and social and cultural change, power relations, and ideologies. Fairclough's
model can be broken down into three interrelated analytical processes that correspond to three
dimensions of discourse:

➢ Text Analysis (Description): This involves a detailed examination of the language used in
a text, including vocabulary, grammar, and structure. It's the micro-level analysis of the
actual linguistic features. Every text, according to Fairclough, can be described and
analyzed from three elements: representation, relationship and identity. in this case I will
give an example from a social science research journal entitled Norman Fairclough's
Critical Discourse Analysis on Viktor Laiskodat's Controversial Statement by Frederik
Masri.
• Representation:
“Karena orang cerdas saja yang masuk surga. Tidak ada orang bodoh dan miskin
masuk surga” In this sub-sentence, it is clear how Viktor Laiskodat's attitude
towards the two main problems in NTT, namely the underdevelopment of the
education sector and welfare. In the education sector, NTT was in the bottom three
after Papua and West Papua in 2017. In addition, for the poverty issue, every year
the number of poor people in NTT Province always increases and is ranked as the
third poorest in Indonesia.
• Relationship:
The relational element relates to the relationship between Viktor Laiskodat as a
representative of the Government and those who listen to his statements in various
activities. The relational relationship that is built shows how Viktor Laiskodat
seeks to invite the participation of the community and all elements in it to jointly

4
 develop the region, and ultimately get out of various social problems that have
occurred over the years.
• Identity:
Viktor Laiskodat's statement represents his identity as part of NTT society. Viktor
Laiskodat has the same character as other NTT people. His straightforward and
loud style of delivering speeches wants to show the public that towards existing
social problems we must be firm and must have a spirit of change for the better.
➢ Discursive Practice (Interpretation): This step interprets the production and consumption
of texts, considering the processes of writing, speaking, and designing, as well as reading,
listening, and viewing. It looks at how texts are produced and understood within specific
social contexts. Example from a social science research journal entitled Norman
Fairclough's Critical Discourse Analysis on Viktor Laiskodat's Controversial Statement by
Frederik Masri:
• The analysis of discourse practices on Viktor Laiskodat's statement includes two
main aspects: text production and text consumption. Viktor Laiskodat, a politician,
was born in Oenesu-Kupang in 1965 and has a background as a migrant in Jakarta
before starting his political career. He emphasized the importance of education and
described his life journey as an example for the people of NTT. However, the
public's response to her statement was mixed, with mostly negative reactions
appearing on social media such as Facebook. Nonetheless, there was also support
for her statement, which criticized the Church's view that emphasizes poverty as
God's will.
➢ Socio-Cultural Analysis (Explanation): The final dimension explores the broader social and
historical conditions that give rise to the discursive practices. It explains why certain
discourses exist and how they are related to social structures and power dynamics. Example
from a social science research journal entitled Norman Fairclough's Critical Discourse
Analysis on Viktor Laiskodat's Controversial Statement by Frederik Masri:
• The analysis of sociocultural practices is related to certain socio-cultural conditions
that influence the production and reception of texts. Viktor Laiskodat's statement is
understood in situational, institutional, and social contexts. Situationally, his
statement arose because of the poor conditions in NTT, such as the low Human

5
Development Index. At the institutional level, Laiskodat is involved in social
institutions that focus on NTT issues, encouraging him to be firm on social issues.
At the social level, the harsh characteristics of NTT society and the harsh natural
conditions influence Laiskodat's critical and assertive speech style.

6
 “Theo Van Leeuwen”
Theo Van Leeuwen introduces this discourse analysis model to detect and examine how a group
or a person is marginalized in a discourse. This opinion refers to discourse and power. Eriyanto
(2001) states that power does not only operate through formal channels, laws and state institutions
with the power to prohibit and punish, but also operates through a series of discourses to define a
group as wrong or bad. This marginalization can be seen from the presence or absence of this group
or person in the text.

A model of critical discourse analysis of van Leeuwen

A. Exclusion Process
Exclusion is a central issue in discourse analysis that the process of exclusion is the process
of how one particular group or social actor is not involved in a process of discussion or
discourse. In this case, the elimination of these social actors has a specific purpose. Thus,
news readers need to criticize how each of these groups is presented in the text. Is it in a
news text, are there any groups or actors that are excluded from the news, and what
discourse strategies are used for that. In this case, the production process can directly
change the public's understanding of it and legitimize certain positions of reasoning.
B. Inclusion Process
The process of inclusion (inclusion) is a process related to the question of how each party
or group is shown through news using certain words, sentences, information, or
arrangement of sentence forms as well as certain ways of telling stories, each group is
interpreted in a text ( Darma, 2014: 121). The inclusion process is divided into seven of the
seven processes as follows:
1. Differentiation.
Differentiation is an event or a social actor that can be displayed in the text
independently as a unique or distinctive event, but can also be contrasted by displaying
other events or actors in the text.
2. Objectivation-abstraction. This relates to the question of whether information about an
event or actor is displayed by giving concrete instructions or what is displayed is an
abstraction, the meaning received by the audience will be different because by making
abstractions of events or actors. According to van Leeuwen, is often not caused by

7
 journalists' ignorance of information, but often more as a journalist's discourse strategy
to present something.
3. Nomination-categorization.
Nomination is news about an actor (a person/group) or about a problem that is not
shown clearly. Categorization is news about actors (a person/group) or about a problem
that is displayed clearly. The actor is shown as is or what is called a category of social
actors. This category can vary, showing characteristics, physical form, and so on.
4. Nomination-identification
This discourse strategy is almost similar to categorization, how a particular group,
event, or action is defined. The difference is in this identification discourse strategy, the
process of defining it is done by giving a clause as an explanation. Here there are two
propositions, where the second proposition is an explanation or description of the first
proposition.
5. Indeterminations
Determination is an actor that is not clearly stated, while indetermination is an actor or
event that is stated clearly.
6. Assimilation-individualization
Individualization is a social actor whose categories reported clearly, while assimilation
is a social actor whose category is not clear.
7. Associations.
Association is an actor or a party that is not shown alone, but is connected with another
larger group, while dissociation is an actor or a party shown alone.

8
Example: Theo Van Leeuweun Method

The results of the analysis using inclusion theory of Theo Van Leeuweun method in finding
the discourse behind news of Murder by “Former Ceo of Amazon”

1. Assimilation-individualization

"Pérez Sagaón was shot in the head by a motorcyclist in Mexico City in front of his two children

in his car" This sentence is an example of assimilation because in the quote the perpetrator of the

shooting is not shown clearly, but the perpetrator/actor is only referred to as a "motorcyclist".

2. Assimilation-individualization

''Juan Carlos García, former CEO of Amazon Mexico, is alleged to have hired two assassins for

US$9,000 or around Rp.132 million, to shoot his wife dead in 2019." This quote includes examples

of individualization because the social actor reported is clearly indicated by his category, namely

the former CEO of Amazon.

3. Determination-Indetermination

"One of the killers recently testified in court." This quote includes an example of determination
because the social actor reported was shown anonymously, namely one of the killers.

"A man suddenly walked up to a car that had stopped at a traffic light and shot him." This quote

includes an example of determination because the social actor reported is shown anonymously,

namely a man.

4. Objectivity-Abstraction

"García is a fugitive and warrants for his arrest have been issued in 190 countries after he was

accused of masterminding the murder of his wife Abril Pérez Sagaón." This quote is an example

of objectification because the sentence contains words that give clearer instructions to the reader,

namely being a fugitive and the mastermind behind the murder of his wife.

9
5. Differentiation-Indeferentiation

"One of the assassins hired to kill Pérez testified in a Mexico City court and pleaded not guilty. He

said that García offered him an additional US$2500 or around Rp.367 million to kill his wife

before the trial." The quote is an example of differentiation because in the sentence there are two

contrasting sentences that the real killer is Garcia because he was paid US$2500 by Garcia so he

is innocent.

"Pérez Sagaón filed for divorce after García accused him of trying to kill her while sleeping with

a baseball bat. But it was García who then hit him with it in January 2019." This quote is an

example of differentiation because in the sentence there are two contrasting sentences which seem

to give the perception that Garcia killed his wife because he was sued for divorce.

"Several days after the murder García allegedly fled Mexico and entered the United States by

crossing on foot to San Diego via Tijuana. García denied the charges and claimed innocence in a

letter he sent to Mexico City officials in 2019." The quote is an example of differentiation because

in the sentence there are two sentences that contrast and declare one's innocence.

10
 Teun A. van Dijk
Teun A. van Dijk defines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as 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. This definition
emphasizes the role of language in maintaining or challenging social structures and power
relations. CDA, according to van Dijk, is not just about analyzing language but also about
understanding the broader social implications and striving for social change.

Teun A. van Dijk, a prominent scholar in the field of discourse studies, offers a unique perspective
on social power. Rather than establishing a direct relationship between society and discourse, he
argues that this influence is indirect and depends on how language users themselves define the
communicative situation. In other words, social power is mediated by the way individuals perceive
and interpret their social context.

Van Dijk introduces the concept of context models as the missing link between language and
society. These models govern all language production and understanding, ensuring that discourse
is adapted appropriately to each situation. By examining the structure of social situations in social
psychology, sociology, and cultural anthropology, van Dijk develops a multidisciplinary theory of
context. He applies this theory to various domains, including politics, where political leaders'
speeches serve as case studies for detailed contextual analysis.

The point of understanding the analysis of the discourse of the van Dijk model (Eriyanto, 2011:
224) is to combine three dimensions/buildings, namely text, social cognition, and social context,
in one unified design analysis. Dimensions/building of text, examining how the structure of the
text and the discourse strategy is used to explain a particular theme. In the dimension of social
cognition, observe and study processes in the production of texts involving the cognition of the
subject of a producer. In comparison, the third aspect is the social context understanding the
dimensions of discourse that society develops towards a problem. This model is described as
follows:

• Text Dimensions
Text dimensions consisting of macro structure, super structure, and microstructure.

11
 ✓ Macro Structure: Macro structure is a global/general meaning from a text that can
be understood by looking at the topic of a text. The theme of this discourse is not
only the content, but also a certain side of an event. From the topic, one can tell
problems and actions taken by communicators to overcome these problems.
Actions, opinions, decisions can be observed on macro structure of a discourse.
Macrostructure is the general meaning of a text that can be understood by reading
the topic of the text. The theme of discourse here is not only the content but also a
certain part of an event
✓ Superstructure: superstructure is the framework of a text. How the structure and
elements are arranged in a text as a whole. Superstructure is the framework of a
text. The way the structure and elements of discourse are arranged in the text as a
whole is schematic (flow). The superstructure consists of introduction, content, and
the end of the discourse. Superstructure is the concept of a text, how the structure
and components of discourse are arranged in the text as a whole.
✓ Micro Structure: Microstructure meaning of discourse that can be observed by
analyzing the words, sentences, propositions, clauses used. things to observe:
a) SEMANTICS (the meaning you want to emphasize in the news text),
elements: setting, details, intent, presupposition, nominalization.
b) SYNTAX (how is the opinion conveyed?), elements: sentence form,
coherence, pronouns.
c) STYLISTIC (what choice of words to use?), element: Lexicon.
d) RHETORICAL (how & in what way to emphasize done?), elements:
graphics, metaphor, expression.
• Social Cognition
According to van Dijk, elements of social cognition include the background of beliefs,
ideologies, behaviors, knowledge, and value norms embraced by a person as part of a
group. Disclosure of an individual's understanding of events based on the so-called
schema. Martha Augiustinos and Iain Walker (1995:33) define the schema as describing
how a person uses information present in his memory and combined with new
information that describes an event being entered, understood, and interpreted as one
of the knowledge of reality.

12
 ✓ Person Schemas. This scheme explains a person's perspective and how to judge
and explain others.
✓ Self Schemas. This scheme deals with oneself being seen, explained and
understood from the perspective of others.
✓ Role Schemas. This scheme is concerned with how a person sees, assesses, and
explains the position and role that a person has in society.
✓ Event Schemas. This scheme explains how we understand and interpret a
particular event.
• Social Analysis / Social Context
Duranti and Goodwin (in Tannen, Hamilton, and Schiffrin, 2001:356) describe
context/social analysis as a structure with a mentality that represents it from the
character of relevant social situations to produce and understand discourse. Van Dijk
(1989:84-86) explains two important points in analyzing society: power and access.
✓ Power
Van Dijk describes power emphasizing its role in controlling individuals or
groups. It highlights that discourse analysis often focuses on social power.
Power is typically associated with ownership of valuable assets like material
wealth, status, and knowledge.
✓ Access
Van Dijk describes access emphasizes how different groups in society have
varying levels of access to power, with elite groups exerting control over lower
groups. Van Dijk's analysis focuses on how elites manipulate media to shape
public perception. In essence, both perspectives highlight unequal access to
power and the role of elites in influencing and controlling society.

Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism

KKN stands for Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism is a problem that exists in almost all
governments in the world. The practice of KKN has always been in the spotlight of the community
and the international community because of its huge impact on the economy, the nation's morale,
and public trust. The community often urges the KKN practice eradication program to be carried

13
out firmly and transparently. The goal is none other than for the nation's good, especially national
economic growth, which is often inhibited by the practices of KKN by state organizers.

14
Example: Teun A. van Dijk Method

Van Dijk's Critical Discourse Analysis of the “Dapur Keluarga” Song and Its Relevance To The
Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism Phenomenon In Indonesia

1. Text Structure

The analysis of the lyrics of "Dapur Keluarga" reveals a thematic discourse on Corruption,
Collusion, and Nepotism (KKN) in Indonesia, particularly involving close family and relatives.
The lyrics predominantly adopt a first-person perspective, portraying a corruptor who also heads
a family, effectively illustrating the KKN phenomenon. This thematic structure not only depicts
the KKN itself but also delves into the privileges, access, and power gained by corruptors, often
from both first and third-person viewpoints. The affirmation of KKN discourse, along with its
intricacies, is supported through superstructure and microstructure analyses.

The text discusses an analysis of the song lyrics of "Dapur Keluarga," emphasizing both the
superstructure and microstructure aspects. The superstructure involves reconstructing the story
within the lyrics from start to finish, while the microstructure delves into the detailed elements
such as background information, metaphors, lexicons, and pronouns. This analysis aims to provide
a focused discussion, particularly highlighting the background from 2019 to the present.

2. Social Cognition

The text discusses Bhaskara Putra's role as a lyricist in determining the message conveyed in the
lyrics of the song "Dapur Keluarga." Through analysis of Bhaskara's press release data, it is
revealed that he draws on personal experiences, memories, and interactions with his environment
to understand human behavior. He acknowledges the tendency for individuals to exploit the
suffering of others to support their families, attributing this behavior to societal structures that
favor some over others. Bhaskara incorporates themes of tragedy, social criticism, and resistance
to societal problems in his work. However, he distinguishes corruptors from those driven by
survival, noting that their actions stem from personal desires rather than necessity.

3. Social Context

The text discusses the discourse surrounding corruption, collusion, and nepotism (KKN),
particularly in the context of Indonesia. It highlights the passing of the KPK bill in 2019, which

15
was perceived as an attempt to weaken anti-corruption institutions. This led to public controversy
and suspicion of corrupt officials trying to undermine anti-corruption efforts. The text also points
out the influence of corrupt officials in controlling media narratives and attacking dissenting
voices. It suggests that while everyone has the potential for KKN, politicians, in particular, wield
significant power and access, often using manipulation and rhetoric to further their interests. Many
politicians, once elected, are accused of abandoning their promises and engaging in corrupt
practices to serve their own agendas.

Based on the results of the analysis of the lyrics of the Dapur Keluarga song, it was concluded that
the process of meaning the message conveyed, namely through the structure of the text (macro,
superstructure, and microstructure), social cognition, and social context analysis is a form of
satirical criticism of human actions in seeking to profit from the suffering of others such as the
practice of Corruption, Collusion, and Nepotism by corruptors and those closest to them (family,
and relatives) who are involved either directly or indirectly, then there is also criticism conveyed
to the listeners, with the use of the point of view of corruptors and those closest to them, the
criticism seeks to be conveyed to us as listeners to realize and correct ourselves when we see a
crime because we also have the potential to commit the same crime if we have the same access
and power as them.

16
 Ruth Wodak’s
CDA sees discourse as a form of "social practice," where language use in speech and writing is
shaped by and shapes situations, institutions, and social structures. Discourse is socially
constitutive and conditioned, contributing to sustaining or transforming the social status quo and
influencing power relations between different social groups.

In a long discussion of experts based on theory, methodological differences and similarities, the
scholars agreed to recognize the Critical Discourse Analysis as an interdiciplinary field of research
and investigation (Wodak, 2008). All approaches of CDA are problem-oriented and eclectic. CDA
systematically deals with the semiotic data by demystifying ideologies and power while
simultaneously taking into consideration the common sense.

→ Power, according to the DHA, refers to an asymmetric relationship among social actors
who occupy different social positions or belong to different social groups. It is defined as
the possibility of having one's own will within a social relationship against the will or
interests of others. Power is implemented through various means such as physical force,
threats, promises, authority, and technical control, and is legitimized or de-legitimized in
discourses.
→ Ideology in the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) is viewed as a one-sided perspective
or worldview shared by members of a specific social group, composed of mental
representations, convictions, opinions, attitudes, and evaluations. Ideologies play a crucial
role in establishing and maintaining unequal power relations through discourse, controlling
access to specific discourses or public spheres, and transforming power relations.
→ Critique in the DHA involves gaining distance from the data, embedding it in the social
context, clarifying the political positioning of discourse participants, and engaging in
continuous self-reflection during research. It integrates text-immanent critique, which aims
to uncover inconsistencies in discourse structures, and socio-diagnostic critique, which
demystifies the persuasive or manipulative nature of discursive practices

Ruth Wodak’s model of CDA

The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an

interdisciplinary approach that combines linguistic analysis with historical and sociological

17
approaches. It involves the analysis of discourses about various social phenomena, such as post-
war antisemitism, racist discrimination, and national identity. The DHA aims to demystify the
hegemony of specific discourses by deciphering the ideologies that establish, perpetuate, or fight
dominance. It critically analyzes language use to understand power dynamics and social
relationships.

In the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA), discourse, text, and context are essential
components of analysis.

→ Discourse refers to the ways in which linguistic forms are used in expressions and
manipulations of power.
→ Texts are considered sites of social struggle, reflecting ideological fights for dominance
and hegemony.
→ Context encompasses extralinguistic social variables, institutional frames, and broader
sociopolitical and historical contexts in which discursive practices are embedded

In the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) proposed by Ruth Wodak, the analysis of speech
involves three main stages:

1. Hermeneutic Analysis: This stage emphasizes the interpretive aspect of discourse

analysis, highlighting the subjective nature of understanding and interpreting texts. It
involves delving into the deeper meanings, power dynamics, and ideologies embedded in
the discourse to uncover implicit messages and intentions.
2. Diachronic Analysis: This stage focuses on the historical dimension of discourse,
examining how past events, traditions, and ideologies influence the current discourse. It
involves tracing the development of discourses over time and understanding how historical
forces shape present communication.
3. Synchronic Analysis: In this stage, the analysis looks at the contemporary context of the
discourse, considering current power relations, norms, values, and social practices that
impact the communication. It involves examining the discourse within its immediate social
and political environment.

18
Example: Ruth Wodak’s Method

A Critical Discourse Analysis of Donald Trump’s Inaugural Address in 2017

Since speeches made by politicians are never neutral in their aims and ambitions, it is
always much better to approach these type of speeches from the perspectives upheld by
critical discourse analysis. The production of political speeches is always subject to the
mechanisms of power relations, norms, and values (Wodak, 2004). Moreover, political
speeches play a highly influential role in shaping common people’s opinions and constructing
foreign policies. Similarly, speeches made by Donald Trump are also characterized by
specific political interests and ambitions. The Inaugural Address made by Donald Trump also
contains his self-interest oriented approach. Besides, Trump’s Inaugural Address is actually
manifestation of his American nationalism. Hence, his nationalistically inspired speech brings
about the birth of some claims which can satisfactorily be countered only through
employment of a critical discourse framework. In this regard, the researcher has made use of
Ruth Wodak’s Discourse Historical Model (2004) to question the claimed truths in Trump’s
speeches.

In this segment, Donald Trump’s Inaugural Address (2017) has been analyzed
employing Ruth Wodak’s Discourse Historical Model. Moreover, the analyses have been
based on sub-headings, such as (1) Hermeneutic Analysis of Power Relations in Donald Trump’s
Inaugural Address, (2) Trump’s Diachronic, Discursive Interaction with American Pastness, and
(3) Trump’s Synchronic, Discursive Interaction with Contemporary Affairs.

1. Hermeneutic Analysis of Power Relations in Donald Trump’s Inaugural Address

“Every four years, we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power,
and we are grateful to President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid
throughout this transition. They have been magnificent” (Trump,2017)

In the excerpt provided, it is evident that Trump is emphasizing the norm of the 'transition of power'
from one American president to another. By using the noun phrase 'transition of power,' Trump is
highlighting the power relations between the American president and the American people. This
phrase allows Trump to assert his authority and inherit power, positioning common Americans as
mere spectators in this historical process. The creation and adherence to norms generate power

19
relations, and Trump sees himself as a powerful leader shaping norms to protect his political
interests.

“Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families, and good
jobs for themselves” (Trump, 2017)

In the provided excerpt, Trump's speech emphasizes the importance of providing great schools for
children, safe neighborhoods for families, and good jobs for individuals. This statement aligns with
the concept of 'power relations' through 'norms and values' as discussed by Wodak (2004). By
using positive nouns like 'children,' 'families,' and 'jobs,' Trump constructs a discourse of populism
to appeal to the American people. He portrays himself as a protector of Americans, suggesting that
he has the ability to fulfill their desires for education, safety, and employment. Through emotional
appeal, Trump justifies power relations by positioning himself as the solution to the educational,
safety, and employment needs of the American population.

2. Trump’s Diachronic, Discursive Interaction with American Pastness

“We’ve defended other nation’s borders while refusing to defend our own;” (Trump,2017)

In the excerpt provided, Trump's speech is analyzed through a diachronic lens, connecting it to
American history. By using the verb 'defended,' Trump suggests a historical pattern of American
leaders protecting other nations from dangers. This narrative establishes a relationship between
those who defend (powerful Americans) and those who are defended (weaker nations), creating a
power dynamic rooted in history. Additionally, Trump contrasts his stance with his political rivals
by using the verb 'refusing,' implying that they neglect to protect common Americans from threats.
This comparison positions Trump as a capable leader and his opponents as negligent politicians
within the framework of power relations.

“We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength, and confidence of our country has
disappeared over the horizon” (Trump, 2017).

In this analysis, Trump is seen to establish a power dynamic between America and other nations
by employing the past participles 'made' and 'disappeared.' By associating 'made' with the positive
adjective 'rich' and 'disappeared' with positive nouns like 'wealth,' 'strength,' and 'confidence,'
Trump suggests that American politicians have prioritized enriching other nations at the expense

20
of American welfare. This discourse taps into American nationalism and power, portraying a
narrative where other countries prosper while America's resources diminish. Through this
narrative, Trump leverages American patriotism to reinforce his political agenda, aligning with
Ruth Wodak's idea that discourses are rooted in power relations and historical influences. Trump
strategically utilizes power relations to advance his political interests.

3. Trump’s Synchronic, Discursive Interaction with Contemporary Affairs

“We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing
our companies, and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength”
(Trump, 2017)

In this analysis, Trump's statement is viewed as addressing the ongoing economic conflicts
between the United States and China. By using the possessive pronoun 'our,' Trump suggests that
China and other nations are negatively impacting America's manufacturing sector. The current
situation involves economic sanctions being imposed by both countries, with Trump accusing
China of 'stealing' in reference to its behavior. Trump advocates for protectionist economic policies
to counter China's manufacturing practices. This economic rivalry is characterized by power
relations, with Trump positioning himself as a leader in economic matters and portraying China as
engaging in unethical practices. The portrayal of America in a positive light, as innovative in
manufacturing, contrasts with the depiction of China as lacking innovative economic ideas.

21