The People‘s Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

Ali Lounici University of Blida 2

Faculty of Arts and Languages

Department of English

A Critical Discourse Analysis of Barrack Obama

First Inaugural Address (2009)

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the

degree of Master Literature and Civilization.

Submitted by: Supervised by:

Mr. CHARFI ABDELHAMID Ms. MEGHESLI

May 2017
 DECLARATION

I, hereby, declare that the work I am submitting for assessment contains

no section copied in whole or in part from any other source unless explicitly

identified in quotation mark and with details, complete and accurate referencing

Charfi Abdelhamid

II
 DEDICATION

At the beginning, I want to thank the All Mighty ALLAH, who helped me

to finish this work despite of all the challenges that I have faced.

I would like to thank all the people who contributed in the realization of

this work. To you all I dedicate this work. First, to my father and my mother,

thank you for your unconditional love, support, and patient. Without your help

and support, none of this would ever have been accomplished. May bless you and

protect you from any harm.

In addition, I would thank my brothers and my sister for their helps. It

would thank all my family members and friends who provided me with all the

help and support during the fulfillment of this work.

III
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This research would not have been possible without the consistence

support of my supervisor, Ms. Souad Meghesli. I am very grateful for her advice,

comments and suggestions on the multiple drafts of this work. I also appreciate

all the encouragement and the faith she had on me throughout the fulfillment of

this work.

In addition, I would like to thank Ms Bezzouh the jury who accepted to

read and evaluate my thesis.. I would also thank Mrs. Kateb, Mrs. Lahlouh and

Ms. Khelkhel for their helps and guidance.

IV
 Abstract

Each four years, the American citizens welcome their new president. This

new president tries to apply his rich language expression, impassioned speeches,

and hearted attitude to persuade people to accept his policies. This research

analyzes Obama’s first Inaugural Address (2009). The research’s main concern is

to investigate the use of language in persuading the American Citizens to accept

Obama’s presidential policies. This research relies on Critical Discourse Analysis

as an approach. This research aims at proving that Obama was able to use

language as persuasive tool to persuade the Americans citizen to accept his

presidential policies. Moreover, this research proves that there is relationship

between language, ideology and power.

Key term: Inaugural Address, Barrack Obama, Critical Discourse Analysis,

Systematic Functional Grammar.

V
 Table of Contents

Declaration………………………………………………...……………………II

Dedication……………………………………………………………………...III

Acknowledgment……………………………………………………………....IV

Abstract……………………………………………………………………….....V

Table of Content………………………………….…………………………....VI

List of Abbreviation………………………………..………………………..VIII

General Introduction…………………………………..………………………..1

 Chapter One: Obama’s Road to the White House…………...………..5

Introduction…………………………………………………...…………..6

1. An Overview of Barrack Obama’s life………………………………...6

2. Obama’s Political Career……………………………………………...10

3. Obama’s Campaign for presidency…………………………………...12

4. Obama’s First Inaugural Address……………………………..............16

Conclusion……………………………………………………….............18

 Chapter Two : Research Methodology……………………………….20

Introduction……………………………………………………………...21

1. Critical Discourse Analysis…………………………………………...22

2. Systematic Functional Grammar……………………………………...25

2.1. Meta-Function Phases………………………………………..27

VI
 2.1.1. Textual Meta-Function……………………………...27

2.1.2. Ideational Meta-Function…………………………...29

2.1.2.1. Material Process…………………………...29

2.1.2.2. Mental Process…………………………….30

2.1.2.3. Relational Process………………………....30

2.1.2.4. Verbal Process……………………………..31

2.1.2.5. Behavioral Process………………………...31

2.1.2.6. Existential Process………………………...32

2.1.3. Interpersonal Meta-Function………………………..32

3. Critical Discourse Analysis as an Approach to This Research……….33

4. Data Collection Procedures………………………………………...…34

4.1. Sample………………………………………………………..34

4.2. Secondary Sources ….……………………………………….35

4.3. Method……………………………………………………….36

Conclusion……………………………………………………….............33

 Chapter Three: Data Analysis, Results and Discussion……………...38

Introduction……………………………………………………………...39

1. Meta-functional Analysis……………………………………………..39

1.1. Textual Meta-function Analysis……………………………..40

1.1.1. Greeting…………………………………………......40

1.1.2. Recalling the Past…………………………………...41

1.1.3. Reviewing…………………………………………..41

1.1.4. Stating the Future Policies………………………….41

VII
 1.1.5. Resort to God……………………………………….42

1.2. Ideational Meta-function Analysis…………………………...44

1.2.1. Material process…………………………………….45

1.2.2. Relational Process…………………………………..49

1.2.3. Mental Process……………………………………...51

1.3. Interpersonal Meta-function Analysis………………………..53

1.3.1. Model Verbs………………………………………...53

1.3.2. Tense………………………………………………..55

Conclusion……………………………………………………………….58

General Conclusion…………………………………………………………...60

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………...64

VIII
 List of Abbreviation

1. CDA: Critical Discourse Analysis.

2. CL: Critical Linguistics

3. SFL: Systematic Functional Linguistic

4. SFG: Systematic Functional Grammar

5. UG: Universal Grammar.

IX
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
 Through time, language has been developed to an important means by politician

to convince the population to accept their decisions. Public speech as kind of discourse

in which scientists and linguists paid attention to investigates how politician apply

language as means to reach their political agendas. Inaugural Address is type of public

speeches were the newly inaugurated president uses language as persuasive tool to

convince and persuade the American citizens to accept his presidential policies. This

research analyzes a political discourse namely Obama’s first Inaugural Address of

2009. This study investigates the use of language as mean of persuasion in Obama’s

Inaugural Address.

This current study investigates the use of language as tool of persuasion in

Obama’s first Inaugural Address. It is an attempt to understand how Obama was able

to demonstrate his ideology and show his power as new president through language.

Halliday’s theory of Systematic Functional Grammar is applied to examine the lexico-

grammatical choices in order to reveal how Obama’s Inaugural Address is formed and

functioned.

Therefore, through analyzing Obama’s Inaugural Address we extract the

different functions of the language. In addition, it reveals the different language

processes that help president Obama to transmit his ideology and show his ability to

lead the United States in critical time. Therefore, the current show the different views,

opinions, and judgment about Obama’s inaugural address. It explores how effective

was Obama’s Inaugural Address in persuading the citizens to accept his policies

2
 Within the framework of Systematic Functional Grammar, this study aims at

analyzing and investigating the relationship between language, ideology, and power in

Obama’s first Inaugural address. It explores the use language to persuade the people.

Moreover, the study examines the function of language in Obama’s inaugural address

through adapting Halliday’s idea of Meta-functions “Ideational met-function,

Interpersonal meta-function, and textual meta-function”.

In order to reach the aims of this study, we need to ask the following questions:

1. To what extent does language help Obama to persuade the American people to

accept his policies?

2. To what extent is the ideology of President Obama reflected through the linguistic

choices in the speech under study?

This study contains three chapters. The first chapter presents the different events

and experiences that developed Obama’s personality through studying Obama’s

background form his birth, childhood, education life, political carrier, and presidential

election. In addition, this chapter includes the different views of journalist, former

presidential speechwriters about Obama’s first Inaugural Address.

The second chapter presents the methodology designed to fulfill this research work.

First, it explains the approach that this study relies on; moreover, it deals with Critical

Discourse’s foundation, concept and development. Moreover, this chapter defines

Systematic Functional Grammar foundation, and introduces its functions. Furthermore,

it tackles Obama’s Inaugural Address and its significance to the American citizens and

it is explain the research’s method. Finally, chapter three concerned with the analysis

3
of the speech. This chapter divided into three sections; the first section deals with the

textual analysis of Obama’s first Inaugural Address. In addition, it explores of the

major themes used in Obama’s speech. The second section investigates the ideational

analysis of the speech. In other word, it investigates the use of the three ideational

processes “Material, Relational, and Mental Processes” in Obama’s Speech.

4
 Chapter one

Obama’s Road to the White House

5
Introduction:

The main objective of this chapter is to explore the different events

and experiences that helped Obama to create such a strong personality

through tackling his background. This chapter is divided into four sections.

The first Section, describes Obama’s childhood, education and how his

multi-cultural childhood helps him to polish his personality as president.

Second, it presents Obama’s political career. Third, it explores how Obama

entered the presidential race, versus whom and how he won. Finally, it

presents the different views, critics, and different opinions about Obama’s

Inaugural Address.

1. An Overview of Barrack Obama’s Life:

Barrack Hussein Obama II born on August 4, 1961 in Hawaii from

Kenyan father and Hawaiian mother. Obama’s father left family when

Obama was just two years, and he returned to Kenya where he died in car

crash nineteen years later. After his parents divorced, his mother married

foreign student from University of Hawaii, Lolo Soetoro from Indonesia.

From the age of six to ten, Obama lived with his mother and stepfather in

Indonesia, where he attended Catholic and Muslim schools. “I was raised as

an Indonesian child and a Hawaiian child and as a black child and as white

child,” Obama later recalled “And so what I benefited from is a multiplicity

of cultures that all fed me” (Miller Center, 2017).

6
 Concerned for his education, Obama’s mother sent him back to

Hawaii to live with her parents, Stanly and Madelyn Dunham, and to study

at Hawaii’s prestigious School “Punahou” from fifth grade to the

graduation from high school. While Obama was still in school, his mother

divorced her Indonesian husband, and returned to study cultural

anthropology at the University of Hawaii, then she returned to Indonesia for

field research. Obama at Punahou School was good but not brilliant student,

he practiced a different activities such as basketball, and later he admitted,

“Dabbled in drugs and Alcohol” including marijuana and cocaine (Ibid,

2017). For religious, because his parents and grandparents was nonbelievers

Obama point out “I was not raised in religious household” (Barrack Obama,

1995)

Obama left Hawaii for college, enrolling first at Occidental College

in Los Angeles for his freshman and sophomore years, and then at

Colombia University in New York. Obama’s interest in political and

international affairs led him to graduate from Colombia University with

political science major in 1981. After graduation, Obama spent additional

years in New York as researcher with Business International group, a global

business-consulting firm. Years later Obama accepted job offer as

community organizer in Chicago largely poor and Black South Side. As a

biographer David Mendel (2007) point out that the job of community

organizer gives Obama his first immersion into the African American

Community he had longed to both understand and belong to. His main job

7
as organizer was to lunch church-funded developing community’s project,

and he put pressure on Chicago’s city hall to improve and accept conditions

in poorly maintained public housing projects.

In 1988 Obama was accepted as student at Harvard Law School,

where he graduated and elected as a president of the prestigious Harvard

Law School Review for the academic year 1990-1991.As the first African

American president in the history of low Obama drew wide media attention.

Obama took the chance to sign contract with publishing house to write book

about race relation entitled “The Dream Of My Father: A Story of Race and

Inheritance” (1995.), this book was mostly personnel memoir that focus

mostly on his identity’s struggle as black man raised by the white in the

absence of his African father.

During his summer internship at Chicago’s Sidley and Austin Law

Firm, after his first years at Harvard Law School Obama met Michelle

Robinson (Miller Center, 2017). A South Side native, Princeton University,

and Harvard Law School graduate who supervised his work at the firm.

After four years of their relationship they get married in 1992 and settled in

Chicago, w here they get their first daughter Malia Ann in 1998, and in

2001 they get their second daughter Natasha (called Sasha) (Ibid).

As for his political beliefs, Obama’s mother who to the end of her

life [in 1995] believed herself as unreconstructed liberal, she supported the

Civil Right movements of the 1950s and 1960s. As result, she proudly

8
transmitted these ideas to Barrack Obama. Later on Obama recalled in his

book “Dream of My Father: A story of Race and Inheritance” “To be black

was to be the beneficiary of a great inheritance, a special destiny, glorious

burdens that only we were strong enough to bear.” Because of cultural

diversity that Obama lives in, he created a unique liberal ideology, he

believed in the civil right movement of the 1960 especially the African

American Civil Right Leader Martin Luther King Junior and his famous

speech in Washington Square 1968 ‘I have Dream’. Moreover, Obama was

exposed to racial harassments in very young age (Barrack Obama, 1995).

His liberal ideology starts to shine and appears to the American in 1990

when he won the election as president of the prestigious Harvard Law

School Review by persuading the journal has outnumbered conservative

staffers that he will treat their viewers fairly (Miller Center, 2017). Obama

recalled: “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of twelve or

thirteen, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself

to whites” (Ibid: p.xv).

Obama in this quote spoke about the role of cultural diversity in the

development of his political awareness. despite his African gender and

rising in white family with his mother and her parents, Obama believed he

is fusing into the white society more and more, therefore he accepted job

offer as a community organizer in Chicago‘s Largely Poor and Black in

South Side.

9
2. Political Career:

In 1993, Obama accepted an offer to become senior lecturer of

teaching constitutional law in the University of Chicago Law School. After

passing three years in teaching and as civil rights attorney, Obama was

elected to Illinois State Senate as a democrat representing Illinois 13Th

legislative district. Obama’s entrance to the Senate House was not as he

expected, many the senate believed that he is threat to their interests

especially with his years working as community organizer and his Harvard

Law degree (Miller Center, 2017).

Many senates point out that Obama was “as an aloof Ivy Leaguer

who spent a lot of time talking about his years as a community organizer

and his Harvard Law degree.”(Joann P, 2008: p54). Kirk Dillard a

Republican from a sunburn Chicago point out that Obama’s Harvard Law

Degree and his position as a professor of law get a wide attention and

makes some eyes roll. Most of the Senates described Barrack Obama as an

elitist and noted that many of his speeches were focused on policy were

only intellectuals Qualities welcomed by Barrack Obama. Even thought,

during his state senate campaign he devoted most his time to work in

Chicago’s South Side, an area that called by Almanac of The American

Politics as “The nation’s largest urban black community for nearly

century.”(Ibid).

When Barrack Obama a democrat, was elected the state capitol was

under republican control. Obama was known as committed liberal and a

10
progressive democrat. Paul Williams a former state representative point out

that Obama’s “come with huge dose of practicality” (Joann P, 2008: 54),

and he characterized barrack’s attitude” O.k. That makes sense and sounds

great, as I’d like to go to the moon, but right now I’ve only got enough gas

to go this far.” (Ibid).

As senator, Obama worked in the public health and welfare

committee and Judiciary and local government committees. Obama soon

became leader by developing a style that was methodical, inclusive, and

often a pragmatic (Joann P, 2008: p55).his focused on making connection

and work with other politician in the other aisle. He also have major role in

making connection between the two parties to draft bipartisan legislation

and health care reform, even he designed changes to suits racial profiling in

Illinois to make capital punishment more impartial (Ibid).

In 2004, Obama began eyeing for United State senate seat that was

held by an unpopular first term Republican Peter Fitzgerald who decided to

enter the re-election (Miller Center, 2017). In October 2002, Obama takes a

risk move when he opposes the congress resolution about launching war

against Iraq “I don’t oppose all wars” he declared also “What I am

opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war.” (Ibid). As

result, Obama set himself apart from the leading candidate for the

Democratic Senate nomination such: Hillary Clinton of New York, or John

Kerry of Massachusetts, and John Edward of North Carolina. From the first

look, it seems that Obama lost the nomination because of his Anti-war

11
attitude. However, with time and the Consequences the war, Obama’s Anti-

war attitude became advantage (Ibid).

Advised strongly by the consultant David Axelrod, Obama gathered

coalition from the African American and White Liberals to win Democratic

Senate primary election by 53 percent, more than his entire candidate

combined did. Then he moved toward the political centre to wage his

general election campaign against the republican nominee Jack Ryan, yet

Jack Ryan forced to withdraw from the race after the scandalous details

about his divorce revealed to the public. Obama make an easy landslide

victory against Ryan replacement Alan Keyes (Miller Center, 2017).

Obama won by the largest in the history of senate election in state of

Illinois (Ibid). In addition to his historical senate campaign, Obama became

more popular by his Keynote Address at the Democratic National Covenant

when he declared:

“There's not a liberal America and a conservative

America, There's a United States of America. There's not a
black America and white America and Latino America and
Asian America. There's a United States of America.”
(Miller Center, 2017)

3. Obama: Campaign for Presidency:

The 2008 presidential elections have been described as the most

historical presidential race in the history of United State, because of the

participated candidate. According to Joann (2007) for the first time, an

African American was a democratic front-runner with great chance to

become president. Moreover, Hillary Clinton front runner candidate for the

12
first time in U.S. politics. There were also other firsts such as “the first

Mormon, the first Hispanic, the first person who married three times, and

the first person over the age of 70 (Joann F. Price, 2008: 97).

From the moment he finished his famous Address in the Democratic

National Covenant in August 2004, Barrack Obama became popular

politician. Suddenly, Obama’s name become everywhere; therefore, after he

was elected to U.S. Senate there was discussion about running for U.S.

presidency. The 2008 presidential election was a bit different from U.S.

Senate election because for the first time in many years there was no former

president, or even vice president run for the presidential election.

Consequently, there was fair opportunity for all candidates to enter the

presidential race such as “The Democratic nominees; Hillary Clinton U.S.

Senate from New York, Barrack Obama U.S. Senate from Illinois”, where

they face each other in preliminaries for the Democratic representative in

the presidential campaign (Miller Center, 2017).

On February 10, 2007, Senator Barrack Obama stood before the old

State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois where Abraham Lincoln began his

political career and announced his candidacy for the White House Office.

According to New York Time (2007), Obama presented himself as “an

agent of generational change who could transform a government hobbled

by cynicism, petty corruption and “a smallness of our politics.” Obama

declared, “The time for that politics is over;” he said also, “It is through. It’s

time to turn the page.”

13
 Obama’s preliminaries elections were against five nominees from the

Democratic Party: Hillary Clinton U.S. Senate of New York, John Edward

of South Carolina, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, Joseph Biden of

Delaware, and Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico. Biden, Dodd, and

Bill drop out from the very beginning because of the poor vote percentage

they got, later on Edward drop out on January 30, 2008, which means that

the race became between Clinton and Obama. According to study made by

Miller center (2017) about Obama’s election and campaign, Obama had

three elements that turned the race to his favor. One, Obama was able to

contrast his consistent opposition to the war of Iraq unlike Clinton in 2002.

Two, although there was different between Clinton and Obama in theme of

the campaign, Obama’s theme was Change and Clinton was Experience.

However, because of the economic crisis and its consequences, the

American citizen started looking for new solutions. Three, while Clinton

focused her fighting in the thirty-nine primaries, Obama did not over look

the seventeen and territories that choose their delegates through caucuses,

he strongly out-organized Clinton in those contest by wining fourteen from

seventeen caucuses. With this major lost Clinton withdraw from the

nomination contest on June 7, 2008 (Miller Center, 2017).

After he won against Clinton, Obama become the representative of

the Democratic Party in the presidential election. In the presidential

election, Obama run against John McCain republican’s representative.

Obama won the general election against McCain for several factures. One,

14
Obama won a convincing victory on the bases that voters were more

concerned about economical crisis that could affect their economical life,

moreover, Obama benefited from the new voters and those under 30

(Patrick James, 2008). Second, according to Patrick James (2008) a director

of USC College, McCain made a mistake when he chose Sarah Palin as

vice president. He said, “It was almost a perfect storm of mistakes and box

canyon” James comments also “People are post-mortaring, saying, ‘How

could you have picked Sarah Palin? That’s where you blew it.”(Ibid).Third,

Obama’s wining turn or as Patrick James said, ‘Obama’s slam dank’. He

argued that Obama did almost everything right in his campaign and there

was danger and pressure on Obama because no African American had been

elected to this high position, therefore he must do everything right and that

what Obama did, James recalled “To win, Obama had to be almost letter

perfect, and he was.”(Ibid).

At last, McCain biggest mistake that the majority of the American

citizen disapproved Bush’s way in running the country, and they thought

that McCain will continue bush policies; therefore, they voted for Obama

hoping for change. In November 4, 2008, the election results appeared and

declared Barrack Obama as the first African American to be the 44th

president for the United State by 365 electoral votes and 173 electoral votes

for McCain (Miller Center, 2017). In January 20, 2009 Barrack Hussein

Obama sworn the presidential oath and became officially the 44th president

of United State.

15
4. Obama First Inaugural Address 2009:

On January 20, 2009 Barrack Hussein Obama sworn the presidential

oath and became the fortieth fourth president. As well as, Obama the first

Afro-American who hold this position in the history of United State of

America. In that glorious day, Obama delivered his first Inaugural Address

in front of almost two million people (CNN, 2013). This Inaugural Address

attracted many journalists, researchers, and speechwriters who tried to

analyze it from different contexts such as ‘the language, the content, the

ideas’.

Many speechwriters argued that president Obama’s Inaugural

Address was clear, organized, and glorified the previous president.

According to William Safire, a former speech-writer for the president

Richard Nixon1, Obama’s first Inaugural Address was short, respected,

organized and well delivered similar to Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Kennedy.

William Safire point out that Obama reminded the American properly by

recalling phrases from previous American presidents such as Kennedy’s

phrase “the torch has been passed” or president Roosevelt’s phrase “Has a

rendezvous with destiny”. He recalled the American citizen that each

generation faces crisis, with high spirit they can and they will overcome this

problem (New York Time Blog, 2009).

1
Richard Nixon: the 37th U.S. President and the only Commander in chief resign after the
Watergate Scandal. (The White House, 2017)

16
 Another speechwriter was Clark Judge (2009) former speechwriter

for the president Ronald2 Reagan. He said that Obama’s Inaugural Address

was deeply delivered when he asked the American people to put aside all

their old rivals and grudges. This proposition reminded the Americans in

Lincoln’s Inaugural when he addressed the American citizen to forget their

conflicts and stop the civil war (New York Time Blog, 2009).

Walker (2009) point out that Obama’s speech was an ‘‘Average

speech’’, but fantastic because of his ability of controlling the audience

with his pauses, which was brilliantly planned. In addition, when he

changes his pace, speed, tone and volume, it was like everything in Obama

from his spoken, body language, and even his style of delivering the speech

was planned perfectly. Walker (2009) argued that Obama did a great effort

to communicate with the masses, and sometimes he use contradictory

messages. Obama peruse the American that the world is in extreme crisis

and people should made sacrifices. As well as, he set out extreme optimism

that the world will survive from this crisis. Furthermore, Walker point out

that Obama through his Inaugural Address was not afraid to suggest that

this unlikable time will require difficult decisions.

Many researchers analyze Obama’s first Inaugural Address of 2009

from different perspectives. For instance, Janling Wang (2010) a Chinese

scholar, wrote research untitled as “A Critical Discourse Analysis of

Barrack Obama’s Speeches” were he analyzes Obama Inaugural Address

2
Ronald Reagan: He is the 40th U.S. President serving from 1981-1989. (The White House, 2017)

17
from linguistic perspective and he discovered that language can be a

powerful tool to control people’s mind. According to Juraj Horvath (2011),

that Obama’s Inaugural Address was divided into two sections: thanking his

predecessor, acknowledging the economic crisis and explored how Obama

was able to ensure to American that they will overcame this crisis together.

Another research untitled “Discourse analysis of Obama Inaugural speech

from the Perspective of Culture” done by Yang Sheghua, analyzes

Obama’s. Inaugural Address from cultural perspectives, by recalling the

history of the Inaugural Address in United State of America, and how

Inaugural Address developed through time.

At last, most of previous speechwriters, researchers, and even journalist

agreed that Obama first Inaugural Address was clear, organized, well

planed in term of ideas and language.

Conclusion:

This chapter dedicated to Obama pre-presidential life. It introduces

the life of Obama from childhood until the presidential election. The reason

behind selecting Obama is that he is the first Afro-American who ever hold

this high position in history of The United States. His multi-cultural life

helped him to develop a unique personality that makes him different from

the other candidates of American presidential election.

The following chapter is dedicated to the description of the

methodological design of this study. It will define Critical Discourse

Analysis as the chosen approach and explain the reason behind it choice as

18
the most appropriate of all other approaches. Furthermore, this chapter

provides more explanation about the study sample, and the reason behind it

choice. Furthermore, it introduces the d secondary recourses that help in

achieving the research aims.

19
 Chapter Two

Research Methodology
Introduction:

The main objective of this research is to investigate how Obama used

language as tool to serve his ideology and persuade the American citizen to

accept his future presidential policies. This investigation is done through the

analysis of Obama’s Inaugural Address 2009. The intention from this

analysis is to prove that is relation between language, ideology and power.

This chapter relies on Critical Discourse Analysis as an approach to reach

the research objectives. This chapter explores and defines the approach.

Furthermore, it gives description and the justification for the research

method.

The chapter is divided into two sections. The first one is dedicated to

description of the research approach. This section defines Critical Discourse

Analysis and explains its principals and its applications as an analytical

approach. The Second section is a description and justification of the

sample and the data collection of the research. It explains the choice of

Obama’s Inaugural Address as primary source and how the speech is read.

Moreover, introduces the secondary sources that will be used in this

research.

21
1. Critical Discourse analysis:

Discourse can be defined as the different forms of communication

between peoples; it goes either in spoken forms or in written form. Because

of communication constitutes an important part of our lives, theorist and

linguist have always tried to analyze this discourse to investigate how

language serves people’s ideologies. Linguists notice that people use a

different type of communication consciously or unconsciously for different

situations and purposes. Therefore, people transform their ideas, and

beliefs in a linguistic form that is called a discourse. In the 80s, Zelling

Harris published the first work about discourse analysis called “Discourse

analysis and language”. As a linguistic term, Discourse Analysis is defined

as analytical study of communication between people. According to

McCarthy (2005), Discourse Analysis is linguistic applied studies

concerned with daily interaction between people; it could be printed or

spoken.

Over the years, many analytical approaches have been established to

analyze discourse. For some linguists what is interesting in discourse are

content, themes, and the issues being discussed in the text. In contrast,

others focus on the grammar of target language and it function in specific

context.

Critical Discourse Analysis is an approach that tries to study and

analyze discourse to explore the relation between language, ideology and

22
power. According to Dutch linguists, Van Dijk (1988) Critical Discourse

Analysis aims to:

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
opacity of these relationships between discourse and
society is itself a factor securing power and hegemony.
(135)

The evolution of Critical Discourse Analysis goes back to the 70s

when groups of literary theorist and linguists at the University of Anglia,

England, attempted to isolate ideology from discourse using Halliday’s

Systematic Functional Grammar. CDA participants tried to isolate ideology

from discourse to investigate how power and dominance is delivered

through specific linguistic processes. CDA participants argued that

language perform three functions namely “Ideational function,

Interpersonal function, and Textual function”. First, Ideational function

refers to the speaker’s experiences in the world and it phenomena. Second,

Interpersonal function refers to embodiment of the speaker’s own attitude

and evaluation about the phenomena in question. Third function is Textual

function refers to the ability of the speaker in producing a meaningful

discourse that can be understood easily by the listener. Textual function is

the process when the speaker can produce his feeling, attitude, and shorten

the distance between him and the audience (Fairclough 1995: 25).

23
 Over the years, many scholars and linguists such as Fairclough, and

Van Dijk developed Critical Discourse Analysis. According to

Sheyholislami, Fairclough has raised two issues about the previous CL

studies. First, he claims that the previous CL linguists did not pay attention

to the audience’s interpretation of the text. He also claims that they assumed

that the audience interprets the same way analysts do. The second issue

raised by Fairclough, is that the previous studies was very thorough studies,

but they did not pay much attention to inter-textual analysis of the text:

"the linguistic analysis is very much focused upon clauses, with little

attention to higher-level of organization properties of whole texts"

(Fairclough 1995: 28). Despite of these two issues, Fairclough did not want

to minimize the work done by the previous CL practitioners.

Among the scholars who have contributed in the development of

CDA is the Dutch linguist Van Dijk. He is one of the most referenced and

quoted from in CDA studies. He specialized in media discourse; in the 80s,

he started to apply his theory on the ethnic and minorities group in Europe.

In 1988, he applied his theory on the authentic cases of new reports at

national and international levels (Van Dijk 1988). He developed his theory

upon three analytical ideas called Socio cognition, social cognition and

personal cognition that mediate between discourse and audience (J.

Sheyholislami, 2001: P4). He defined social cognition as the system of

mental representation and process of the group members, this process can

affect indirectly the personal cognition of the group members. By this

24
relation V. Dijk wanted to control how people act, speak, write, and how

they understand the social practices of each others.

Beside the contribution of Fairclough and Van Dijk in the

development of CDA, Halliday also has contributed in the evolution of

Critical Discourse Analysis. Halliday is the Australian linguists who lay-

down the foundation to CDA with his theory of Systematic Functional

Grammar.

2. Systematic Functional Grammar:

Systematic Functional Grammar (SFL) is a linguistic approach

developed initially by M.A.K. Halliday in Britain in the 60s; years later in

Australia. This approach at first was used for educational purposes, when

Halliday accepted the request of the Labor Government to replace the

traditional way of teaching with new one that suits both students and the

teachers. Years later, researchers have started to use SFL to analyze

discourse.

Systematic Functional Grammar was originally built on linguistic

notions of two famous linguists Malinowski and J.R. Firth. Malinowski

(1887-1942) provided two concepts for studying any language from cultural

context (M. Farhat, 2016:33). He argues that the environment and culture

have big influence of the language in terms of slang, topics, and attitude.

Later on, following Malinowski’s ideas Halliday developed his theory of

Systematic Functional Grammar at Brague School.

25
 In 1960, Halliday applied his theory of SFL for the first time when

he investigated the structure and the meaning of the Chinese language at the

University of Lingam under the supervision of Wang Li. Years later, he

brought this notion of Systematic Functional Grammar to London when

investigate the English language structure and meaning. Then he moved to

Europe to investigate French and German languages. As a notion, SFL is

different from Chomsky’s theory of Universal Grammar. UG see language

from paradigmatic point of view where the language is described as content

and form. However, Halliday is more interested in language from a social

point of views (M. Farhat, 2016:33).

Halliday (1994) point out that language is interpreted as a system of

meaning potential, and the meanings of any language are understood

through the its forms. Thus, Halliday believes that there is a strong relation

between the grammatical structures of language and its meaning. Halliday

called this notion Systematic Functional of Grammar; it is also called

Systematic Functional Linguistic. SFL is a set of available choices in

particular language context. In other word, the addresser chooses a

particular language for a particular situation or context (Halliday &

Matthiessen 2004).

Halliday (2004) argued that the stylistic analysis of any language is

logically divided into three phases: analysis, interpretation, and evaluation.

He argued that these three phases are highly generalized into set of coded

and abstract meta-function. According to Halliday these meta-function

26
includes “Textual Meta-function, Ideational Meta-function, and

Interpersonal Meta-function”.

2.1. Meta-function Phases:

Halliday and Matthiessen (2014) define language as a text, system,

sound, wording, and writing. Halliday point out, that there are major

semiotic dimensions that organizes any language in particular context. One

of these semiotic dimensions is Meta-function. Halliday used Meta-function

to describe the function of language. This study deals with Meta-function

analysis. For Halliday language has three meta-functions. The first one is

the Textual function that refers to the unity and structure of the text. In

other words, how word and ideas are linked in unified grammatical

structure to create a meaningful text. The second one is the Ideational

function that refers to the addresser’s experiences of the external and

internal feeling through language. The third function is Interpersonal

function, is where language can be used to express social and personal

relations (Hu Zhuanglin 1988:313). Furthermore, the addresser put his

attitude, comments, evaluation to make a bound with audience.

2.1.1. Textual function:

Textual meta-function refers to the language mechanism, and how

can make any spoken or written discourse an organized, clear, and

meaningful text. This language mechanism makes it easier for the speaker

to deliver the discourse, and make it easier for the audience to recognize it

(Halliday 1971:334).

27
 According to Matthiessen and Halliday (2014), textual meta-function

is concerned with the creation of the text. Textual function with the help of

ideational and interpersonal meta-functions helps the speaker to share his

ideas and beliefs with his audience in an easy and meaningful way. It also

helps the audience to have clear view of speaker in terms of personality and

ideas. According to Halliday (1977), textual function fulfills the

requirement that any language should be operationally relevant, having a

texture in real contest of situation that distinguishes a living passage from a

mere entry in grammar book or dictionary. It provides the remaining strands

of meaning potential to be woven into a fabric of linguistic structure.

Furthermore, language makes link between itself and the situation, and the

discourse became possible for the addresser to produce it and the listener to

understand it.

Theme is known as the point of departure (Halliday 1985: 37), it

includes the different messages used in text, and it helps to identify the text

relation to the audience. This study tackles textual in term of using themes

to persuade people. Themes are information used by the speaker to give

more credibility to his discourse, usually this information is already being

heard somewhere in the text or is familiar to the context. Religion is one of

the themes used in spoken and written discourse because it has the power to

gather people together in time of crisis, or war, and even peace.

28
2.1.2. Ideational Meta-function:

Ideational function refers to how the addresser embodies his inner

and outer experiences of the real world to convey something that is

unknown to the hearer. This function mainly consists of “The Transitivity

System.”

The Transitivity System is a system that analyzes the addresser

experiences of the real world in linguistic structure to create the same

experiences for the hearer through different lexico grammatical options

influenced by mind styles or authorial ideologies (Fowler, 1986: 133). This

linguistic system contains six processes analyzes the function of the text.

These six processes are:

2.1.2.1. Material process:

When the process is used to represent what is done, and it represents

the experiences of the event, the action, and the attitude. Material process

usually presented through action verbs. It contains two participants: the

actor (logical subject), and the goal (logical direct object, usually noun, or

pronoun).

E.g. the actor signed the fans autographs

The example above represents a material process. The actor in this

example is “actor”, the verb ‘signed’ represents the material process, and

the goal is ‘the fans autograph.

29
2.1.2.2. Mental process:

Is the sensing process. Unlike, material process which focus on

external experiences, mental process focus on the internal experiences. This

process contains two participants: the Sensor that does the function of

sensing, and the Phenomena that is the sensed object. The Phenomena can

be a person, a concrete object, or fact (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014).

Mental process divided into three sections: perception (Perceive, sense,

notice, hear), cognition (think, believe, suppose), and reaction (like, please).

E.g. He heard a faint sound.

The example represents a mental process. The Sensor is ‘He’, and the

mental process represented by the verb ‘heard, the phenomena are ‘a faint

sound’.

2.1.2.3. Relational process:

The function of this process is to characterize and identify (Halliday

and Matthiessen, 2014). The verbs involved within this relational process

are the verb ‘to be and copular verbs’ such as appear, seems, look, and

became. It also involves possession verbs such as “have, own, and posses”.

Relational process is divided into two types: Attributive process which

focuses on the description of a case situation without identifying it.

Attributive process has two participants: the Carrier refers to assigns a

quality, or an adjective. The Carrier usually presented by a noun, or

nominal phrase. The second participant is the attribute.

E.g. she was in a ward on the third floor.

30
 The example above represents an attributive process. The carries in

this example is ‘she’, and the attributive process is represented by ‘was’.

The attribute in this sentence is ‘in a ward on the third floor’.

The second type of relational process is Identifying process. This

process refers to identifying something through something else (Halliday

and Matthiessen 2014). It contains two participants and both can identify

each other “Token,” and “Value.”

E.g. Osama is my friend my friend is Osama.

2.1.2.4. Verbal Process:

It codes the action of saying (Farhat, 2016:40), and it contains three

participants: the “Sayer” which represents the one who did the act of

saying, the “verbiage” which represent what have been said. In addition, we

have the “entity” or the target that indicate the addressee. This process

usually uses the verbs such as say, repeat, declare, tell, and explain.

Example about verbal process:

E.g., I told him what happened.

From the example above, we can extract the participant of the verbal

process. Sayer in this example is ‘I’, the verbal process is the verb ‘told’,

the target is ‘him’, and the verbiage is ‘what happened’.

2.1.2.5. Behavioral Process:

It represents the physiological and psychological process of the

human being like smiling, breathing, coughing, dreaming and staring

(Halliday and Matthiessen 2014). It contains two participants: the

31
“behaver” which refers to the person who does the behavior and the

“behavior” which scope the participant in material process (Halliday and

Matthiessen 2014:103).

E.g., the boy laughed an embarrassed laugh.

From the example above, we can extract the participant of the behavioral

process. The behaver is ‘the boy’, and behavioral process is ‘laughed’, and

the behavior is represented by ‘an embarrassed laugh’.

2.1.2.6. Existential Process:

According to Fontaine (2013), it is the simple process in term of

structure . This process represents the phenomena of existence, and it

involves one form of the clause “to be”. It contains only one participant,

which is ‘existent’. It represents the existed things.

E.g. there was a bomb

The example above represents the existential process. The subject in

this sentence is ‘there’, and the existential process is the verb ‘was’. The

participant in this example is “a bomb”.

2.1.3. Interpersonal Meta-function:

Interpersonal meta-function mainly focuses on the relation between

the addresser and the audience. The speaker uses language as mean to

interact with the audience, and it takes different forms, such as greeting,

persuading, asking, informing, and questioning (Halliday 1977:333).

Modality system expresses interpersonal meta-function. Modality

system refer to addresser’s judgment and attitude toward a specific

32
situation; it usually goes between ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ (Halliday and Matthiessen

2014:178). To be specific, it expresses the attitude, the judgment, and the

opinion of the speaker toward situation in positive or negative way.

Moreover, interpersonal meta-function enhances the social relation between

the speaker and the audience (Nur, 2015).

Interpersonal meta-function involves the use of model verbs, model

adverbs, and adjectives; there are also personal pronouns, notional verbs,

tense, direct and indirect speeches to express moralization. Example about

interpersonal meta-function:

1. He might play football. Perhaps yes, perhaps no

2. He usually plays football. Sometimes yes, sometimes no

3. He ought to play football. At present no, but in the future yes.

4. He will play football if he wants. At the present no but in the

future yes if he want.

From the above examples, we can notice that each example refers to

specific function. Example1 refers to Probability “might”. Example 2

refers to Usuality “usually”. Example 3 refers to Obligation, but this

type of obligation does not happen in the present time but it happens in

the future. Example 4 refers to obligation, unlike example 3 it refers to

present time.

3. Critical Discourse Analysis as an Approach to this Research:

This study is based on Critical Discourse Analysis as an approach.

Obama’s Inaugural Address of 2009 is read first from textual analysis to see

33
how Obama organized the speech. Moreover, it explores the major themes

used in the speech. Second, the speech is read form Ideational and

Interpersonal analysis in order to investigate the different strategies that

used by Obama to make a bound with the American citizens. In the same

way, it helps to investigate the relationship between Language, Ideology

and Power.

Critical Discourse Analysis of Obama’s Inaugural Address serves the

objectives of this study, and verifies it hypothesis. According to Hugh

Trappers-Lomax (2002)

“The study of language viewed communicatively

and/or of communication viewed linguistically. Anymore
detailed spelling out of such a definition typically involves
reference to concepts of language in use, language above or
beyond the sentence, language as meaning in interaction,
and language in situational and cultural context.” (p134)

Critical Discourse Analysis proposes that language is a very

powerful mean to gain power, especially for politicians and presidents as

well. It examines Obama’s strategies to persuade the American citizen that

he is capable of leading them in this difficult period.

4. Data Collection Procedures:

4.1. Sample:

Inauguration day is American ceremony were the new president is

elected. It takes place on 20 January. It is very important ceremony for the

American citizen because it shows them hop for a better future. In 20

January 2009, American witnessed an Inauguration day with coming of the

34
new president Barrack Obama. This Inauguration day was not like previous

inauguration days because it set new era in history of United State for the

country and its people. What is different in this Inauguration day is that for

the first time in the history of United State, an Afro-American Politian takes

the highest position in United State and became president. The speech is

downloaded from the White House site http://www.whitehouse.gov/.

For this study, an American Inaugural Address The primary recourse

in this research is Obama’s first Inaugural Address of 2009 for many

considerations. First, the speech was delivered by the first Afro-American

president I the history of the United State Hussein Barrack Obama. Second,

the speech represents the beginning of a new era to the American citizens,

because of it request of change over continuity. Third, the speech gives

hope for the American citizens in that time of the worst economical crisis

since 1930, which affected the American’s way of life. In addition to this

crisis, United State had international problem especially the cases of Iraq

and Afghanistan. At last, Obama’s Inaugural Address is the best example of

how language used to persuade people’s mind.

4.2. Secondary Sources:

This study relies on numbers of secondary recourses in the analysis

of Obama’s Inaugural Address. This study maintains the choice of

“Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar (Fourth Edition)”.

Halliday published this first edition in 1985, the second edition in 1994, the

third edition in 2004, and the fourth edition in 2014 and revised by

35
Matthiessen. The fourth edition is more the e recent edition that contains all

the changes and the new additions that added to SFG. Furthermore, helps

the reader to get a clear idea about Systematic Functional Grammar; also, it

helps the reader to understand the analysis.

Another source on which this research relies is Halliday’s book

entitled “Linguistic Fiction and Literary Style”. Halliday published this

book in 1971; it explores the linguistic features in literary text. In addition

to these two books, the study relies on another book by Halliday, which is

entitled “Text as Semantic Choice in Social Context”. This book published

in 1977, it interprets the text from a social context, on which the reader or

the hearer understands the relation between the text and the time and place

that is written in.

In addition to Halliday’s books, this study relies on number of other

secondary sources for example: “News as Discourse 1988”by Van Dijk,

“Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language 1995” by

Fairclough. Besides books, articles also used as secondary recourses to

analyze Obama’s speech such as “WHAT is CDA” by Sheyholislami.

4.3. Method:

This study has been undertaken under Qualitative research methods.

It is includes different data sources in order to provide a general knowledge

about the sample and the approach. Moreover, it deals with political speech

from different angles and provides many opinions and critics about the

chosen topic. Furthermore, this research considers to qualitative research

36
because it analyzes Obama’s Inaugural Address with the use of structured

research method and approach. The aim behind using a Qualitative research

is to investigate the use of language as persuading tool in Obama’s

Inaugural Address.

Conclusion:

This research maintains Critical Discourse Analysis as

methodological framework in analyzing Obama Inaugural Address. The

approach has been selected because it interprets and analyzes political

discourse in linguistic and grammatical context. Critical Discourse Analysis

is useful for this research because it based on the notion of Meta-functions

that helps in investigating how Obama persuaded the American citizens to

accept his policies through language.

The following chapter will analyze Obama’s Inaugural Address

2009. This Inaugural Address will be analyzed according to its linguistic

and functional context to investigate how Obama was able to persuade the

American citizen to accept his future policies. In addition, the analysis of

the speech will reveal the relation between language, ideology and power.

37
 Chapter Three

Data Analysis, Result, and discussion

Introduction:

Obama’s Inaugural Address is a very especial in history of the United

State because it marked the beginning of new era for United State. This

chapter concerned with the analysis of the Obama’s Inaugural Address on

2009. The analysis of this speech relies on Critical Discourse Analysis. The

main objective of this chapter is to prove that Obama was able to persuade the

American citizen to accept his policies through language. It also, aims to

investigate the relationship between language, ideology and power.

This chapter is divided into three sections. The first section concerned

with Textual meta-functional analysis. This analysis investigates the

organization of the speech, and the major themes. The second section, it is

concerned with al Analysis Ideational analysis. This analysis investigates the

different process used by Obama to persuade the American citizens. This

analysis consists of three sections “material, relational and mental processes”.

The third section, concerned with Interpersonal analysis. This meta-functional

analysis investigates how model verbs and tense used to help Obama to

persuade the American citizens.

1. Meta-functional Analysis:

The analysis of this speech follows meta-functional processes, namely

ideational functional, interpersonal functional, textual functional analysis.

Through these three meta-functions, it will be clear how Obama could

persuade the American citizen to accept his policies.

39
1.1. Textual Meta-Functional Analysis:

Halliday point out that language is a system that has its own mechanism

to transform any written or spoken form into a well organizes coherent text

(Halliday and Matthiessen 2014). As new president Obama wanted to make

sure that, he appears as qualified president. He sought to fulfill the aim of his

speech, which is convincing the American citizen that he is a capable

president, and he will lead them to better future. This aim will not be fulfilled

without delivering a good, organized, and fulfill every aspect of the American

life. Obama’s speech organized as follows:

1.1.1. Greeting and thanking:

Obama started his Inaugural Address by greeting the American citizen,

and thanking them for their trust in choosing him as president. Furthermore,

Obama thanked the former president Bush for his services for the country and

its people.

1. My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us,

grateful for the trust you've bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our

ancestors. (Line1-2)

2. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation -- (applause) -- as well

as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.

(Line3-4)

40
1.1.2. Recalling the past:

Obama recalled the achievement of the previous presidents and

considered it as legacy must go on.

Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential

oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of
prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often,
the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms.
At these moments, America has carried on not simply because
of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we,
the people, have remained faithful to the ideals of our
forebears and true to our founding documents. (Line5-10)

1.1.3. Reviewing:

Obama reviewed the current situation of the United State such as the

economic crisis and international situation ,such as the war against terrorism,

Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood.

Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of
violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a
consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some,
but also our collective failure to make hard choices and
prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost, jobs
shed, businesses shuttered. (Line12-15)
1.1.4. Stating future policies:

Obama stated his agenda of the future policies. It is contained the

possible reformation in every fields. Furthermore, Obama stated his agenda for

the international affairs such as the contribution in the war against terror,

especially in Afghanistan, and Iraq.

[…] And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to
lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and
bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our

41
 commerce and bind us together. We'll restore science to its
rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health
care's quality and lower its cost.
(Line57-61)
[…]We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people
and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old
friends and former foes, we'll work tirelessly to lessen the
nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet.
(Line 103-106)

1.1.5. Resort to god:

At last, Obama finished his inaugural address by resort to god’s help

and blessing “Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of

America.” (Line176)

According to this order, we notice that Osama’s inaugural address is

clear, organized, and helped him to fulfill his aim of convincing the audience

that he is worthy of leading them to safety shores. In other side, it helps

audience to have clear ideas of what Obama aimed for.

Despite this organized speech, Obama needs other elements to make his

inaugural address reach the research’s aim. The element that strengthens his

speech is the use of religious concepts to give more credibility to his speech

and to reach people’s mind and heart. The following examples explain how

Obama used religion to fulfill his aim:

1. [...] The God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve

a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. (Line32-34)

42
 Because ofTheUnited States is multi-religious country, Obama want to

send a message to this multi-religious people that we are equal an front of god.

2. […] this is the source of our confidence -- the knowledge that God calls on

us to shape an uncertain destiny. (Line155-156)

4. […] and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we

carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future

generations. (Line 174-175)

In example 2and 3 Obama recalled that god bestowed knowledge upon

us to shape bright destiny. Also he thanks god for his grace, that helps the

American to built a better future for the future generation

5. Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America.

(Line176)

At last, Obama finished his speech praying to god for blessing that

America will stay strong and safe.

Obama’s speech was clear, simple, organized, well delivered, and short.

A former presidential speechwriter points out that Obama’s speech was similar

to Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Kennedy (A New York Times Blog, 2009).

Obama’s speech was important for America because it comes at time when the

American people were suffering in every aspect of life, and they looked

deeply for change. Obama give them hope of better and prosperous future with

his policies that tackled every field in their lives. To gain the support of the

43
American citizens, Obama recalls the achievements of the past, and they reach

those achievements by sticking together and forget all the hatred and conflicts.

Moreover, Because of America is multi-religious country, Obama makes sure

to portray America ass land of religious freedom.

1.2. Ideational Meta-Functional Analysis:

As it has already been mentioned in the previous chapter, the

Transitivity system contains six processes: material, relational, mental,

behavioral, verbal, and existential processes. These processes are used in

Obama’s Inaugural Address as follows:

1. Material process: is used 141 times with average of 62 percent.

2. Relational process: is used 52 times with average of 23 percent.

3. Mental process: is used 14 times with average of 6 percent.

4. Verbal process: is used 10 times with average of 4 percent.

5. Behavioral process: is used 6 times with average of 2 percent.

6. Existential process: is used 4 times with average of 2 percent.

From the above processes’ statistics, we notice that the recurrent

process in Obama’s inaugural addresses is the material process, with

percentage average of 62. The Second most used process in Obama’s speech is

the relational process with average of 23 percent. The third most used process

in Obama’s speech is the mental process with average of 6 percent. Than the

44
other processes comes in the following order: verbal process with 4 percent,

behavioral process with 2 percent, and existential process with 2 percent.

From this statistical analysis, we notice that the most used processes in

Obama’s speech are “material process, relational process, and mental

process”. Therefore, the ideational analysis of this research relies on these

three ideational processes.

1.2.1 Material Process:

As it has already been mentioned in the previous chapter, Material

process describes the events and the actions that happened in human’s life. It

contains two participants “the actor”, and “the goal”. The actor is the doer of

the action and the goal is the one that is affected by the action. This process

involves action word either abstract or concrete.

The actors used in Obama speech is “I, We, Our”, the actor “I” is used

to thank the Americans for their trust and faith, and for electing him: “My

fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for

the trust you've bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors.”

(Line 1-3)

In this example above, “I” refers to Obama. Obama used this actor to

show his gratitude to the American for their trust. The use of the actor “I”

helps to shorten the distance between Obama and the audience. The actors

“we” used for different purposes. First, Obama used “we” to demonstrate

45
America’s prosperous past, and how all the American share the same present

and future.

[…] At these moments, America (actor) has carried

(process) on not simply because of the skill or vision of those
in high office (goal), but because we (actor), the people, have
remained (process) faithful to the ideals of our forebears and
true to our founding documents (goals). (Line7-10)
In the example above, the Actor “We” refers to American citizens.

Obama in this example want to say that the presidents and governments did

not build the United States, but it was built with help of its people. The use of

this actor increasingly assisted Obama to shorten the distance between him as

president and the audience.

That we (actor) are in the midst of crisis is now well-

understood (goals). Our (actor) nation is at war (process)
against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred (goal).
Our (actor) economy is badly weakened (process), a
consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some
(actor), but also our (actor) collective failure to make
(process) hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age
(goal). (Line12-15)
In this example the actors “We, and our” refer to America. Obama uses

these two actors to reveal the current situation of the United State. The use of

the actors “we, and our” create a strong relation and unity between Obama and

the Americans. It reveals the sharing fate between Obama and the Americans

in this time of the economic crisis.

In another case, Obama used material process to seek the trust of the

Muslim countries; moreover, he wants to build with them new relation that

can last for long time: “To the Muslim world, we (actor) seek (material

46
process) a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect

(goal).” (Line119-120)

Obama by this message meant also that the United State is friend of all

the countries in the world. The use of this actor helps to create a bound with

Muslim countries, and to shorten the distance with Muslims that lives in

United State.

Obama wants to play the role of the saver, who volunteers to help the

poor countries to rebuild themselves. Obama in the following example wants

to offer the help to those who need it:

To the people of poor nations, we (actor) pledge

(material process) to work alongside you to make your farms
flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies
and feed hungry minds (goal). (Line126-127)
One of the topics that Obama tackles it in his speech is “Iraq 3, and

Afghanistan4 wars”. The American condemned these two wars because they

costs a great amount of money, Therefore, Obama used material process to

introduce solutions to these problems.

We (Actor) will begin to responsibly leave (Material

Process) Iraq (Goal) to its people, and forge (Material
Process) a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan (Goal). With old
friends and former foes, we (Actor) will work tirelessly to
lessen (Material Process) the nuclear threat (Goal), and roll

3
Iraq Invasion: In 2003, United State and it allied accused Iraq of making Nuclear
weapons, and threatening the world’s peace. Therefore, Iraqi president Saddam Hussein
denied this accession, as consequence united state and it allied invaded Iraq. (Britannica,
2017)
4
Afghanistan War: In 2001United State witnessed, a series of four coordinated attacked by
terrorist group called Al-Qaeda. As consequence of these attacks, United State with help of
Canada, United Kingdom and NATO invaded Afghanistan in order to capture Osama bin
laden and to remove Taliban from ruling Afghanistan. (Britannica, 2017)

47
 back (Material Process) the specter of a warming planet
(Goal). (Line103-106)
These two wars created a lot problem to American especially in

economic field. Because of these two wars, the American citizens suffered

from high taxes, so can the former government funds for their tours in Iraq and

Afghanistan. For that reason, the American citizens hoped that the new

president would end the problem. The Actor “We” refers to the new

government, this new government brought new solutions to these two wars

such as withdraw from these countries or reduce the taxes. These solutions

help Obama to gain people trust.

In the fourth section, Obama used material process to bring back the

hope to the American by introducing his policies, and reforms:

[...] We (actor) will build (material process) the roads

and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our
commerce and bind us together (goal). We'll (actor) restore
(material process) science to its rightful place, and wield
technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower
its cost (goal). We will (actor) harness (material process)
the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our
factories (goal). And we will (actor) transform (material
process) our schools and colleges and universities to meet the
demands of a new age (goal). All this we can do. All this we
will do. (Line57-64)

We can observe that Obama used material process for differences

purposes, such as “thanks, helps, transform, build, share, seek, and hope”. The

uses of this process have a strong effect on the audience because it gives them

hope for better future. Furthermore, this process helps Obama and his office to

gain the confidence and the support of the American citizen.

48
1.2.2 Relational Process:

According to the previous statistics, relational process comes in second

of most used process in Obama speech. This process can be categorized into

two sections: Attributive, and Identifying. Attributive the case or situation that

cannotbe identified, it contains two participants: carrier, attribute. The

following examples present the use of attributive in Obama’s inaugural

address.

1. “America (carrier) has carried (attributive process) on not simply because

of the skill or vision of those in high office (attribute)”. (Line7-10)

In this example, Obama wants to clarify that American did not

prospered simply because of the skills of president or the government, but it

developed by the helps of its people with government.

2.“Our (carrier) journey has never been (attributive Process) one of short-

cuts or settling for less (attribute)”. (Line36-37)

3. “Our (carrier) challenges (attributive Process) may be new (attribute)”.

(Line145)

From the examples 2and 3, we notice that Obama used material

relational process to say that the path for reviving the legacy of the great

American will not be filled with roses. Moreover, Obama sought to bring back

hope despite the challenges he faces as new president. The use of attributive

49
process helps Obama to gain the support of the American citizens in the

journey of reviving the American legacy.

The second category of relational process is identifying. It is defined as

identifying something by something else. Relational identifying contains two

participants: Token, and Value. The following examples describe identifying

process in Obama’s speech.

1. “America is a friend of each nation” “each nation is friend of

America.” (Line93)

The token in this example is “America”, and the value is “a friend with

each nation”. Obama in this example wants to show the friendly face of

America. The process helps Obama to revive the belief of the powerful

America in the hearts and the minds of the American citizens.

2. “Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and

hatred” “a far-reaching network of hatred and violence is at war against or

nation.”(Line12-13)

The token in this example is “our nation”, and the value is “at war

against a far-reaching network of hatred and violence”. Obama declared that

American would stand against any network of hatred and violence. The use of

identifying process in this example is to portray America as a savior, who will

stand against any hatred or violent action in the world. This process helps

Obama to gain confidence and the restore the American trust.

50
 From this relational analysis, we notice that the use of relational process

is appropriate for the new president, because it shorten the distance between

the addresser and the audience. Moreover, it helps to relate president’s ideals

with the audience beliefs. This relationship will be awarded by the acceptance

of the president’s policies.

1.2.3 Mental Process:

Mental process is sensing and feeling based process, which is interested

in internal experiences of human being. This function contains two

participants: sensor, and phenomenon. Sensor is the one who does function of

sensing, while phenomenon is the object been sensed. The Phenomenon can

be a person, concrete object, or fact (Halliday and Matthiessen, 2014).

Mental process is divided into four types namely perceptive, cognitive,

desiderative, and emotive. The following table tackles the use of mental

process in Obama’s speech:

Types of Mental Sensor Mental process Phenomenon

process
Perceptive We Well understood In the midst of

crisis

Cognitive We gather We have chosen Hope over fear

Desiderative Those That prefer Leisure over work

Emotive We Remember Those brave

51
 American […]

distant mountains.

Table (1): Ideational Analysis (Mental Process) of Obama’s Speech

From the table above, we can notice that the table is divided into four

sections. Section one is for Perspective process were Obama sought to remind

the Americans that even we are at time of crisis, but we will recover if we

stick together and help each others. The second section of the table is for

Cognitive process, in this example Obama to thank the Americans for their

courage because they choose hope over fear.

The third section is for Desiderative process; in this process, Obama

condemned those American who chooses the easy life and leisure over work.

The last section is Emotive process, with this process Obama want to thank

American military who suffer a lot and face extreme danger just to keep

America safe.

From this analysis, we can say that mental process used to reach

audience’s inner feeling to connect with beliefs, and to arouse their high

expectations and to bring hope in clear and simple way. In this way, the

audience’s confidence and devotion toward Obama will be strengthened.

Because of the nature of these research only theses, three processes

were used in the analysis. Verbal, Behavioral and Existential processes were

52
not used in the analysis. In addition, we chose only the top three of the most

used processes in Obama’s Inaugural Address.

1.3. Interpersonal Meta-Functional analysis:

As it has already been mentioned in chapter two, the third meta-

functional analysis is interpersonal analysis. It appears when there is language

exchange between the addresser and the addressee. Interpersonal Meta-

function can be depicted through analysis of modality and mood (Halliday and

Matthiessen, 2014:138).

Interpersonal meta-function can be referring to by modality. It

expressed by the use of model verbs, model adverbs, and adjectives; there are

also personal pronouns, notional verbs, tense, direct and indirect speeches to

express moralization. According to this explanation, the analysis of this

research is based on model verbs and tense to examine how Obama was able

to persuade the American citizen.

1.3.1. Model Verbs:

Model verbs refers to verbs used to describe the mood of the audience

toward the speech, it differ according to the degree of mood “high, medium,

and low”. Model verbs are divided into two types: positive model verbs, and

negative model verb. The following examples explain the use of model verbs

in Obama’s speech:

53
1.3.1.1. Positive model verbs:

1. […] that the next generation must lower its sights. (Line21)

In this example, Obama used positive model verbs with degree of high

politeness. Obama want to send message to the next generation to lower their

sight in this time of crisis.

2. but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish

things. (Line28-29)

In this example, Obama used positive model verbs with high politeness

degree. Obama used the scripture to remind the American that they should

lose their childish thing if they want restore the American legacy.

Positive model verbs help president Obama to deliver his message in

simple way. It makes sure that the audience understands what Obama want to

say. Positive model verbs help Obama to shorten the distance between him

and the Americans.

1.3.1.2. Negative model verbs:

Obama used negative model verbs to condemned people who do not

have faith in the government and the American people. Furthermore, Obama

refused to change the American way of life, because it is heritage from the

previous generation.

1. Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions, who

suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. (Line65-66)

54
2. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its

defense. (Line 107)

In example1, Obama used negative model verbs to oppose the people

who do not have faith in the government. In example2, Obama used negative

model verbs to say Americans will not change the way of their life. This way

of life is heritage from the old generation.

From these examples, we realize that Obama used to model verbs to

convey attitude and judgment about different topics. What makes model verbs

a good choice for new president is that it is appropriate for spoken discourse.

Moreover, it convenient for the audience, because it helps them to identify and

understand what the addresser what wants to say.

1.3.2. Tense:

Halliday (1994) point out that the primary tense means past, present, or

future at the moment of speaking; it is time relative ‘now’. Obama’s inaugural

address also witnessed the use of these three tenses. The use of tenses in

Obama speech came as follow:

The present simple used for 71 times with average of 63.4. Present

perfect used for 13 times with average of 11.6 percent. Simple past tense used

for 12 times with average of 10.7 percent. Future tense used 14 times with

average of 12.5.

55
 According to these statistics, we notice that the most tense used by

Obama is the present tense with both its type simple, and perfect with average

of 75 percent. The second in rank of the most used tense is future with average

of 12.5 percent.

Obama used present simple or perfect to present the domestic and

international affairs from different perspectives at present time. It helps to

shorten the distance between Obama and its addressee. Present tense helps the

audience to understand what he is trying to say. The following examples

introduce the use of present tense in Obama’s speech:

1. In reaffirming the greatness of our nation we understand that greatness

is never a given. It must be earned. (Line35-36)

2. as for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our

safety and our ideals. (Line86-87)

In example1, Obama used present tense say that there is no short cut for

reaching greatness. In example2, Obama declare the government will not lose

their father’s ideals just for the sake for our safety.

Second, Obama used future tense to reveal the future policies, and

reformation needed in many fields. It gives more credibility to the speech. In

this way, the government’s plans and objectives are introduced to the

audience; moreover, the audience’s confidence is built by the beauty and

prosperity of the future life.

56
 The following examples explore the use of the future tense in Obama’s

speech:

1. And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new

foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids

and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. (Line57-59)

2. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people and forge a hard-

earned peace in Afghanistan. (Line103-104)

In example 1, Obama used future to introduce his future policies and

reforms in domestic affairs. In example 2, Obama used future tense to

introduce his future policies in the international affairs.

At last, Past simple is used to refer to those things that happened in the

past. The new president usually use this tense to state the achievements, and

recall the negative and the positive experiences of the former president. By

this recalling, he showed his gratitude to the former president and stated his

future agenda solid ground to base on. Examples of simple past and present

perfect in Obama’s speech:

1. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of

this Earth. (Line112-113)

2. and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and

segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united.

(Line113-115)

57
 In example1, Obama used simple past to say that America is country

shaped by different cultures, and languages. In example 2, Obama used past

simple to remind the American that they can overcome any crisis and the best

example of that is the civil war.

At last, we can say that the use of tenses changes according to the needs

of addresser. In this case, Obama used to demonstrate the achievements of the

past, the crisis of the present, and to draw a better picture for the future.

Moreover, it is used also to give credibility to either spoken, written discourse.

In addition, the use of these tenses helps the audience to get clear ideas of

what the addresser wants to say.

.Conclusion:

This chapter maintains the three meta-functions as methodological

framework of analyzing Obama’s Inaugural Address. First, Obama used

simple words and short sentences to make the language easy to understand and

colloquial. Moreover, it helped him to shorten the distance between him and

the audience. In addition, Obama used the theme of religion to reach people’s

mind and heart. Second, in ideational analysis, Obama used three processes

the most in his speech “material, mental, and relational processes. In material

process, Obama wants to recall the American about the governments past

achievements, and state new government’s agenda in the future. By applying

transitivity in his speech, Obama wants to arouse the confidence of the

American citizen toward him as new president and his government.

58
 Third, through applying interpersonal or modality analysis, we can

figure out that Obama used model verbs, tense, and personal pronoun to make

his audience easily understand and accept his future policies. He used present

simple to present the domestic and the worldwide situation from political,

economic, cultural fields. Then, he applied simple future to lay out the future

steps, policies, and reforms.

59
GENERAL CONCLUSION
 Obama’s first Inaugural Address of 2009 was one of the most

significant events in the history of United State, not only he was the first

Afro-American president of the United State, yet he did great effort to

persuade the American citizens to accept his new ideology especially in the

that time of the economic crisis. Therefore, this study investigated the use

of the language in Obama’s Inaugural Address as tool to persuade the

American citizens to accept his future policies. Moreover, this study

explored the relation between language, ideology and power in Obama’s

Inaugural Address

This research comprised three chapters. Chapter one was devoted to

the background of the president Obama. Throughout the background, we

noticed that Obama lived in multiple cultural communities that helped him

to develop a unique personality that assisted him in his political career. In

addition, this multi-cultural life Obama helped him to attract the different

races that live in The United States such as the Arabs the African that

accrued in speech when he recalled that “we are all equal in the eye of god”

.The second chapter described the methodology design of the study. This

chapter explained Critical Discourse Analysis as chosen approach for this

study. Furthermore, this chapter justified the chosen sample of this research

and the data collected.

The last chapter analyzed and discussed the use of language in

Obama’s Inaugural Address. This investigated the language use as tool of

persuasion and proved that Obama used language as tool to facilitate the

61
American an acceptance of his presidential policies. Moreover, this chapter

proved that there is strong relationship between Language, Ideology and

Power. In addition, this chapter answered the questions that were raised at

the beginning of the study. For question one, language was a very

effective tool to persuade the American citizens to accepts Obama’s

policies. The use of religion helped Obama to gain the trust of the people.

Moreover, the clarity and the organization helped to shorten the distance

between Obama and the audience. The use of ideational processes helps

Obama to gain confidence and the support of the American Citizens. At

last, Interpersonal analysis helps to give credibility to Obama’s and it gives

hope to the American citizens for better future.

Obama’s ideology reflected throughout the speech when he used a

clear and organized speech in order to let the American trust him. In

addition, he used language to demonstrate the future changes, but with

protecting the American identity. Moreover, he used future tense and

present to describe the critical moment that American lives in, but with

giving hopes for better future.

At the end of this study, we realize that Critical Discourse analysis is

a very effective tool to explore the relationship between language, ideology

and power. Obama’s request of persuading the American to accept his

policies was successful. As result, we can consider Critical Discourse

Analysis as an effective tool to analysis public speeches and it worth to pay

more attention to it.

62
 Because of the nature of this research, many elements mentioned in

the theoretical part were not included in the discussion First, in textual

analysis this study analyzed in term of organization, clarity, and the use of

religion in the speech. . Second, ideational function contains six processes:

material process, mental process, relational process, verbal process,

behavioral process, and existential process. Because of the specific structure

of the Obama speech, the analysis was based only on three processes,

including the “material process, relational process, and mental process”.

Third, the interpersonal meta-function is usually used to express the mood

of the speaker with the use model verbs, model adverbs, and adjectives.

Furthermore, due to time and the structure, this analysis based only on the

use model verbs, tense in the speech.

63
Bibliography:

Primary Source:

Macon Phillips. President Barrack Obama’s Inaugural Address.

Web. The White House Government, 21 January 2009. Accessed 10-02-
2017.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/.
Secondary Sources:

Books:
Barrack Obama. Dream From My Father: Story Of Race and
Inheritance. The United States: Broadway Books, 1995.

Christopher Hart. Discourse, Grammar, and Ideology “Functional

and Cognitive Perspective”. London & New York: Bloomsbury Publishing,
2014.

James P. Gee. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis Theory and

Method. London &New York: Routledge, 1999.

M.A.K, Halliday. Linguistic function and literary style: an enquiry

into the language of William Golding's 'The Inheritors'. Ed. Seymour
Chatman. New York: Oxford University Press, 1971.
M.A.K, Halliday. 'Text as Semantic Choice in Social Contexts'. Eds.
Teun A. van Dijk and Janos Petofi, Grammars and Descriptions. Berlin/
New York: de Gruyter: 333, 1977.
M.A.K. Halliday. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 1st Ed
London: Edward Arnold, 1985.
M.A.K., Halliday. Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd Ed.
London: Edward Arnold, 1994.
M.A.K., Halliday & Ch, Matthiessen. Introduction to Functional
Grammar, 3rd edition, London: Edward Arnold, 2004.
M.A.K., Halliday & Christian Matthiessen. Halliday’s Introduction
to Systematic functional Grammar. 4th Ed. New York: Routledge, 2014.

Marianne Jorgensen & Louise J. Phillips. Discourse Analysis as

Theory and Method. London: Sage publication, 2002.

64
 N. Fairclough. Language and Power. Ed. Christopher N. Candlin.
The United State: Longman, 1989.

N, Fairclough. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of

language. London: Longman: 25-28, 1995.
Joann F. Price. Barrack Obama: A Biography. London: Greenwood
Biographies, 2008.

The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Eds. James P.

Gee & Michael Handford. London & New York: Routledge, 2002.

Teun. A. Van Dijk. News as Discourse. Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum,

1988b.

Teun. A. Van Dijk. Ideology and Discourse: A Multidisciplinary

Introduction. Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona, 2000.

Teun. A. van Dijk. News Analysis: Case Studies of International and

National News in the Press. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
1988.

Articles:

Carol A. Fowler. An Event Approach to the Study of the Speech

Perception from a Direct-realist perspective. London: Journals of
Phonetics, 1989.
Kate McFarland. Strengthening Critical Discourse Analysis. The
Bay book revised. Belfast: Queen’s University,
Jaffer Sheyholislami. Critical Discourse Analysis: What is CDA?.
Carleton University, Ottawa.
Charles ANTAKI. Discourse analysis and conversation analysis.
(Eds.). IN: Alasuutari. P., Beckman L, and Brannan, J. The SAGE
Handbook of Social Research Methods, London, Sage, pp. 431-446. 2008.

Ruth Wodak. Method of Critical Discourse Analysis. Vol1.

England: Lancaster University, 2015.

Ruth Wodak. Aspect of Critical Discourse Analysis. Vienna:

Austrian Academy of Science, 2002.

Teun. A. Van Dijk. Aims of Critical Discourse Analysis. Vol 1.

Japanese Discourse, 1995.

65
 Francis. Y. Lin & Alex. X. Peng. Systematic Functional Grammar
and Construction Grammar. China: Beijing Normal University, School of
Foreign Languages and Literatures, 2006.

Published Dissertation:

Junling Wang. A Critical Discourse Analysis of Barrack Obama’s

Speeches. Diss. Northwest Normal University, 2017. Finland: Academy
Publisher, 2010.

Shakila Nur. Analysis of Interpersonal Meta-function In Public

Speeches: A Case of Nelson Mandela’s Inauguration Speech. Saudi Arabia:
King Khalid University, 2015. International Journal of Social Sciences. Vol
30, no 1.

Yang Shenghua. Discourse Analysis of Obama’s Inaugural Address

Form the Perspective of Culture. Diss. China West Normal University,
2015. Vol. 2 of Studies in Literature and Language, June 26, 2015.

Unpublished Dissertation:

Fatima. M. Farhat. A Systematic Linguistic Analysis of Process

Types, Participant Roles and Modality Types in Obama’s Speeches on
Muslim World Issues. Diss. Kuala Lampur: University of Malaya, 2016.

Online Sources:

Adam Nagourney & Jeef Zeleny. Obama Formally Enters the

Presidential Race. The New Times, February 11, 2007. Web. 11 February
2017.
file:///D:/thesis/chapters/chapter%20one/data/Obama%20Formally%20Ente
rs%20Presidential%20Race%20-
%20The%20New%20York%20Times.html.

Jonathan Raban. Obama Inauguration: The Golden Trumpet. The

Guardian. 24 January 2009. Web. 11 February 2017.
file:///D:/obama/Nouveau%20dossier%20(2)/Jonathan%20Raban_%20How
%20did%20Obama's%20inaugural%20speech%20shape%20up_%20_%20
US%20news%20_%20The%20Guardian.html

66
 Miller Center of Public Affairs. Barrack Obama: Life Before the
Presidency. University of Virginia. Web. 10 February 2017.

http://millercenter.org/president/biography/obama-life-before-the-
presidency.
Miller Center of Public Affairs. Barrack Obama: Campaigns and
Elections. University of Virginia. Web. Accessed in 10 February 2017.
http://millercenter.org/president/biography/obama-life-before-the-
presidency.

Room for Debate. ‘The Speech’: The Expert Critique. New York
Times Blog. January 20, 2009. Web. February 11, 2017.
file:///D:/obama/Nouveau%20dossier%20(2)/'The%20Speech'_%20The%2
0Experts'%20Critique%20-%20The%20New%20York%20Times.html.

Stanley, Feldman. Why Obama Won. CBS News, 2008. Web.

February11,2017
file:///D:/thesis/chapters/chapter%20one/data/Why%20Obama%20Won%2
0-%20CBS%20News.html.

Stuart Whatley. Obama’s Inaugural Address Drew Some Criticism.

The Huffington Post. 21 February 2009. Web. 11 February 2017.
file:///D:/obama/Nouveau%20dossier%20(2)/Obama's%20Inaugural%20Ad
dress%20Draws%20Some%20Criticism%20_%20The%20Huffington%20
Post.html.

T.J. Walker. Analysis of Obama’s Inaugural Address. T.J. Walker

Channel. January 21, 2009. Web. 11 February 2017.
file:///D:/obama/Nouveau%20dossier%20(2)/Analysis%20of%20Barack%2

0Obama%20Inaugural%20Address.html

67
 ‫الملخص‬

‫كل أربع سنوات يرحب الشعب األمريكي بقدوم رئيس جديد‪ .‬يستعمل الرئيس الجديد لغة‬

‫غنية بالتعبير و الخطب الملتهبة لكي يستميل الشعب األمريكي و يجعله يوافق علي قراراته‬

‫الرئاسية‪ .‬هذا البحث مكرس لتحليل الخطاب االفتتاحي للرئيس االمريكى باراك اوباما في ‪.2009‬‬

‫يحلل هذا البحث المعايير المعتمدة من طرف الرئيس االمريكى باراك اوباما في خطابه الستمالة‬

‫الشعب األمريكي لقبول أجندته الرئاسية‪ .‬تهدف هذه الدراسة انه باستعمال اللغة استطاع باراك‬

‫اوباما إن يجعل الشعب األمريكي يقبل رزنامته الرئاسية‪ .‬باإلضافة إلي ذلك إلثبات انه توجد عالقة‬

‫بين اللغة و الفكر و السلطة‪.‬‬

‫‪68‬‬