Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Unpacking Speech Acts in Political Discourse Joe Biden’s Speeches on the Hamas and Israel Conflict Wibowo, Hanafi; Sholihah, Umi
Teaching English as Foreign Language, Literature and Linguisticss Vol. 5 No. 2 (2025): TEFLICS
Publisher : Program Studi Pendidikan Bahasa Inggris,, Fakultas Ilmu Pendidikan, Universitas Hasyim Asy'ari

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.33752/teflics.v5i2.10313

Abstract

This study investigates the use of speech acts in Joe Biden’s 2023 speeches concerning the Hamas and Israel conflict, with a focus on identifying and interpreting the pragmatic functions of his language. Drawing on Austin’s and Searle’s framework of speech acts, the analysis categorizes utterances into locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts, with particular emphasis on illocutionary functions. The data were collected from Biden’s public addresses and analyzed qualitatively to determine the frequency and communicative purpose of each speech act category. The findings reveal that assertive speech acts dominate the discourse (64%), followed by directives (24%), declaratives (9%), and expressives (3%), with no commissive identified. This indicates Biden’s preference for asserting information and guiding responses rather than expressing emotions or making binding commitments. Comparative analysis with previous studies such as research on Netanyahu’s crisis rhetoric, Hamas representatives’ accusatory strategies, and speech acts in films shows both similarities and differences. While assertives consistently dominate across contexts, Biden’s avoidance of commissives and limited use of expressives distinguishes his rhetoric as cautious and diplomatic. The study concludes that speech act patterns in political discourse are strongly shaped by the speaker’s role, political stance, and global positioning, offering new insights into the intersection of pragmatics and international political communication.
A critical discourse analysis of Tom Lembong’s pleidoi in the context of his corruption case Sanit, Avvena; Wibowo, Hanafi; Fadhil, M. Rizky
Linguistics Initiative Vol. 6 No. 1 (2026)
Publisher : Pusat Studi Bahasa dan Publikasi Ilmiah

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.53696/27753719.61415

Abstract

This study investigates how ideological legitimacy and claims of innocence are discursively constructed in Tom Lembong’s handwritten pledoi as reported by Tirto.id within the context of his corruption case. While previous Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) research on corruption has primarily examined media framing and political elites, limited attention has been given to technocratic actors and to defense statements as autonomous sites of ideological production. Addressing this gap, the study employs a qualitative research design with a descriptive–interpretive orientation, utilizing Teun A. van Dijk’s CDA framework to analyze the discourse at macrostructural, superstructural, and microstructural levels. The data consists of a single online news article reproducing the pledoi during the pre-trial phase. The findings indicate that the global meaning of the text is structured around themes of gratitude, cooperation with legal authorities, institutional trust, nationalism, and religious devotion, which collectively construct an ideology of moral–patriotic integrity. At the superstructural level, the discourse follows a coherent narrative sequence that moves from respectful address and gratitude to moral self-positioning, institutional alignment, national commitment, and religious closure, guiding readers toward an interpretation centered on humility and ethical credibility. At the microstructural level, positive lexicalization, inclusive pronouns, high-commitment modality, presuppositions of innocence, repetition, politeness markers, and the absence of legal jargon contribute to a non-adversarial and morally persuasive discourse. Overall, the pledoi functions as an ideological substitute for legal defense, foregrounding moral, national, and religious values to negotiate legitimacy under conditions of legal and institutional asymmetry. This study contributes to CDA by foregrounding defense discourse as a site of ideological construction and by extending corruption discourse analysis to technocratic actors within Indonesian digital journalism.