Anggit Meitri posted an update 8 months, 1 week ago
Journal Review V
Political Discourse of Jordan: A Critical Discourse Analysis
This journal was written by Hassan Ali Al-Momani from English Department, Tafila Technical University, Jordan. And published by Canadian Center of Science and Education.
The modern critics of critical discourse analysis theory focus on the relationship between discourse and racism, discourse and ideology, and discourse and knowledge which contribute to the foundations of this theory. Also, the critics of this theory try to integrate the social and cognitive approaches to discourse and critical analysis, and they deal with the social problems and issues that have both a social and cognitive dimensions. Furthermore, the theorists focus on the multidisciplinary studies, in which discourse can be studied from a socio-cognitive dimension. So, discourse in this theory is at the interface of the social and cognitive dimensions, in which discourse is a social practice, and it is at the same time a major way we acquire ideologies.
In his article “political discourse and political cognition” Van Dijk (2002) studies the relation between political discourse and political cognition. He argues that political discourse derives from a cognitive process including mental models or from general political representations, such as knowledge, attitudes and ideologies which “are social representations shared by a group” (p. 222). He claims that “political discourse can only be adequately described and explained when we spell out the socio-cognitive interface that relates it to the socially shared political representations that control political actions, processes and systems”.
Teun Van Dijk (2006) has outlined the process of discourse production through highlighting the concepts of mental model, context model and their relation to mind. Mental models are a psychological notion that “account for subjective definitions of situations. They account for personal variation in discourse production comprehension, for style, for interactional conflicts, and especially for the ways discourse is appropriate in given social, political or cultural situtations”. Van Dijk claims that we understand a text when we construct a mental model for it. It is related to the notion of “making sense of text or talk,” in which they “have culturally based schematic structures…they represent people’s experiences, and people’s episodic memory is thus populated by mental models which are subjective, and possibly biased representations of “reality”, and may also feature evaluations of events or situations (opinions), as well as emotions associated with such events”
In conclusion, the Jordanian political discourse takes the status of audience into account when it is directed to the international opinion. In other words, the political discourse of Jordan is directed in accordance with the cultural and ideological backgrounds of the people to whom it is addressed. Also, the status and ideologies of audience to whom the political discourse is directed influences the king’s style and psyche. This is clear in the lexical usage and modes of argumentation in the political discourse of Jordan which are influenced by the status of audience to whom the king directs his discourse. Furthermore, it is observed that the political discourse of Jordan is more moderate and relevant to the attitudes and opinions of the international public opinion. This is clear from the use of the unbiased words to the Arab Islamic ideology.