Discourse Analysis Approach to Euphemism at Word and Sentence Level: A Case of Political Speech

This study was a critical discourse analysis of the US and Iran’s politician speeches from 2013 to 2015 on the issue of nuclear negotiations in order to show how a single reality like nuclear agreement was presented and viewed by the politicians of the United States and Iran. Using Van Dijk’s (2004) framework, this study investigated how the politicians of each country try to justi-fy their ideas and persuade their audience by utilizing subtle ideological discourse structures in their speech. In doing so, the present study tried to identify the similarities and differences be-tween English and Persian political discourse regarding euphemism on the basis of the frequen-cy of each category. Having analyze data via descriptive statistics and chi-square methods, the results of the speeches indicated that politicians employ euphemistic strategies related to au-thority and evidentiality to establish a framework for burden or topos, which facilitates robust arguments against specific topics. In essence, they present substantial evidence or validation through references to authoritative figures, including esteemed experts, moral leaders, and repu-table international organizations. By citing trustworthy individuals, scholarly articles, and rele-vant scenarios, they aim to project objectivity, reliability, and credibility. This approach serves to bolster their claims and perspectives within an argument, rendering their assertions self-evident, adequate, rational, and plausible.