Manipulative Strategies in Political Discourse: A Comparative Pragma-Rhetorical and Semantic Analysis of English and Arabic Political Speeches

This paper examines how politicians speaking in English and Arabic deceive their audience by using pragmatic and rhetorical skills. The semantic analysis exposes the conscious and uncon-scious meanings of their messages, showing how meaning is manufactured within and potential-ly manipulated in English and Arabic political discourse. A mixed-method approach, along with purposive sampling and qualitative, quantitative, and comparative analyses, was applied to en-sure the selection of major speeches representative of key political events. It contained famous Western and Arab politicians' statements on world affairs from the Iraq War to the present. The analysis examined manipulation by the use of speech acts, presuppositions, Grice's Maxims, rhetorical techniques, and semantic devices. The researcher delineated these features of lan-guage and their implications on the main point of each speech. The results showed intriguing manipulation practices by politicians from both linguistic groups. English-speaking politicians rely on directness, trust, and positive narration through statements of fact, promises, logic, and credibility. Arabic-speaking politicians went for a much more subtle approach, establishing ci-vility to create a rapport of friendship and shared goals and emotional appeals to invoke shared identity and history. While the languages that they speak are different, both the English and Ar-abic politicians share certain characteristics: directness and assertiveness, rapport, framing, and clever figurative language. The results showed that the two language groups appealed to differ-ent persuasive strategies but differed in culture and language. The English-speaking group relied on directness and individual independence while the Arabic speaking group relied on subtleties, collective identity, allusions to religion or traditions. All these discrepancies demonstrated how language, culture, and political discourse interact and how language can affect audiences across cultures. These findings are important for understanding political communication dynamics, shaping language training, improving politician cross-cultural communication, and guiding polit-ical discourse analysis research. Understanding cultural differences can improve political en-gagement in various circumstances.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Languages and Translation
Published
2024-09-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.71755/ttlt-2025-1228076
Primary Topic
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Manipulative Strategies in Political Discourse: A Comparative Pragma-Rhetorical and Semantic Analysis of English and Arabic Political Speeches

Sahar Najarzadegan, Atefesadat Mirsaeedi, Ghanim Jwaid Idan, Qasim Hawas Hadi Hawas Hadi
Journal of Languages and Translation
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
article

Manipulative Strategies in Political Discourse: A Comparative Pragma-Rhetorical and Semantic Analysis of English and Arabic Political Speeches

Sahar Najarzadegan, Atefesadat Mirsaeedi, Ghanim Jwaid Idan, Qasim Hawas Hadi Hawas Hadi
article en

Abstract

This paper examines how politicians speaking in English and Arabic deceive their audience by using pragmatic and rhetorical skills. The semantic analysis exposes the conscious and uncon-scious meanings of their messages, showing how meaning is manufactured within and potential-ly manipulated in English and Arabic political discourse. A mixed-method approach, along with purposive sampling and qualitative, quantitative, and comparative analyses, was applied to en-sure the selection of major speeches representative of key political events. It contained famous Western and Arab politicians' statements on world affairs from the Iraq War to the present. The analysis examined manipulation by the use of speech acts, presuppositions, Grice's Maxims, rhetorical techniques, and semantic devices. The researcher delineated these features of lan-guage and their implications on the main point of each speech. The results showed intriguing manipulation practices by politicians from both linguistic groups. English-speaking politicians rely on directness, trust, and positive narration through statements of fact, promises, logic, and credibility. Arabic-speaking politicians went for a much more subtle approach, establishing ci-vility to create a rapport of friendship and shared goals and emotional appeals to invoke shared identity and history. While the languages that they speak are different, both the English and Ar-abic politicians share certain characteristics: directness and assertiveness, rapport, framing, and clever figurative language. The results showed that the two language groups appealed to differ-ent persuasive strategies but differed in culture and language. The English-speaking group relied on directness and individual independence while the Arabic speaking group relied on subtleties, collective identity, allusions to religion or traditions. All these discrepancies demonstrated how language, culture, and political discourse interact and how language can affect audiences across cultures. These findings are important for understanding political communication dynamics, shaping language training, improving politician cross-cultural communication, and guiding polit-ical discourse analysis research. Understanding cultural differences can improve political en-gagement in various circumstances.

Journal of Languages and Translation
Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (IR), University of Kerbala (IQ)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.