Explore the vast range of titles available.

The current speech 'A critical Discourse Analysis to the Self-representation in Joe Biden's speech ''On fighting the COVID-19 pandemic''. The problem of study lies in the scarcity of the studies that tackle the self-representation in Biden's speeches about the Covid-19 rescue plan. The study attempts to answer the following question: what are the self-representation strategies used by Biden ''on fighting the COVID-19 pandemic''. It has hypothesized that certain self-representation strategies are adopted on three levels of analysis: the meaning level, the argumentative level and the rhetorical level, moreover each level involves more frequently used strategy than the other strategies. It also aims at figuring out the positive self-representation strategies used by Biden as well as identifying the most frequent strategy and the least one in each level. The study has adopted an eclectic model which is amalgamation of two of Van Dijk's models (2000 and 2006). The study conducts qualitative and quantitative analyses. Finally, the study concludes that, to represent himself positively during the ''COVID-19 pandemic'', the president of USA uses the following strategies of self-representation which are: \"actor description\", \"lexicalization\", \"national self-glorification'', \"victimization\", \"generalization\", \"evidentiality'', \"populism\", \"burden\", \"reasonableness\", \"comparison\", \"metaphor\", \"repetition\", ''hyperbole'' and ''number game. Moreover, the quantitative analysis demonstrates that, among meaning, argumentation and rhetoric levels, the most frequently used strategy is ''actor description'' whereas the least one is '' national self-glorification.

The current study seeks to shed light on the strategy of polarization and investigate the macro-strategies and micro-strategies that former U.S. President Donald Trump employs in his tweets. This study develops an amalgam data analysis model that integrates two models, Van Dijk (2000:51-84) and Masroor et al (2019: 6-10). The study is limited to analyze the tweets directed against immigration policies adopted by Trump's opponents. Through the analysis, the study reveals that Trump employs four macro-strategies, two of them are in terms of positive self-representation: \"the self is personification of Goodness\" and \"the self is the only nation's hope\". The other two are in terms of negative other-representation: \"the other is disloyal to our country\" and \"the other lacks credibility\". These four macro-strategies are realized by the employment of seven micro-strategies: lexicalization, yperbole, modality, number game, consensus, metaphor, and irony.

Commonly, the topic of humanitarianism (i.e., the embodiment of an ideology of human compassion) has not been given its due concern neither in terms of Critical Discourse Analysis studies nor in political speeches. Moreover, there is lack of studies that handle the topic in president Biden's speeches. As such, the current study tries to bridge this gap by answering the questions of: What are the strategies of the ideology of humanitarianism in Biden's speeches on the Palestine-Israel conflict? What are the most and the least employed strategies in the speeches in question?, And finally, why does Biden employ these strategies? The study employs Van Dijk's model that involves appropriate tactics for the overall strategy of \"positive self-representation\" and \"negative other-representation\" as ideological constructions in discourse. The study finds that Biden implements various strategies like actor description, metaphor, victimization, lexicalization, empathy, presupposition number game, and compassion. In terms of the most employed strategies, they are compassion, empathy and lexicalization, yet the least utilized ones are presupposition, and number game. Finally, the ideology of humanitarianism in Biden's speeches is mainly done throughout his ideologized plans of positive self -representation as feeling the suffering, and having compassion towards people of Israel, while Hamas, as a representative of Palestinians, is portrayed as terrorist organization, slaughtering scores of Israeli people and committing many vicious massacres, as such humanitarian. As such the strategies of humanitarianism are ideological.

This paper is a critical discourse analysis of the ideology of power in unequal treaties of peace. It investigates the system of ideas, which expresses the interests of the powerful states with the aim discovering the ideological strategies of discourse, and the way such strategies are utilized for their interests. For this end, the study analyzes some treaties (bilateral and multilateral) drawing upon an eclectic model adopted from Fairclough's (1989) and Van Dijk's (2006). It appears that treaty participants' interests involve presenting the strategies of consensus, and reasonable justifications for concluding such agreement, as well as presupposing what the powerful participants require to achieve as something taken for granted. However, all are practiced for the purpose of power sustaining.

This study is concerned with utilizing CDA to analyze and identify the main strategies of legitimization in D. Trump's public speech. As such, this study aims to (1) find out legitimization strategies processed in Trump's public speech, (2) pinpoint the evaluation and authority legitimization strategies in Trump's public speech. To achieve the aims of the study and test its hypotheses, the following procedure is followed: (1) surveying the CDA literature of the political discourse, (2) reviewing literature on legitimization, its definition, types, functions, strategies and models, (3) developing a model of analysis, (4) selecting representative extracts taken from Trump's public speeches to be the data of analysis, and (5) conducting qualitative data analysis in the light of the model developed, supported with some statistical correlations. The results of analysis revealed that the value of the significance has been reliable and this validates the first hypothesis that Trump manipulates different legitimization strategies that enhance his own ideologies towards political cases, where such discursive and rhetorical strategies have been employed to legitimize different political and economic decisions and threats concerning various ideological contexts such as the Middle East issues, terrorism, immigration and the global economic crisis.

Empathy is, as a prosocial act, encompasses understanding and sharing other people's emotions to give an emotional support. Though empathy is common, such topic has not yet received its due attention from a discourse analysis perspective. Hence, in terms of Biden's speeches supporting Israel after acts on October, this paper tries to answer the following: What are the categories of empathy that Biden utilizes ? What are the most and the least utilized categories? What are the strategies of empathy in those speeches? What are the most and the least implemented strategies? Consequently, in terms of Biden's speeches, the paper aims to specify categories of empathy, pinpoint the most and the least utilized categories, uncover the strategies of showing empathy and finally, determine the most and the least implemented. To achieve the aims, an eclectic model is followed from van Dijk's (2006,200)and Fairclough's (1989)models. It is concluded that Biden employs four categories of empathy in his speeches. They are Perspective-taking, Fantasy, Empathic concern and personal distress. Perspective taking is the most common one in addition to empathetic concern. Both help Biden achieve his aim of showing empathy towards Israel. Personal distress is the least used one due to the idea that the president tries to prove that what he says is related to truth rather than mere feelings. As for the strategies, Biden implemented Compassion, Victimization, Presupposition, Lexicalization, and Number Game. Lexicalization is the most employed strategy Its recurrence gives the discourse its force by using effective words. Next, presupposition asserts that what is said is presumed knowledge or common sense. Finally, Victimization and number game are the least used strategies.

This paper is a critical discourse analysis (CDA)of framing in Trump's speech on coronavirus. Framing, here, encompasses highlighting specific actions as significant and neglecting others. Since, the lack insights in framing conduces delimiting in understanding the situation, this paper tries to answer the following : a-What are the framing items and devices that Trump uses ? b- How can a, and ,b above described , interpreted and explained c- What are the rates of the framing devices employed by Trump in the speech in question? Hence, the paper aims at uncovering framing items and devices, analyzing them in terms of CDA, and pinpointing the highest rate of such devices. Following an eclectic model, depending on Semetko, and Valkenburg's (2000, p. 104); Gamson and Lasch's (1983, p. 407-408) and Fairclough's (1989), the paper analyzes Trump's framing of his acts as positive. The paper concludes that : a-Trump uses the following items :conflict, human interest ,consequence, morality ,and responsibility to frame his speech showing himself positively. b-the speeches can be described in terms of having specific words and structures that serve the purpose of the speaker. Seemingly, they are said to show the plan to face the pandemic yet, they frame the speech in a specific direction of positive self -representation c- Depictions and metaphors exhibit the highest rate of employment in Trump's speeches.

The present study endeavoured to investigate the notion of predication in terms of critical discourse analysis (henceforth, CDA) in Pinter's \"The Dumb Waiter\". The problem with the present study is, to the researcher's best knowledge, that predication in the plays has not been investigated as a special subject in terms of CDA. The study aims to identify explicit predication strategies, and to determine the most frequently used strategies and the least frequently employed ones in Pinter's play in question. The study adopted the following procedures: Firstly, presenting a theoretical account of critical discourse analysis and predication. Secondly, presenting models that involved the predication for the study based. Thirdly, conducting a qualitative analysis of Pinter's (The Dumb Waiter) in terms of strategies in question and finding out the frequencies and percentages of those strategies.

The present paper is a critical discourse analysis of the ideology of nationalism in Boris Johnson's first speech as Prime Minister. The problem with current study is that the ideology of nationalism in Boris Johnson's first speech has not been critically analyzed. The study aims to show how the ideology of nationalism is represented in Johnson's speech. Furthermore, it attempts to identify the micro strategies that indicate the ideology of nationalism and which strategies are most frequently used and least frequently used. The study adopted an eclectic model based on Van Dijk's (2000, 2006). The paper concludes that the ideology of nationalism in Boris Johnson's speech is fundamentally represented by micro strategies, which in turn lead to macro strategies of positive self-representation and negative other representation. Then, the micro strategies that indicate the ideology of nationalism in Johnson's speech are distancing, honesty, repetition, actor description, comparison, lexicalization, national self- glorification, metaphor, number game, and populism. Finally, the most frequently employed strategies of the ideology of nationalism are lexicalization and national self-glorification, whereas the least frequently employed is the strategy of metaphor.

The current paper investigates strategic avoidance of explicitness employed in newspaper articles. It aims at attaining knowledge of strategies of avoiding explicitness as effective way of indirectness. The study finds three major strategies: (implicatures, hedges and presequences) that carry communicative significance; yet, the writers show various degrees of implementations. Mostly, implicature employment comes first as a highly preferrable strategy, before \"Hedges\", and \"presequences\". This reflects writers' intention to use such strategies in their writing to avoid direct commitment of the proposition they present. There are rationales behind that like politeness, considerations of pragmatics parameters, imposition avoidance and rights of obligations.