A Critical Discourse Analysis of Selected Poems of “Maya Angelou”
(“Equality”, “Cage Birds” and Other Poems as Examples)
الملخص
Language users’ choices of linguistic forms and expressions are usually guided by their thoughts, feelings, attitudes and their stance in the real world. Language, according to CDA, is never neutral and it always has some implications of the world that surrounds us. Critical studies are concerned with scrutinizing power relations, ideological manifestations and hegemony in social practices. The current paper is a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of selected poems of Maya Angelou, who is an African American poet, memoirist, and civil rights activist. It sheds light on the figurative language of the poems that are selected randomly for the purpose of analysis. The five selected poems: "Still I Rise, Equality, Caged Bird, On the Pulse of Morning and Phenomenal Woman." are analyzed based on Fairclough’s model of CDA. The study tries to show the implicit figurative language in the poems and identify different figures of speech that have implicit meaning in the poems. It also examines how figurative language is used to enhance the meaning of the poems and communicating the ideas more effectively. .
المراجع
2.Charteris-Black, J. (2011) Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. 2nd ed. Lodon: Palggrave Macmillan
3.Holmgreen, L. (2006) Neo-liberalism and discourse the cohering function of metaphor. Quadensde Filologia Estudus, 11, pp. 95-111.
4.Fairclough, N. L. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
5.Fairclough, N. (1992) Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
6.Fairclough, N. (1993) Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: The Universities. Discourse and Society, 4(2), pp. 133-168.
7.Fairclough, N. L. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Harlow, England: Longman.
8.Fairclough, N. L., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse Studies. A multidisciplinary introduction. Vol. 2. Discourse as social interaction. (pp. 258-284). London: Sage.
9.Fairclough, N., Mulderrig, J. and Wodak, R. (2011). Critical Discourse Analysis. In Tuen A. van Dijk, Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction (2nd ed.). Sage.
10.Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English. (2001) Longman dictionary of contemporary English. 3rd ed. Hong Kong: Person Education Limited, Longman 11.Mahmood, R. (2014A) Critical discourse analysis of figurative language in Pakistani english newspapers. International Journal of Linguistics, 6(3), p. 67
12.Schiffrin, D. (2006) Discourse. In: Ralph, W.F. and Connor-Linton, J., (eds.), An introduction to language and linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 169-203.
13.Stubbs, M. (1983), Discourse analysis. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
14.Titscher, S., Wodak, R., Meyer, M. and Vetter, E. (1998) Methoden der textanalyse. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verl
15.Van Dijk, T.A. (1998b) Opinions and ideologies in the press. In: Allan, B. and Garrett, P., (eds.), Approaches to media discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
16.Van Dijk, T.A. (2001) Multi-disciplinarily CDA: A plea for diversity. In: Wodak, R. and Meyer, M., (eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: SAGA Publication, pp. 95-120
17.van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach. In Ruth Wodak and Michael Mayer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.
18.Wodak, R and Meyer, M. (2009). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.
19.Weiss, Gilbert and Ruth Wodak, eds. 2003, Critical Discourse Analysis Theory and Interdisciplinarity, New York, PALGRAVE MACMILLAN
