Keyness for Revelation of Self and Other Representation in Kurdish National Identity Construction

Nahlah N. Khorsheed; Hisham Dzakiria; Manvender Kaur Sarjit Singh

doi:10.25212/lfu.qzj.8.2.54

Authors

Nahlah N. Khorsheed Department of English, College of Education and Languages, Lebanese French University, Erbil, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
Hisham Dzakiria School of Languages, Civilization and Philosophy, College of Arts and Sciences, Sintok, Malaysia
Manvender Kaur Sarjit Singh School of Languages, Civilization and Philosophy, College of Arts and Sciences, Sintok, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.8.2.54

Keywords:

Keyness, Wmatrix, Corpus linguistic, Discourse-Historical Approach, Kurdish national identity.

Abstract

The presentation of Self and Other as the basis of inclusion and exclusion strategies, which is the core of ideologically formation of national identity, has been examined using various branches of CDA. This paper demonstrates that the keyness technique combined with concordance can reveal the ideology behind the representation of Self and Other in national identity construction relying on the discourse-historical approach (Wodak et al. 2009) as a theoretical basis. Accordingly, four discursive strategies that signal the presentation of Self and Other: constructive strategies, perpetuation strategies, transformation strategies, and dismantle strategies, are explored. As a methodology, the six-step outline proposed by Subtirelu and Baker (2018) was followed. A corpus was compiled with data from two focus group interviews. For the focus group interviews, ten participants were recruited purposefully from postgraduate students in University Utara Malaysia. As the study is on how Kurds depict Self and Other in their national identity construction discourses, only Kurdish students were reached. The paper seeks to contribute to the body knowledge of corpus linguistic analysis in the revelation of ideology through co-text and intertext. The findings display that Kurds emphasize the ingroup sameness and sharply distinguish themselves from their Other. However, they intend to confer a shade of vagueness on their other through depersonalizing and institutionalizing. Through the discursive construction of Kurdish national identity, the informants rely primarily on transformation and dismantling strategies.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Adley, N. (2001). Analysing Masculinity: Intepretive Repertoires, Ideological Dilemmas and Subject Positions . In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, & S. J. Yates, Discourse as a data: A guide for analysis (pp. 189-228). London: Sage Publication Ltd. .

Afzal, N., & Harun, M. (2015). A Critical Analysis of Newspaper Editorial Discourse on the Portrayal of Uprising in Libya and Syria. Academic Research International, 243-254.

Baker, P., Gabriellatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Krzyzanowiski, M., McEnery, T., & Wodak, R. (2008). A Useful Methodological synergy: Combining Critical Discourse Analysis and Corpus Linguistics to Examine Discourses of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press. Discourse & Society, 273-306.

Biber, D. (1993). Representativeness in Corpus Design. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 243-257.

Breeze, R. (2011). Critical Discourse Analysis and its Critics. International Pragmatics Association, 493-525.

Cohen, A. P. (2001). Signifying identities. London: the Taylor & Francis e-Library.

Conte, G. I. (29 March, 2020). Hindustan Times. Retrieved from You Tube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1PoTBwHwOc

de Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (1999). The Discursive Construction of National Identities. Discourse and Society, 149-173.

Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge .

Hardie, A., (2014, April 28). Log Ratio – an informal introduction [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://cass.lancs.ac.uk/log-ratio-an-informal-introduction/

Gabrialatos, C., & Baker, P. (2008). Fleeing Sneaking Flooding: A corpus analysis of Discursive Constructions of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press 1996- 2005. Journal of English linguistics, 5-38.

Gellner, E. (1983). Nations and Nationalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher Limited.

Guibernau, M. (2000). Nationalism and Intellectuals in Nations without States: the Catalan Case. Political Studies, 48(5), 989–1005.

Kamasa, V. (2016). Corpus linguistics for critical discourse analysis. What can we do better? Language, Corpora and Cognition, 221-239.

KhosraviNik, M. (2010). The Representation of Refugees, Asylum Seekers and Immigrants in British Newspapers: A Critical Discourse Analysis. Journal of Language and Politics. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1-28.

Leeuwen, T. v. (2008). Discourse and Practice: New tools for critical discourse analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.

Miller, D. (1995). On Nationality . New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

O'Halloran, K. (2013). Inferencing and Cultural Reproduction: Corpus-based Critical Discourse Analysis. In R. Wodak, Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 321-349). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Phillips, D. L. (2015). The Kurdish Sipring: A new map of the Middle East. New Jersey: USA.

Rayson, P. (2008). Computational Tools and Methods for Corpus Compilation and analysis. The Cambridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics.

Rayson, P. and Garside, R. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In proceedings of the workshop on Comparing Corpora, held in conjunction with the 38th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2000). 1-8 October 2000, Hong Kong, pp. 1 - 6.

Rayson P., Berridge D. and Francis B. (2004). Extending the Cochran rule for the comparison of word frequencies between corpora. In Volume II of Purnelle G., Fairon C., Dister A. (eds.) Le poids des mots: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Statistical analysis of textual data (JADT 2004), Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium, March 10-12, 2004, Presses universitaires de Louvain, pp. 926 - 936. ISBN.

Smith, A. D. (2009). Ethno-symbolism and Nationalism. London and New York: Routledge.

Subtirelu, N. C., & Baker, P. (2018). Corpus-based approaches. In J. Flowerdew, & J. Richardson, The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies (pp. 106-119). London and New York: Routledge.

Ting, H. (2008). Social construction of nation - A theoretical exploration. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics, 453-482.

van Dijk, T. A. (1984). Prejudice in Discourse: An Analysis of Ethnic Prejudice in Cognition and Conversation. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

van Dijk, T. A. (1989). Text and Context. Singapore: Longman.

van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 115-140.

van Dijk, T. A. (2013). Ideology and Discourse. In M. Freeden, L. Sargent, & M. Stears, The Oxford Handbook of the Political Ideologies (pp. 175-197). New York: Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H. G., (2004). Text, Context, Pretext: Critical Issues in Discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak, & M. Meyer, Methods of Critical Discourse analysis (pp. 63-94). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Wodak, R. (2011). Language , Power and Identity. Cambridge University Press, 215-233.

Wodak, R. (2018). A Discourse-Historical Analysis of David Cameron's "Bloomberg Speech" on the European Union. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 27-58.

Wodak, R., Cillia, R., Reisigl, M., & Liebhart, K. (2009). The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd.

Wodak, R., & Weiss, G. (2005). Analyzing European Union discourses Theories and applications. In R. Wodak, & P. Chilton, A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis: Theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity (pp. 121-135). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.