Abstract
This paper seeks to investigate the sources of power in the discourse of an Arab-American writer, Etel Adnan's one act play, Like a Christmas Tree . The play represents a heated argument between two figures who stand for two different ideologies and who fall within the frame of 'binary opposition' , transcultural misunderstanding, and colonial hegemony versus native resistance . Supposedly, an American Journalist, Jim, is expected to dominate the discourse by force of his cultural and professional background, but sarcastically enough, the Iraqi butcher, Badr is the part who represents power and domination throughout the play. The current paper depends on more than one tool of analysis: Norman Fairclough's (2001) and Foucault's(2004) concepts of power and discourse, Grice's theory of 'cooperative principles'(1989), Brown and Gilman's study of 'address forms' (1972), and Georgia Green's contribution in the process of 'turn-taking' (1989).The study celebrates an analysis of data which uncovers the power of discourse in the exchanges of both characters and sheds light on the identity of both of them in an attempt to affirm that 'power' is not necessarily on the side of the stronger. Keywords : discourse, power, address forms, turn-taking, interruption, topic control
Highlights
In his book, Power and Language (2001), Norman Fairclough explores the various dimensions of the relations of power and language
Those channels fall within the frame of power acquisition through our speech and, for the purpose of the study, will be limited to "cooperative principle", "address forms", and "turn-taking" procedures, topic control, and interruptions
In the light of the previously mentioned theoretical framework, the aim of the study is to analyze the discourse of power through the verbal exchanges between two characters belonging to different cultures and different ideologies and to highlight the source of power in their contexts
Summary
Power and Language (2001), Norman Fairclough explores the various dimensions of the relations of power and language. How many truly different things can we do in the course of talking to each other?" (183).The simple answer to these questions is that we try to establish a discourse through various channels Those channels fall within the frame of power acquisition through our speech and, for the purpose of the study, will be limited to "cooperative principle", "address forms", and "turn-taking" procedures, topic control, and interruptions. At a time Jim justifies his presence in Iraq as a national mission he fulfills to his country and for the newspaper he works for, Badr views that presence as imperialistic and unjustifiable Even in their intellectual dwells over concepts like honour, nationalism, belonging, war, pride, and power, each one is backed by his cultural notions that legitimatize his own discourse. On the basis of this intellectual misunderstanding and binary oppositions the discourse of power is given the space dedicated to this paper
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
