Abstract
This paper investigates the linguistic representation of power in Edward Bond’s Lear (1978). More specifically, the paper tries to explore the extent to which power is linguistically represented manipulatively and/or persuasively by means of specific lexical and pragmatic devices in the discourse of the selected play. The main objective of the paper is to explore how power relations, irrespective of their type, influence the cognitive world of the discourse participants, which in turn attempts a change in their conversational behavior to the extent that allows the acceptance of a specific argument in a particular way. The paper adopts a lexico-pragmatic perspective to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), instanced by Fairclough’s (1989) lexical model for the analysis of discourse, and the concepts of politeness and face (Thomas, 1995; Yule, 1996a). The main research question of the paper is: to what extent do different power relations, encoded lexically and/or pragmatically, affect the conversational behavior of the play’s characters, persuasively and/or manipulatively? Some lexical and pragmatic strategies have been highlighted and then linguistically analyzed to expose their effectiveness in deciphering persuasive and manipulative power relations in the selected play. Among these strategies are: euphemism, myth-making, positive self-presentation and negative other-presentation, and politeness strategies. The paper concludes that power has linguistically been encoded in the discourse of the selected play, both persuasively and manipulatively, to affect a cognitive shift in behavior reflected in the conversational interaction among characters.
Highlights
IntroductionLanguage users are confined to a specific type of discourse that may, to varying degrees, comes counter to their cognitive attitudes
Language influences our beliefs, formulates our responses and directs our behavior
Based on the above analysis, this paper demonstrates a number of findings as follows: 6.1 Manipulative and Persuasive Power in Bond’s Lear
Summary
Language users are confined to a specific type of discourse that may, to varying degrees, comes counter to their cognitive attitudes. This disparity takes place when power relations between discourse participants vary. The characters’ conversational behavior within the dramatic genre changes frequently with the change of the dramatic events This change comes as a result of miscellaneous power relations that are changed throughout the play, which, in turn, is reflected in different discourse types within the same dramatic work. Despite the fact that the play under investigation is a conversational genre, that is, a work of fiction, the paper tries to make a connection between the discursive strategies used in it and those used to determine interactional practices between participants in any real speech event today
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
