The Use of Hedging Methods in the Language of Television Talk Shows - an Analytical Study of the Program (Chairs Game) in Al Sharqiya Channel
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The research seeks to know the nature of the contents in which the hedging is carried out, and how the methods of hedging are employed in the language of television talk shows, and to reach the research aims, the researcher uses the survey method by using a content analysis tool to analyze the content of episodes of the Chairs Game program in Al-Sharqiya Channel. For the difficulty of conducting a comprehensive survey, a simple random sample is chosen from the episodes of the Chairs Game program.
Among the most important findings of the research: the topics of the political struggle for power and the anticipation of civil war come first, and then the amendment of the election law to be held early, as well as limiting weapons to the hands of the state to restore its prestige, and it also concludes that the focus of the program is on the method of politeness and kindness comes first, and then the method of evasiveness (indirect speech), the method of ambiguity, as well as identifying the people hosted in the program: political, governmental and academic personas.
Metrics
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
- Ahmed Mokhtar Omar, Contemporary Arabic Dictionary (Cairo: World of Books, 2008).
- Barakat Abdel Aziz, Media Research Curriculum, Theoretical Origins and Application Skills (Cairo: Modern Book House, 2015).
- Intermediate Dictionary, 4th Edition (Cairo: Al Shorouk International Library, 2004).
- Please Ahmed El Beheesh, Propaganda Euphemisms Speech (Deliberative Study), Published Research, Al-Mustansiriyah Magazine for Arab and International Studies, Issue 42, 2013.
- Raja Mahmoud Abu Allam, Psychological and Educational Sciences Research Curriculum, T4 (Cairo: Egyptian-Lebanese House, 2004).
- Saad Salman Al Mashhadani, Media Research Methodology (United Arab Emirates and The Lebanese Republic: University Book House, 2020).
- Salim Abdul Nabi, Television Media, (Amman: Osama Publishing and Distribution House, 2010).
- Samir Mohammed Hussein, Studies in Scientific Research Curriculum - Media Research, (Cairo: Modern Book House, 2006).
- Maad Assi Ali, Talk of The Two Rivers, Master's Thesis, Baghdad University, Media College, 2008.
- Watheq Ibrahim Hussein, Deliberative Analysis of Hedging Instruments in English Political Discourse (Obama Press Conferences 2013), Master's Degree in English, Mustansiriyah University, Faculty of Arts, 2014.
- Yaseen Alwan El-Taif Al-Jubouri, Political Marketing Methods in The Talk Show of Russia Today Channel An Analytical Study of the Program Of Not Saying A Model for the Duration of 1/1/2017 to 30/6/2017, Master's Thesis, Iraqi University, Faculty of Information, 2018.
( English sources
- Allott,N.(2010)key terms in pragmatics. London: Continuum, p85.
- Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson (1978). “Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena”. In Esher N. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction .Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .p116.
- Chilton, P. (1987). “Cooperation and Non-cooperation: Ethical and Political Aspects of Pragmatics”. Language and Communication, 7(3): p99.
- Coates, J. (1983). The Semantic of the Modal Auxiliaries. London: Groom Hebn.
- Crystal, D. (2008). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 6th ed. Oxford: Blackwell,p227.
- Danell, Karl Johan (1978). “The Concept of Vagueness in Linguistics”. Studia Neophilologica, Vol.50, p15.
- Dudley-Evans, T. & St. John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for Specific Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p76.
- Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual: Essays on Face to Face Behavior. New York: Anchor,p17.
- Gruber, H. (1993). “Political Language and Textual Vagueness”. Pragmatics 3: p6.
- Hartnett, C. (2003). “How Does Science Express Uncertainty?” A Paper Presented at the Meeting of the Linguistics Society of Canada and the United States,p6.
- Hyland, K. (1998). “Boosting, Hedging and the Negotiation of Academic Knowledge”. Text, 18(3): p2.
- __________. (1996). “Writing without Conviction: Hedging in Science Research Articles”. Applied Linguistics, p 15.
- __________. (2000). “Hedges, Boosters and Lexical Invisibility”. Language Awareness, Vol.9, No.4, p83.
- Lakoff, George (1973). “Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts”, Journal of Philosophical Logic, Vol.2, p471.
- Lobner, S.(2013) Understanding Semantics. London: Routledge, p280.
- Nikula, S. (1997). “Interlanguage View on Hedging”. In R. Markkanen and H. Schroder (eds.), Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter,p192.
- Obeng, S. G. (1994). “Verbal Indirection in Akan Informal Discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics, 21: p54.
- Salager-Meyer, F. (2000). “Procrustes Recipe: Hedging and Positivism”. English for Specific Purposes,p176.
- ___________. (1997). “I Think That Perhaps You Should: A Study of Hedges in Written Scientific Discourse”. TESOL, 2 (2), p150.
- Schaffner,C.(1998), Hedges in Political Discourse; A Translational Perspective. In Heckey, L. (ed) The Pragmatics of Translation Clevedon: Multingual Matters, p200.
- Tannen, Deborah (1989). Talking Voices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,p17.
- Wardhaugh, Ronald (1985). How Conversation Works. Oxford: Basil Blackwell,p8.
- Yaukah, K. (1991). “Oratory in Akan Society”. Discourse and Society, 2(1): p53.