REVEALING POWER AND IDEOLOGY THROUGH MODALITY EXPRESSIONS IN AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPER REPORTING JIS’S PEDOPHILIA
Abstract
This research is aimed at identifying the manifestation of power and ideologies through modality choices used by SMH. This is qualitative research in which to answer the research questions Fairclough’s CDA, Bybee’s, et al (1994) and Frawley’s (1992) concept of modality were used. From the 98 total data from SMH, this Australian newspaper, expresses both epistemic and deontic modal meaning in the same frequency which is 0,32% for the deontic meanings and 0,31 for epistemic meaning. In terms of lexical verbs expressing SMH employed 0,03% for deontic meaning and 0,72% for epistemic meaning. In terms of adverb, this Australian newspaper employed 0,01% for epistemic meanings but non for deontic meaning. In terms of adjective, this newspaper employed 0,02% for epistemic meaning but none for deontic meaning and the last category is multi word units, this newspaper employed 0,04 % multi word units from the total 98 data. These use of modality expressions represents SMH’s interests in exposing the inferiority of the Jakarta International School and its staffs, and the “quality” of the legal process in Indonesia.
Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), modality choices, Sydney Morning Herald, Ideology.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Bybee, J, Revere P, William P. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar. London: the University of Chicago Press.
Firth, J. 1957. Papers in Linguistics. 1934-1951. London: OUP.
Frawley, W.1992. Linguistic Semantics. London: Routledge.
Fowler, R. 1991. Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in Press. London & New York: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power: Discourse and Power. London: Longman.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1970. Language Structure and Language Function. In J. Lyons. Ed. 1970. Pp. 140-65.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed. Great Britain: Edward Arnold.
Hall, S. 1996. The Problem of Ideology: Marxism without Guarantee. In D. Morley and K.H. Chen. Eds. Critical Dialogue in Cultural Studies. London: Routledge.
Oktar, L. 2001. The Ideological Organisation of Representational Processes in the Presentation of Us and Them. Discourse & Society. Vol. 12(3): 313-346.
Palmer, 1986. Mood and Modality. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
Papafragou, A. Modality: Issues in the Semantics-Pragmatics Interference. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Richardson, John E. 2007. Analysing Newspapers: an approach from Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Simpson, P. 1993. Language, ideology and Point of View. London: Routledge.
Tomaselli, K & Tomaselli, R. 1985. Media Reflection of Ideology. University of Natal. Durban: CCSU.
Van, Dijk, T.A. 1988. News Analysis: Case Studies of International and National News in the Press. Hillslade: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Van Dijk, T.A. 1995a. Discourse Analysis as Ideology Analysis. In Weden, A & Schaffner, C (eds). Language & Peace (in Press).
Van Dijk, T.A. 1995b. Discourse Semantics and Ideology. Discourse & Society 6: 2. 243-289.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.