LINGUISTIC AND RHETORICAL MEANS OF LEGITIMIZATION OF THE US MILITARY CAMPAIGN IN THE MIDDLE EAST IN AMERICAN POLITICAL DISCOURSE
Keywords:
neutral lexis, euphemisms, logical fallacies, depersonification, metaphorsAbstract
The article is concerned with the linguistic and rhetorical means that enable the implementing of thelegitimization strategy of the US military campaign in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan in 2016 and 2017.
The corpus of data under analysis is represented by the speeches of American politicians: Ambassadors
to the United Nations S. Power and D. Pressman, Secretary of State R. Tillerson, National Security Advisor
H. MacMaster and Secretary of Defense J. Mattis. The paper investigates how American politicians
focus the reader’s attention on the anti-terrorist character of the US military operation. The study
describes the types of lexis, syntactic constructions and logical fallacies which prompt the reader to
perceive the US military actions as morally right and legitimate. It also explains how metaphors and argumentative
strategies condition the discourse positioning of terrorist organizations as a source of mortal
threat to the international community.
References
Ярцева, В.Н. Языкознание. Большой энциклопедический словарь / В.Н. Ярцева. – М.: Большая Российская энциклопедия, 1998. – С. 590.
Cap, P. Language and legitimization: Developments on the proximization model of political discourse analysis / P. Cap // Lodz Papers in Pragmatics. – 2005. – № 1. – P. 7–36.
