عاطفه سادات میرسعیدی

This study provides a comparative analysis of the rhetorical, pragmatic, and semantic strategies used by English-speaking and Arabic-speaking politicians to manipulate their audiences. By examining political speeches from both linguistic contexts, the research reveals distinct cultural patterns in manipulation. English-speaking politicians often employ direct, fact-based appeals (logos), while Arabic-speaking politicians rely more on emotional and collective identity appeals (pathos). These strategies reflect the cultural and linguistic norms of each group. Additionally, the study highlights the evolving impact of digital media on political communication, showing how manipulative strategies have adapted to new technological platforms. The findings have important implications for political communication strategists, media professionals, and educators. They underscore the need for culturally nuanced communication strategies in cross-cultural political discourse, offer insights for enhancing public media literacy to combat manipulation, and provide a framework for further research into the role of digital platforms in shaping political rhetoric. Additionally, the study highlights the evolving impact of digital media on political communication, showing how manipulative strategies have adapted to new technological platforms. The findings have important implications for political communication strategists, media professionals, and educators. They underscore the need for culturally nuanced communication strategies in cross-cultural political discourse, offer insights for enhancing public media literacy to combat manipulation, and provide a framework for further research into the role of digital platforms in shaping political rhetoric.

This study conducted a critical discourse analysis (CDA) of Arab English-language online newspapers to examine how the Israeli-Lebanese and Israeli-Palestinian conflicts are represented. Employing Fairclough's three-dimensional framework, the research explored the linguistic, discursive, and socio-cultural dimensions of media narratives, integrating framing theory to investigate how these narratives shape public opinion and geopolitical discourse. The study’s design involved the systematic collection and analysis of 50 articles from prominent newspapers such as Al Jazeera English, Al Arabiya English, and Asharq Al-Awsat, selected for their diverse ideological perspectives. The findings revealed distinct ideological framings employed by each outlet, ranging from systemic oppression narratives to calls for regional diplomacy. These narratives are shaped by geopolitical affiliations, cultural identities, and the affordances of digital media, including the role of algorithms and user-generated content. The research highlights how digital tools and social media amplify and polarize discourses, influencing public sentiment and policy debates. By addressing gaps in the literature concerning Arab media’s linguistic strategies and digital affordances, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the interplay between language, power, and ideology in conflict representation. Implications extend to both academic discourse and practical applications, providing a framework for policymakers, peacebuilding organizations, and journalists to critically engage with and promote balanced conflict narratives. This interdisciplinary approach underscores the evolving role of digital media in shaping political realities, offering a nuanced lens for future research on conflict discourse.

This study investigates the pragmastylistic features employed in English and Arabic religious texts, with a specific focus on the concept of rewarding. Drawing on Narmin Abbas Lutfi Baqqal's PhD dissertation, the research examines the pragmatic and stylistic characteristics of rewarding in Biblical and Prophetic Hadith texts. The study addresses two primary research questions: (1) What are the pragmastylistic features used in English and Arabic religious texts to convey rewarding? (2) Which pragmatic and stylistic features are more prevalent in these texts? By analyzing 20 Biblical verses and 20 Prophetic Hadiths, the paper identifies the linguistic and rhetorical devices used to express rewarding, highlighting both similarities and differences between the two languages. The findings reveal that both texts employ declarative and imperative speech acts, deixis, and figurative language, but with distinct stylistic preferences. This study contributes to the fields of pragmatics, stylistics, and religious discourse analysis, offering insights into how language shapes religious messages across different cultural and linguistic contexts.

This article examines gendered patterns in public discourse by analyzing the cognitive and sociolinguistic features of interruptions, turn-taking, and collaborative language during Iraqi TV talk shows. We used a mixed-methods approach to examine transcripts from 20 episodes of TV talk shows in which both male and female guests appeared. This and other studies suggest that there are strong gender-based differences in, for example the per cent of talk with interruptions (evaluated by numerical frequency), topic control or continue, males talking more than females coded as take-talks or pivoting responses, whereas types of type-control regards turn taking was higher among female speakers than male while total degree of fluency to engaged language use. These trends are consistent with Iraq's historical gendered norms — a juxtaposition against American shifts toward more equitable media relations. The main conclusions suggest the significance of cultural constraints in communication, indicating practical paths for media literacy as well as suggestions where sociolinguistic training and gender-inclusive policy design may benefit from a closer look.

This research explored the intricacies of incitement as a speech act in political discourse, particularly in the context of the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. Utilizing a mixed-methods design, the study combined qualitative analyses—focusing on rhetorical structures and pragmatic strategies—with quantitative evaluations of speech act frequencies. The corpus included speeches from prominent political figures delivered between February 2022 and March 2024, selected for their relevance to incitement. The analysis revealed that incitement often straddles the boundary between illocutionary and perlocutionary acts, showcasing how politicians use indirect language to maintain plausible deniability while still mobilizing action. This ambiguity complicates traditional classifications within speech act theory. Furthermore, the study highlights various persuasive strategies employed in political rhetoric, such as emotional appeals and historical analogies.The implications of this research are significant for understanding how language functions as a tool of political power, particularly in conflict situations. It provides insights into ethical considerations surrounding incitement in political communication, suggesting that awareness of linguistic strategies can help prevent escalation of tensions and promote more responsible discourse among leaders.