Language and power in political discourse: a pragmatic analysis of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China

Abstract

This study aims to examine how power is exercised through language in the interactional discourse of the regular press conference (RPC) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China (the MOFA of China). It investigates questions from journalists with different ideological and socio-cultural backgrounds and responses from the conference spokesperson. The data for this study was collected from the official website of the MOFA of China (2017), containing transcripts of RPCs spanning two years from January 2014 to December 2015. The corpus analytical tool, the software program AntConc 3.4.4 (Anthony, 2016), is used to identify the language patterns such as topics, question types, question and response move structures, and (im)politeness strategies in the data. Due to the difficulty in finding an overarching theory for this study, an integrated theoretical framework is drawn upon. It combines critical discourse analysis (CDA) (Fairclough, 1995; van Dijk, 2001) for explaining the intricate power relations embedded in the discourse; footing theory (Goffman, 1981) for examining the varying forms and degrees of the interactants’ involvement and participation; politeness theory (Brown & Levison, 1987) and impoliteness theory (Culpeper, 1996, 2011; Bousfield, 2008) for investigating (im)politeness strategies applied by interactants to maintain or attack face, as well as positioning theory (Davies & Harré, 1990; Harré & van Langenhove, 1999) for exploring the interactants’ construction and negotiation of positioning. Results show that verbal production embedding power relations are constrained by contextual factors such as participants’ roles and goals. Questioning and responding involved in the RPC are by no means mechanical processes of information transaction. They serve the pragmatic function of exercising power and generating influence. Within the context of the RPC, footing shift is used as a linguistic device by journalists and the conference spokesperson to take up positions and show alignment or disagreement. It is also demonstrated that journalists and the spokesperson resort to different linguistic devices to accomplish their roles and goals. In question moves, journalists maintain a harmonious relationship via less restraining open-ended questions or create confrontational situations to challenge the spokesperson with thorny questions, controversial topics, or hostile prefatory statements. Correspondingly, the spokesperson applies politeness strategies in response to seek solidarity or impoliteness strategies to counterattack when challenged. The research findings also show that the device of quotation is important for both sides to construct and convey positionings through the three dimensions of reporting source, reporting verbs, and reported content. This study contributes to the systemic study of Chinese political discourse with an integrated theoretical framework rooted in pragmatics and supplemented by CDA. Furthermore, this study, incorporating the examination of the interplay of power and impoliteness, yields more effective results than relying solely on politeness, thus enriching the politeness study of Chinese political discourse. However, this study has some inherent limitations. One is that it mainly depends on resources accessible through the official website of the MOFA of China, which cannot fully capture the complexities of real-time ongoing interactions. Another reason is that the data used in this study are exclusively in Chinese documents. This can lead to interpretive bias that may alter the original content’s nuances and emphases in analysing the questions posed by journalists in various languages, in which Chinese is dominant.

Date of Award	2023
Original language	English
Awarding Institution	Western Sydney University
Supervisor	Xiangdong Liu (Supervisor) & Chong Han (Supervisor)