PDF
ZENODO
Published
2025-06-21
Section
Articles
How to Cite
How to Cite
SOFT POWER IN SYNTAX: THE SEMIOTICS OF MODERN DIPLOMATIC RHETORIC
Khamrakulova Ravshanoy
Department of Exact and Natural Sciences, Fergana State University
Mamatova Matluba
Department of Exact and Natural Sciences, Fergana State University
Keywords: Diplomatic discourse, political speech, rhetorical strategy, morphological analysis, paralinguistic features
Abstract
This article examines four high-profile diplomatic speeches' linguistic, morphological, and paralinguistic features, emphasising their rhetorical construction, lexical choices, and performative strategies. Drawing on speeches delivered by Ambassador Scott C. Miller and a senior British diplomat, the study analyzes how political actors strategically blend formal rhetoric with emotional and symbolic language to promote national identity, reinforce international alliances, and sustain geopolitical legitimacy. By employing a comparative discourse analysis framework, the article situates these speeches within the broader contexts of contemporary soft power diplomacy and science diplomacy, highlighting the evolving nature of political communication in a globalised, media-driven world.
References
1. Beard, A. (2000). The language of politics. Routledge.
2. Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
3. Chilton, P., & Schäffner, C. (1997). Discourse and politics. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 206–230). Sage.
4. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
5. Gluckman, P., Turekian, V., Grimes, R. W., & Kishi, T. (2017). Science diplomacy: A pragmatic perspective from the inside. Science & Diplomacy, 6(4).
6. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
7. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
8. Schäffner, C. (1996). Building a European house? Or at two speeds into a dead end? Metaphors in the debate on the united Europe. In A. Musolff, C. Good, P. Points, & R. Wittlinger (Eds.), Attitudes towards Europe: Language in the unification process (pp. 31–59). Ashgate.
9. Turekian, V. C., Macindoe, S., Copeland, D., Davis, L. S., Patman, R. G., & Gluckman, P. D. (2015). The emergence of science diplomacy. In S. D. Turekian, V. C. Turekian, & L. S. Davis (Eds.), Science diplomacy: New day or false dawn? (pp. 3–24
