Discourse Analysis of Trumps North Korea Interactions

colloquy Analysis of sounds mating Korea InteractionsThe bulge of atomic number 18na tycoon in join States- northwestern Korea modern-day interactionsIntroductionLanguage has an essential role in the projection of policy-making precedent (Foucault in Pitsoe and Letseka, 2012). Besides creation an instrument for communication, it similarly serves as a tool for projecting power, (Bordieu, 1977), portraying certain double to the listening and turning the overts attention to pcticular matters (Behr, Iyengar and Cohen cited in Sirin and Villalobos, 2018). to a fault, vocabulary notify be a tool for power to realize what it is known as the keeping of common sense (Jones andW atomic number 18ing, 1999, p. 34), so as to consider certain semi governmental orientation to the extent of it being voluntarily considered by the unexclusive as part of shargond system of principles, what Fairclough calls the manu detailure of consent (2001, p. 3). Already a disputable public f igure, Donald go around, since the actually beginning of his mandate, has been known for his contentious treat. His inaugural row showed the early signs of the palaveral rift (Sirin and Villalobos, 2018) from his predecessor, whose positive rhetoric greatly differs from Trumps contradict and sharp extractments. Even though it is not old seeing Trump explicitly addressing round early(a) countries in a discrediting dash (Watkins and Phillip, 2018) and despite the fact that US- compass north Korean transaction commence been try since the Cold War (IBP USA, 2005), refreshed forms of communication, combined with the new US presidents fondness of public attention, among other f fakers, nurture generated a tug-of-war situation around such risky issues as land-wide security. The aim of this essay, thus, is to analyse how power is being projected in US- mating Korea interactions finished discourse analysis.In terms of methodology, s of all timeal texts depart be studie d. Speeches say by US President Donald Trump and North Korean giving medication statements have been chosen for this matter. Prior to our analysis, it is important to address the fact that North Korea public communication features a graduate(prenominal) level of censorship, scoring the get freeing place in the Reporters with bug egress Borders 2017 World Press granting immunity Index (Reporters Without Borders, 2017). Regarding texts issued by the unify States side, the sources consulted have formalized status (The White House and Donald Trumps ordained Twitter) but the Government of North Korea does not have an open- rag official website in English. For this reason, the exclusively primary source is the official newspaper of the inter shift committal of the Workers Party of Korea Rodong Sunmun. In terms of the procedure, the essay leave behind be pore first gearly on a general learning of the elements of communication secondly, it leave behind consider grammar ana lysis and thirdly, aspects connect to the lexical level will be addressed. This way, the projection of power will be assessed by these elements following a slender discourse Analysis model, as check to Simpson and Mayr it is the most blanket(prenominal) endeavour to develop a theory of the interconnectedness of discourse, power, ideology and sociable structure (2010, p. 51).Discourse AnalysisElements of communicationFor this section, we will use,among others, the Jakobson criteria model presented in Barbara Johnstones intelligenceDiscourse Analysis (Jakobson in Johnstone, 2002, p.220), which includesan addresser, an addressee and message. In the first speech presented, Remarks by President Trump to the 72ndSession of the fall in Nations e realday Assembly (Trump, 2017) thesecomponents will play a very important role. The addresser is Donald Trump inthe sense that he is the aspire source. However, in the first line, he statesthat it is a profound honorto stand here in my theme city, as a representative of the Ameri squeeze out people, to addressthe people of the world. (Trump, 2017). This is the first sign of powerprojection with this statement, Trump is implying that everything he will elevate comes not only from him but is also endorsed by the people in hiscountry. In other words, his message is not personalized it comes from the UnitedStates to the world and, indirectly, to North Korea. This is not the case withState of the Union Speech, as it is targeted at the United States in particularand not at an world-wide presidential term as the United Nations. Thus, due tothe varied nature of 2 communications, both messages will have differentrepercussions in terms of projection of power as there is an increase in legitimacy by including addressees inthe message (Johnstone, 2002, p.46).In the case of North Korea specimens, we see that Kim Jong-Un himself is hardly ever the person who directly conveys the message but a government official. In the first example, the addresser is the North Korean Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Nonethe slight, in the other selected text, he is the one to de recogniser the response to Trumps speech in the Office of the United Nations, fact which could be considered as a way to project power itself, as he only speaks in very rare occasions (Smith, 2017) and this is one of them.Regarding the addressee, it is important to underline that there are some differences in terms of direct referencing. North Koreas discourse displays direct explicit references of the United States. In Trump speeches, however, this is highly dependent on the context where the discourse takes place. piece speeches thought to be delivered in an international scenario, such as the one pronounced in the Office of the United Nations, feature a much serious rhetoric, it is not uncommon to let direct descriptions, like Rocket Man in communications sexual climax directly from Trump in more informal contexts or transmit of commun ication, such as Twitter. On the other hand, as stated before, North Korea lacks this man-to-man dimension as statements hardly ever come from its attracter himself. It terms of projection of power, this clearly states a difference Donald Trump is a public figure, as the president of the United States but also, as an individual persona with his own opinions. Kim Jong-Un, on the other hand, not only is not separated from his position (he does not have a private acquit of communication) but does not appear in the public international scenario. This way, an go steady of unreachability is portrayed, as if he did not participate directly in this issue. Finally, the line of products of communicationis also worth mentioning. Donald Trump is an avid Twitter drug user (36,900 tweets)(Trump, 2018b), which nooky be used not only as a way of communication but alsoas a way of portraying influence. The very same act of communicating by socialmedia has a strong connotation in terms of proj ecting power. In the firstplace, due to its spontaneous nature, this tool enables to reach a high numberof people (Sirin and Villalobos, 2008) in seconds. Most importantly, joint discourseactivitycreates and corroborate shared membership in a community ofpractice (Wenger in Johnstone, 2002, p.116). Twitter has its own textual conventions. Due to its capacity of reach the public and the brevity of the messages, language tends to be direct and informal. Even though political discourse is highly stylized and predictable most of the time (Edelman in Lim, 2008, p. 4), it is highly noticeable how Trumps discourse finished social media is nowhere scrawny traditional presidential rhetoric and his remarks feature closely bantering language. We foundation see this in the hale-known nuclear pushing tweet, where he states that his button is bigger than the North Korean attracters (Trump, 2018b). It would be relevant to mobilize that this is part of a political system in the sense that power thunder mug be projected by highly intellectual rhetoric but also by disregarding the formality aspect pass judgment fetching into fib the type of interaction (Fairclough, 2001). In simpler words, informal language could be used to downplay North Korean threats. On the other hand,North Koreas official channel of communication is a perfect example of one ofFaircloughs minds. He supports that the access to discourse itself is as muchof a good as economic wealth (Fairclough, 2001). If one were to access theKorea Central intelligence information Agency, it would be impossible to find much information, asaccess is highly restricted and the system does not allow to search for morethan a couple of statements if subscription is not paid. Thus, the channel ofcommunication is this case is a tool for projecting power by not providinginformation, being the admit opposite of Trumps case. GrammarAgency in sharesIn the first place, we are going to analyse these texts in terms of gra mmar as grammatical and semantic forms rout out be used as ideological instruments (Fowler et al. cited in Simpson and Mayr, 2010, p. 50). To start with, our study will focus on performance. Agency is expressed in grammar by dint of the use of the passive or the dynamical voice as this is a way to determine which participants are actors and which ones are the recipients of the action. One signifi deposet distinction of the selected extracts from Trump is the lack of use of passive voice except for two cases which will be later addressed. We can see that in sureness and disdainful powers seek to collapse the values, the systems, and alliances that prevented conflict (Trump, 2018a), where the fact that North Korea (or authoritarian politicss) is trying to end with the current state of peace is stated indirectly. Also Trump is making an implicit reference, which can be used in political discourse as a way to evade business (Simpson and Mayr, 2010, p.43). We find another examp le in this same text no regime has oppressed its own citizens more totally or brutally than the cruel dictatorship in North Korea. Again, the regime is the main actor through the use of personalization and the use of active voice. in that respect is a change of meaning amid citizens have been oppressed by the regime and the regime has oppressed the citizens as the centre of the action has been shifted. However, it is significant to point out that the passive voice is used twice in the extract related to North Korea in the State of the Union speech (Trump, 2018a) and it is when Trump tells the twaddle of a North Korean defector (he was tortured by North Korean authorities and his father was caught trying to escape). In this part of the speech, the centre of the action has shifted through the use of passive voice and it is not the North Korean regime anymore but the defector. We can see how here the human factor is what is important, appealing to the more steamy aspect by making this defector the passive subject of the sentence. There are kindred strategies in North Koreans response. While the majority of sentencesin the text are introduced by verbs in active voice, there are some cases wheresubjects have been changed into objects. We can see this in the prevailingserious circumstances, in which the situation on the Korean peninsula has beenrendered tense as never before (The invigorated York Times, 2017). The agent isunknown, which can be, according to Johnstone, due to the fact that it is unknown,obviousorunimportant as well as a way of hidinganagentwhoisknown (2002, p. 46). However, althoughthe attempt to conceal the agent could be argued, it is noticeable that thesame verb (to render) has been used meet a line on a lower floor (Trump has rendered theworld restless through threats and blackmail against all countries in the world),this time in active voice, with a clear agent, establishing thus a direct linkbetween the existing tension and the Presiden ts actions. There is a similarcase Should theKorean peninsula and the world be embroiled in the crucible of nuclear warbecause of the reckless nuclear war mania of the U.S. (Rodong NewsTeam, 2017), wherethe use of the passive voice and the verb embroil suggest that this situationis almost circumstantial, as neitherKorea nor the world would be taking part in this conflict and would findthemselves in the middle of a war. Agency in pronounsAs Fairclough mentions, pronouns in English can establish different relations (2001). In Trumps statements, it is worth noting that the first person of the plural form appears throughout the whole text (i.e. our military will soon be the strongest or the whammy of our planet). The sentence I intend to address some of the very serious threats before us today, which belongs to the United Nations speech, is especially revealing. With this statement, Trump is essentially conveying that North Korean threat is not only an attack to his country, but the a ddressees as well this matter involves the world and not exactly one nation. However, it is also important to point out that the use of the pronoun we, especially as inclusive, can be used to isolated responsibility and agency and a method to share responsibilities (Simpson and Mayr, 2010, p. 44). In this case, taking into consideration that the addressee is the United Nations and that Donald Trump does not coarsely hide his intentions towards North Korea, it would be more appropriate to think that he is trying to convey a message of unity against this country, an attempt to remove the rest of nations, preferably of aiming at concealing his opinions. In consequence, by using this pronoun, power has shifted, as now it would not be US against North Korea but North Korea against the United Nations. Unlike Trumps statement at the United Nations,Kim Jong-Un response contains just one inclusive pronoun. As it has beenmentioned, it is very rare that the Korean attraction himself deli vers a speechpersonally. Nonetheless, he is the direct addresser in this response and heshows it by always using the pronoun I. This way, Kim Jong-Unsstatement is portrayed as a reaction toa personal attack. Trumps words were not only targeted atNorth Korea but his leader himself. Thus, the figure of the leader, alreadyvery prominent in this nation, is even more enhanced. Power, in this case, is portrayedby focusing the interaction solely onone (or two, with Trump) participants. LexicalaspectsWe have also regarded the analysis of vocabulary as something very relevant, as choices somewhat naming and wording deciding what to call something can constitute a claim about it (Johnstone, 2002, p. 46) In this regard, we will consider referencing and fables. In other words, we will focus in the way each participant refers to the other. It is usual to find implicit referencing to North Korea in Trumps discourse and many times this is done using allegorys, which are well-known to the public such as the famous excite and fury (NBC News, 2017). In the selected texts, we can find that Trump talks about authoritarian regimes as the scourge of our planet (Trump, 2017) without mentioning directly North Korea. However, he mentions it a line below as a way of example. This strategy appears in Johnstones book Discourse Analysis under the name of presupposition, where the public is delivering information implicitly and leaving it to the hearer to deduce meaning and make assumptions (Johnstone, 2002, p.43). The same strategy is used the same text if the righteous many do not confront the wicked few, then evil will triumph. In this case, he refers to these regimes (and, ultimately, North Korea) as wicked but, more importantly, he is implicitly referring with the word righteous not only to himself, as taking into flyer that this speech is pronounced at the United Nations, this serves as an appeal to engage for the rest of countries. Lastly, in his speech for the State of the Unio nof 2018, several references are made through allegorys which are related to theidea of North Korea being a nation deprived from freedom. We can see that inthe last-place part, where Trump tells the story of a North Korean defector, is ametaphor itself. This is becomes clear in the final sentence he states sayingthat Seong-hos twaddle is a testament to the yearning of every human soul tolive in freedom. Regarding North Korea, Kim Jong-Uns use of metaphors is also instead relevant. In the response speech (The New York Times, 2017), a constant metaphor exists in which the North Korean leader associates Trump with an animal, specifically, a drag. We can see that in the idiomatic sentence a frightened dog barks louder. This implicit reference becomes explicit at the end of the speech, (I will surely and definitely tame the mentally deranged U.S. dotard with fire), through the use of the verb to tame which, according to the Oxford Dictionary online, means make less powerful and easie r to control but also to domesticate (an animal). He also uses the expression with fire, retaking Trumps statement (fire and fury), which could be considered as a response. Also in this speech, we can see that, while he refers to himself as a man representing the DPRK, appealing to the Democratic in Democratic Popular Korean Republic he calls Trump the man place the prerogative of the supreme command in the US, appealing to the fact that he is the sole person holding the power. In terms of projection of power, metaphors are an essential part of political discourse as they can change the addressees perspective on the referent or topic that is the target of the metaphor, by making the addressee spirit at it from a different conceptual commonwealth or dummy (Steen, 2008, p.22) and an important means of conceptualizing political issues and constructing world views (Charteris-Black, 2004, p. 48). In this case, we can state that they are a resource to engrain in public opinion a certa in association so the audience can identify an idea with a concept belonging to their reality, which Simpson and Mayr refer to as target domain and source domain respectively (2010, p.43).ConclusionsFrom our analysis we can conclude that power is being portrayed in the language of North Korea-US interactions in different ways in the first place, by an increase of legitimacy on the part of Donald Trump by including the American people and the United Nations as addressers. Secondly, by making explicit references. We see a change in the language of Donald Trump in cases where the addressees differ. While in an international context, references are more implicit, we see an explicitation process when the speech is pronounced at a national event or come through a personal way channel of communication.Thirdly, by restricting access to information. Finding official statements made by Donald Trump is much easier than finding North Korean official sources. Information from this country, thus, would be reserved only to a few people. In this regard, the exposure to the public is also relevant. The North Korean leader does not appear usually in the media which, on the one hand, portrays an image of unreachability and, on the other, increases the importance of the occasions when he does. Fourthly, by the position of agency through the use of active and voice and pronouns. Shifting agency is effective when portraying to the audience who does what. Lastly, through the use of metaphors, also present on both sides. While Trump intends to lead the public to assumptions and evoke the excited side of the story, Kim Jong-Un uses this resource for the portrayal of authority downplaying Trumps and this, establishing an round-backed relation of power. As Simpson and Mayr state (2010, p.4) language is influenced by ideology. By analysing the elements studied in this essay, it can be said that ideology can also be affected by language. In the case of United States-North Korean intera ctions, where current events keep changing the international scenario and taking into account that discourse is one of the principal activities through which ideology is circulated and reproduced (Foucault in Johnstone, 2002, p.45), it will be relevant to keep observing both countries discourse from the projection of power perspective. BibliographyBourdieu, P. (1977)Outlineofatheoryofpractice. CambridgeCambridgeUniversityPressCharteris-Black, J.(2004) Corpus Approaches to CriticalMetaphor Analysis. Basingstoke and New York Palgrave. MacmillanFairclough, N.(2001)Languageandpower. 2nd edition.London Longman IBP USA (2005)Us Korea North Political and EconomicRelations Handbook. Washington DC planetary Business Publications.Johnstone,B. (2002)DiscourseAnalysis.OxfordBlackwellJones, J.,S. Wareing (1999) Language and politics. In Thomas, L. and S. Wareing. eds. Language, society and power. London andNew York Routledge, pp. 31-47.Lim, E.T. (2008)Theanti-intellectualpresidency. New York Ox ford University PressNBC News (2017) Donald Trump North Korea impart Be Met With Fire And Fury online. Available from Youtube accessed 3 February 2017Pitsoe, V.M.,Letseka(2012)Foucaults Discourse andPower Implications for Classroom Management. Open Journal of Philosophy, 3(1), pp. 23-28Reporters without Borders (2017) 2017 World Press Freedom Index. Reporters Without Borders online, 26 April. Available from https//rsf.org/en/ranking accessed 1 February 2018 Rodong News Team, (2017) FM Spokesman on Planned Joint Aerial Drill by U.S. and S. Korea. Rodong Sinmun online, 5 December. Available from accessed 31 January 2018Semino, E. (2008) Metaphorin Discourse. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.Simpson, P., A. Mayr (2010) Language and power A resource book for students. London RoutledgeSirin, C. and Villalobos, J. (2018)Rhetoric,PublicPolitics, and Security. In Conley, R. ed.Presidential leadingandNationalSecurityTheObamaLegacyandTrumpTrajectory. New York Routledge, pp. 19-42Smith, M. (2017) Kim Jong-Un calls Trumps UN speech annunciation of war and brands US president mentally deranged in rare speech. The Daily Mirror online, 21 September. Available from accessed 3 February 2018Steen, G.J. (2008) The paradox of metaphor Why we need athree-dimensional model for metaphor in Metaphor& Symbol 23(4), 213-241.The New York Times (2017) Full Text of Kim Jong-uns Response to President Trump. The New York Times online, 22 September. Available from accessed 27 January 2018Trump, D.(2018a) President Donald J. Trumps Stateof the Union Address. Capitol Building, Washington, 31 January.Trump, D.(2017) Remarks by President Trump to the72nd Session of the United Nations General Assembly. Office of the UnitedNations in New York, 19 September. Trump, D. (2018b) 2 January. Available at accessed 23 JanuaryWatkins, E., A. Phillip (2018) Trump decries immigrants from shithole countries coming to US. CNN online , 12 January. Available from accessed 5 February 2018