NGUYỄN THU PHƯƠNGA CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ON ENGLISH POLITICAL CARTOONS PHÂN TÍCH DIỄN NGÔN PHÊ PHÁN VỀ TRANH BIẾM HỌA CHÍNH TRỊ TIẾNG ANH Minor thesis Field: English Linguistics Co
R ATIONALE
The relationship between language and worldview has captivated humanity for millennia: does language shape our perception of reality, or merely reflect it? While objective language is often assumed, language use is fundamentally social, influenced by factors like upbringing, ethnicity, gender, and education.
Successful reading comprehension, especially of journalistic texts and graphics, transcends mere linguistic proficiency Second-language readers, particularly Vietnamese readers, often encounter challenges due to reliance on native sociocultural conventions, leading to misunderstandings Effective reading necessitates not only mastering the target language's grammar and pronunciation but also understanding its cultural context, crucial for interpreting visual media like pictures and cartoons.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), a relatively new approach to text analysis, examines how language is used to create and maintain power imbalances and social inequalities Focusing on social problems, CDA prioritizes the perspectives of marginalized groups, critically analyzing those in power and exploring how discourse contributes to domination This politically engaged methodology aims for social change by uncovering hidden ideological assumptions within texts, ultimately contributing to the struggle for power equality.
Cartoons, with their rich history and societal significance, offer a potent source of communication, employing words and drawings to achieve diverse effects While often humorous, cartoons—especially political cartoons—can also convey serious messages about important issues They provide valuable insights into cultures, lifestyles, and national identities.
This case study employs Critical Discourse Analysis to uncover hidden political opinions within English political cartoons It also investigates Vietnamese readers' comprehension of these cartoons, comparing their interpretations to those of native English speakers, identifying causes of misunderstanding, and suggesting improvements in cross-cultural communication.
S COPE OF THE S TUDY
This CDA study of English political cartoons analyzes linguistic devices, symbolism, and conversational implicature within their political and social contexts While acknowledging the importance of global context and cartoonist gender, the research focuses primarily on the cartoons' inherent linguistic and symbolic features.
A IMS OF THE S TUDY
The objectives of the study on English Political Cartoons from CDA standpoint include:
- To provide a theoretical background of CDA- its concepts, its analysis procedures as well as its role in linguistics
- To find out hidden political opinions in the English Political Cartoons.
- To investigate the extent to which Vietnamese readers of English understand the messages embedded in English Political cartoons.
R ESEARCH Q UESTIONS
In order to realize these above aims, the case study is supposed to answer the following research questions:
- How are political opinions embedded in English Political Cartoons?
- Do Vietnamese readers of English understand what is intended to be conveyed via the cartoons?
- What are the causes of misunderstanding?
M ETHODS OF THE S TUDY
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) isn't a single method but a diverse set of approaches focusing on detailed textual analysis, combining interdiscursive analysis with linguistic and semiotic methods (Wodak & Meyer, 2001; Fairclough, 2001) Methodological choices, including data selection, collection, and analysis, depend on the research question, leading to the use of various techniques in CDA studies.
This case study employs quantitative and qualitative methods, including explanatory and contrastive analysis, to interpret data-driven findings.
O RGANIZATION OF THE S TUDY
The study includes three parts as follows:
Part A: Introduction, presents the rationale, the aims, the scope and the methods of the study as well as the organization of the study.
Part B: Development, the main part of the thesis and consists of three chapters:
This chapter discusses the theoretical background related to Critical Discourse Analysis.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) examines discourse's relationship to power, focusing on its characteristics, principles, and aims This involves understanding discourse itself and analyzing how it functions, particularly within the context of political cartoons, which utilize visual rhetoric to convey meaning and exert influence Political cartoons, therefore, provide a rich case study for applying CDA principles to understand the interplay between power dynamics and communication.
This chapter first restates the three research questions then gives the detailed description of the study, which includes data collection instrument, subjects and data collection procedure.
- Chapter 3: Presentation and Discussion of the results
This thesis presents a data analysis, in-depth discussion of results, and a synthesis of major findings to provide a comprehensive overview.
Part C: Conclusion, summarizes the major findings and also deals with the limitation of the study as well as suggests the further study.
Apart from the three main parts, the two survey questionnaires (one for native readers and one for non-native readers) are also included as appendix.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theories on Critical Discourse Analysis
1.1.1 What is Critical Discourse Analysis?
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), emerging in the 1970s amidst formal linguistic research, focuses on language's role in societal power structures Pioneered by scholars like Kress, van Dijk, Fairclough, and Wodak, CDA's broad scope and complex nature make concise definition challenging, as evidenced by Wodak's (2001) summary of its diverse applications.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) distinguishes itself through its critical perspective, challenging assumptions, reductionism, and power structures This "critical" approach involves skepticism, self-reflection, and proposing alternatives, rather than simple negativity.
The concept of CDA has been discussed for long CDA encompasses a number of general tenets and uses a large range of techniques In simple words, Van Dijk (1988) defines CDA as
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) examines written and spoken communication to uncover how power, dominance, inequality, and bias are created, sustained, replicated, and changed within specific social, economic, political, and historical contexts.
Fairclough (1997) defines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as the study of the relationship between discourse and socio-cultural structures, focusing on how power relations shape discourse and how this relationship is often obscured CDA investigates how discursive practices arise from and reinforce power struggles, analyzing the opacity of this connection as a means of maintaining power.
In general, the answer to such (critical) questions as “What is critical discourse analysis?”,
Critical discourse analysis (CDA) distinguishes itself from other discourse analyses by focusing on the relationships between discourse, power structures, social inequality, and dominance Its aims involve uncovering these power dynamics through specialized methods, grounded in a theoretical framework that examines the analyst's own position within these social relationships.
Critical discourse analysis examines how discourse reproduces and challenges social dominance, defined as elite power resulting in inequality across various dimensions (political, cultural, class, ethnic, racial, and gender) This involves analyzing how texts and talk support, enact, represent, legitimize, deny, mitigate, or conceal dominance Researchers investigate textual properties contributing to these power dynamics, ultimately aiming to expose and resist social inequality through dissident research.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) distinguishes itself from other sociolinguistic approaches through several key characteristics, as highlighted by Meyer (2001) Its identity is defined by its differentiation from alternative methodologies.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) uniquely addresses power imbalances, unlike methods with predetermined approaches Its critical perspective exposes hidden power relationships to achieve practically relevant results, focusing on research questions that advocate for socially disadvantaged groups.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) uniquely considers a wide array of extra-linguistic factors—cultural, societal, and ideological—influencing texts, unlike other sociolinguistic approaches This stems from CDA's foundational premise that all discourses are historically situated and require contextual understanding, encompassing social-psychological, political, and ideological components for an interdisciplinary approach.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) uniquely views the language-society relationship as mediated, not deterministic, unlike approaches like conversation analysis This mediation is central to CDA, incorporating Halliday's multifunctional linguistics and concepts of discourse orders (Fairclough) and sociocognitive levels (van Dijk).
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) uniquely integrates specific linguistic categories, primarily a limited range of devices, into its analysis While methods beyond CDA may analyze categories like deixis and pronouns, these are crucial for CDA's examination of the linguistic surface, both explicitly and implicitly.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is interdisciplinary, examining its subject from diverse perspectives and iteratively refining analysis through data collection CDA's approach most closely aligns with sociological and socio-psychological viewpoints, though these connections aren't uniformly defined across all applications.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) uniquely integrates a critical problem-solving approach with multidisciplinary perspectives, considering extralinguistic factors like culture, society, and ideology This approach emphasizes the mediating role of language in shaping societal relations, distinguishing CDA from other discourse analysis methods.
1.1.3 Principles and Aims of CDA
Titscher et al (2000), using the work of Wodak (1996), summarize the general principles of CDA as follows:
- CDA is concerned with social problems It is concerned with language or language use,but with the linguistic character of social and cultural processes and structures.
- Power-relations have to do with discourse, and CDA studies both power in discourse and power over discourse.
Discourse shapes society and culture, while simultaneously being shaped by them; each instance of language use either reinforces or alters existing social, cultural, and power structures.
- Language use may be ideological To determine this it is necessary to analyze texts to investigate their interpretation, reception and social effects.
Understanding discourse requires considering its historical context; meaning is derived from usage within a specific situation, mirroring Wittgenstein's metatheoretical approach.
Background knowledge about Cartoons
1.2.1 What are Cartoons and Political Cartoons?
The word cartoon has various meanings, based on several very different forms of visual art and illustration The term has evolved over time.
The original meaning was in fine art and there cartoon meant a preparatory drawing for a piece of art such as a painting or tapestry.
Originally used for humorous magazine and newspaper illustrations, cartooning now encompasses creative visual work across print, electronic media, animation, and digital platforms.
In print media, "cartoon" typically refers to a humorous, single-panel drawing, often captioned but lacking speech balloons, unlike comic strips.
Technological advancements in the late 19th century enabled the rise of daily newspaper cartoons, exemplified by Walt McDougall's impactful 1884 New York World front-page cartoon Editorial or political cartoons provide visual commentary on current events, often using satire to convey a political viewpoint or enhance editorial articles.
1.2.2 General characteristics of Political Cartoons
Political cartoons employ hyperbole, symbolism, and often humor to convey complex political messages concisely For instance, an elephant symbolizes the Republican Party, a shorthand more efficient than depicting its entire membership.
Political cartoons use symbolism to transcend educational barriers, connecting with diverse audiences through shared understanding of visual metaphors A simple image, like giving money to an elephant, can evoke laughter and understanding regardless of literacy level.
Political cartoons use visual analogies to connect images with relevant issues, relying on reader interpretation Meaning is derived from recognizing these analogies, which can be challenging if based on obscure contemporary, historical, or literary references Understanding the broader cultural and visual discourse, including caricature and visual analogy as rhetorical devices, is crucial for interpreting cartoon meaning.
Political cartoons rely on shared cultural memory—contextual knowledge of the subject, understanding of visual language and rhetorical devices, recognition of historical and cultural allusions, and awareness of the genre's conventions—for effective communication A lack of this shared understanding renders cartoons opaque, highlighting the importance of this shared cultural memory for successful interpretation.
Political cartoons offer a concise, humorous critique of current events, simplifying complex issues into easily digestible visuals Their accessibility transcends literacy, making political commentary readily available to a broad audience.
Political cartoons, found in major newspapers globally, use caricature, symbolism, and satire to express opinions on public issues and officials Their subtle meanings require careful consideration by the reader, demanding a nuanced understanding from both the cartoonist and the audience.
This chapter reviews diverse linguists' approaches to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), highlighting the varied analytical focuses within the field Researchers must therefore select a suitable analytical approach for their own work This thesis employs a discourse approach to analyze English political cartoons, revealing the discursive power of language and visuals in expressing the cartoonist's socio-political views.
METHODOLOGY
Data Collection Methods
This study analyzes participants' interpretations of nine English-language cartoons using open-ended questions, assessing individual comprehension without external influence Participants identify linguistic, visual, and contextual cues informing their understanding of each cartoon's message.
Sample of data collection instruments as follows:
1 What are the message and the humor in the cartoon?
2 What help you derive the political opinions behind the cartoon?
- Which words or phrases appear to be the most significant? Why?
- Which objects are used as symbols in the cartoon?
- What do you think each symbol mean?
- Who would agree/disagree with the cartoon‟s message? Why?
- What might be the public‟s reaction to this cartoon?
This study analyzed cartoons sourced from reputable publications including Newsweek, The New Yorker, and The Times, as well as established online archives like cartoonstock.com and cartoongallery.co.uk.
The selection of the cartoons under study was based on the following criteria:
- The cartoons must consist of drawings as well as words to serve the purpose of a linguistics study.
- The cartoons look strange, interesting, and funny but not too challenging so that the readers can understand them (especially for non-native readers).
- The cartoons must convey political issues such as power, dominance, prejudge discrimination, and/or racism etc.
This case study required advanced English speakers motivated to interpret English cartoons Ten Vietnamese participants were selected: five journalists from Vietnam News' Life and Style Division, and five English teachers from Hanoi University of Industry's Foreign Languages Faculties All participants regularly use English professionally, with journalists leveraging cartoons to creatively report on diverse global issues, and teachers using cartoons as effective pedagogical tools to enhance language learning and cultural understanding.
To assess comprehension, a benchmark was established by comparing the understanding of ten Vietnamese English learners with that of five native English-speaking readers These native readers, experienced professionals in education and business, provided a reliable standard for interpretation.
Cartoon interpretation varies widely, even among native speakers, stimulating imagination and critical thinking However, cartoonists create with an ideal viewer possessing specific linguistic and cultural knowledge in mind Native speakers more closely fit this ideal, better understanding the intended message, providing crucial feedback for the cartoon creation process.
Native speakers (NR) and non-native speakers (NNR) completed a survey on English political cartoons Three NR provided direct responses; two submitted answers via email Analysis of these responses established a benchmark of common interpretations, revealing significant similarity among NR interpretations despite varied analytical approaches.
A study compared Vietnamese English-language readers' interpretations of English cartoons to those of native English speakers using a ten-person questionnaire Participants independently interpreted cartoons, identifying contributing linguistic, graphic, and narrative elements Contact information was retained for follow-up clarification.
This study compared Vietnamese and native English speakers' comprehension of English cartoons, analyzing their use of language and graphics to identify sources of misinterpretation among Vietnamese readers Findings, while limited by sample size, highlight key factors influencing non-native comprehension of English cartoons.
CHAPTER 3 PRESENTATION AND DISCUSION OF
This chapter analyzes how political viewpoints are embedded in cartoons and how Natural Language Reasoning (NNR) can interpret them, exploring potential sources of misunderstanding It presents survey results and individual analyses of nine cartoons, culminating in a summary of key findings and a broader discussion.
Interpreting hidden messages in English political cartoons proves challenging for non-native readers (NNR), with less than a third correctly understanding the intended message compared to native readers (NR) A significant percentage of NNRs left cartoons uninterpreted, highlighting the need for a more detailed analysis of individual cartoons to fully assess comprehension levels.
Cartoon analysis reveals the political power dynamics inherent in language and visuals Power in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is broadly defined as cognitive influence achieved through persuasion or manipulation Cartoonists wield this power through media access and their ability to shape public opinion and influence policymakers Their power stems from manipulating language, graphics, and context to frame events and exclude alternative interpretations, thereby raising awareness and indirectly influencing policy.
In the light of the above theory, the following part will deal with each cartoon individually.The orders of the cartoons do not serve any special purposes.
A July 21, 2008, New Yorker cover depicting Barack Obama in Muslim attire and his wife as a terrorist sparked controversy, drawing objections from both the Obama and McCain campaigns.
Barry Blitt's controversial New Yorker cover depicts President Obama in Muslim attire and Michelle Obama in military gear, with a burning American flag and a Bin Laden portrait in the Oval Office The magazine issued a statement regarding the image.
"combines a number of fantastical images about the Obamas and shows them for the obvious distortions they are."
Foreign readers interpret the piece as satire targeting rumors about Barack Obama, including claims he is Muslim, anti-American, and secretly aligned with al-Qaeda, plotting to undermine the U.S The satire lampoons these caricatures.
Senator Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive.
The image, a clear parody, was immediately recognized as such by NNR However, its perfect encapsulation of vicious anti-Obama smears meant it could easily be mistaken for genuine propaganda.