Self-Image Projection in Mohammed Bin Salman's Political Interviews: A Pragma-Semantic Approach to Political Discourse Analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1606.25Keywords:
Mohammed bin Salman, political interviews, pragmatics, self-image projection, semanticsAbstract
This paper presents a political discourse analysis (PDA) of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s (MBS) interviews. The main purpose of the paper is to show how the image of a competent political leader is linguistically rendered by various linguistic practices in the selected interviews. The paper draws on political discourse analysis as discussed by Chilton (2004) and Chilton and Schaffner (2002). The analytical focus is on demonstrating how a positive self-image is communicated linguistically and deciphering the socio-political meanings encoded in the selected interviews at the pragmatic and semantic levels of analysis. The corpus of this study constitutes four interviews conducted with MBS: his interview with CBS TV in 2019, his interview on Vision 2030 broadcast on Saudi national TV in 2021, his interview with The Atlantic in 2022, and his interview with FOX News in 2023. The study depends on a mixed-method approach manifested in the employment of both quantitative and qualitative analyses. There are three main findings in this paper: First, in the selected interviews, MBS not only does politics but also projects a positive self-image by presenting himself as a solidary and collective, decisive, diplomatic, human-rights observer, and broader-goals-seeking leader. Second, these positive characteristics of a competent leader have been linguistically manifested at the pragmatic and semantic levels of analysis. Third, political interviewing is a form of mediatized political discourse that communicates a specific ideology-laden message of politicians.
References
Abdi, R., & Basarati, A. (2016). A critical analysis of the representation of Yemen crisis in ideologically-loaded newspaper headlines. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 16(3), 37–52.
Alaufi, H., & Obeng, S. (2025). Persuasive interactional strategies in the Abdullah Al-Mudaifer-Mohammed Bin Salman interview on Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030: Ecolinguistics study. Ijaz Arabi: Journal of Arabic Learning, 8(1), 288-304.
Alsalem, M. S. (2025). Critical discourse analysis of Bret Baier’s opinion piece in Fox News about his interview with Crown Prince Mohamed Ben Salman. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 15, 49-68.
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovil, N., & Mullett, J. (1990). Equivocal communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Baym, G. (2007). Crafting new communicative models in the televisual sphere: Political interviews on The Daily Show. The Communication Review, 10(2), 93-115.
Boris, V. T. (2012). Lexical borrowings: Linguistic and didactics aspects. Journal of Siberian Federal University: Humanities & Social Sciences, 7(5), 944-950.
Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric. The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
Chilton, P. (2004). Analyzing political discourse: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.
Chilton, P., & Schaffner, C. (2002). Politics as text and talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse analysis. John Benjamins.
DeLuca, K. M., & Peeples, J. (2002). From public sphere to public screen: Democracy, activism, and the “violence” of Seattle. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 19, 125-151.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London & New York: Longman.
Fairclough, N. (1998). Political discourse in the media: an analytical framework. In Bell, A. & Garret, P. (Eds.), Approaches to media discourse (pp. 142-162). Oxford.
Fairclough, N., & Fairclough, I. (2012). Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. Routledge.
Feldman, O., Kinoshita, K., & Bull, P. (2017). Failures in leadership: How and why wishy-washy politicians equivocate on Japanese political interviews. Journal of Language and Politics, 16(2), 285-312.
Feldman, O. (2022). Introduction: Political interviews: An analytical model. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 1-21). Springer Nature.
Fetzer, A., & Weizman, E. (2006). Political discourse as mediated and public discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 138(2), 143-153.
Fowler, R. (1991). Language in the news: Discourse and ideology in the press. London: Routledge.
Garfinkel, H. (1994). Studies in Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Gnisci, A., Asterope, M., Casapulla, R., D’Agostino, M., & Perillo, G. (2022). Threat to face and equivocation in televised interviews of Italy’s politicians for and against the 2016 constitutional referendum. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 85-107). Singapore: Springer Nature.
Goźdź-Roszkowski, S. (2021). Corpus linguistics in legal discourse. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law – (Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique), 34(5), 1515-1540.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Vol. 3. Speech acts (pp. 41–58). Academic Press.
Gumperz, J. (1996). Relativity of conversational inference. In Gumperz, J. & Stephen C. Levinson, S. (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 17-37). Cambridge University Press.
Hutchby, I. (2022). Neutrality, non-neutrality, and hybridity in political interviews. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 25-42). Springer Nature.
Íñigo-Mora, I, & Frías-Arenas, J. (2022). Pejoration in political interviews: Contrasting U.S. president Donald J. Trump with Venezuela president Nicolás Maduro. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 295-314). Springer Nature.
Kantara, A. (2022). Manifestations of integrated hybridity in journalistic questioning during the 2012 elections in Greece. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 43-62). Springer Nature.
Khafaga, A. (2021). Exploring ideologies of function words in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 29(3), 2089-2111.
Khafaga, A. (2023a). Imperatives as persuasion strategies in political discourse. Linguistics Vanguard, 9(1), 51-62.
Khafaga, A. (2023b). Strategic lexicalization in courtroom discourse: A corpus-assisted critical discourse analysis. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 10(1), 1-27.
Khafaga, A., & Alqahtani, F. (2024). Modalities as persuasion carriers in political discourse. World Journal of English Language, 14(1), 398-410.
Livingstone, S., & Lunt, P. (1994). Talk on television: Audience participation and public debate. London: Routledge.
Lu, S. (2021). Elastic language in persuasion and comforting: A cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 187, 115-117.
Marques, J, Miola, E., Comel, N., & Kniess, A. (2022). Adversarial rhetoric or lapdog journalism? Political interviews during the 2018 Brazilian presidential elections. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 273-294). Springer Nature.
McDonnell, A. (2020). Clinton stated, trump exclaimed! Journal of Language and Politics, 19(1), 71-88.
Patriarche, G. & Zienkowski, J. (2022). Shaping political subjectivity through media and information literacy. Researches in Communication, 54, 271-290.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, G. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the EnglishLanguage. Longman.
Richard, I. (2018). Is legal lexis a characteristic of legal language? Lexis, 11, 1–14.
Sengul, K. (2022). The role of political interviews in mainstreaming and normalizing the far-right: A view from Australia. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 357-375). Springer.
Seraku, T. (2022). Interactional and rhetorical functions of placeholders: A relevance-theoretic approach. Journal of Pragmatics, 187, 118-129.
Shevchenko, I., Goncharova, T., & Gutorov, V. (2020). Cognitive pragmatics of American presidential debates: a case for economic metaphors. Cognition Communication Discourse, 21, 36-49.
Surahmat, S., Wijana, I., & Baskoro, S. (2023). Humor as a political act: study of Indonesian presidents’ humor. Journal of Language and Literature, 23(1), 125-139.
Tan, D., & Al-Rikaby, A. (2022). Aristotelian framing in political discourse. A case Study of Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s exclusive interview with Radio Televisyen Malaysia and the news agency Bernama. In Feldman, O. (Ed.), Adversarial political interviewing: Worldwide perspectives during polarized times (pp. 109-126). Springer Nature.
van Dijk, T. A. (1995). Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. In Christina Schäffne & Anita L. Wenden (Eds.), Language and peace (pp.17- 33). Aldershot.
van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Political discourse and racism: Describing others in western parliaments. In Riggins, H. (Ed.), The language and politics of exclusion: Others in discourse (pp. 31-64). Sage.
van Dijk, T. A. (2004). Discourse, knowledge and ideology: Reformulating old questions and proposing some new solutions. In Martin, P., JoAnne, N., & Van Dijk, T. A. (Eds.), Communicating ideologies: Multidisciplinary perspectives on language, discourse, and social practice (pp. 5-38). Peter Lang.
van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical discourse analysis. In D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, & D. Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 466-485). Wiley-Blackwell.
Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse of politics in action. Palgrave.
Žmavc, J. (2018). Construction of the speaker’s persuasive image in public discourse classical rhetoric revisited. John Benjamins.
