Manipulasi Linguistik sebagai Instrumen Politik dalam Animal Farm: Sebuah Analisis Wacana Kritis
Article Sidebar
Published:
Apr 24, 2023
Keywords:
critical discourse analysis, Animal Farm, linguistic manipulation, political power
Main Article Content
Abstract
Politics and language are inextricably linked, and the relationship between the two has long been the subject of philosophical and linguistic study. Through critical discourse analysis, the contemporary linguistic practice seeks to examine language as a form of social practice. Thus, political discourse is seen as a discourse oriented towards concealing power for manipulative purposes, legitimizing discourse practices, and imposing ideologies. This study analyzes the use of linguistic manipulation in George Orwell's "Animal Farm" using van Dijk's socio-cognitive approach. The results of the study of the text, context, and social cognition dimensions of "Animal Farm" show that the political elites in this novel successfully use linguistic manipulation as an instrument to influence members of society with lower language skills to realize the elites' goals. Linguistic manipulation is also used as an instrument to exercise and maintain power. As a proponent of socialism, Orwell revealed the use of political manipulation in "Animal Farm" as a satire of the Stalin-led socialists who had perverted the goals of the Russian revolution for personal and group gain.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Article Details
How to Cite
Pardede, P., Rasyid, Y., & Anwar, M. (2023). Manipulasi Linguistik sebagai Instrumen Politik dalam Animal Farm: Sebuah Analisis Wacana Kritis. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 6(2), 449-466. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v6i2.605
Issue
Section
Articles
Every work in Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, dan Pengajarannya is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- ShareAlike — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a CC BY-SA 4.0 DEED Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Internationalthat allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
References
Abrahamyan, S. (2016). Linguocultural Peculiarities of British Parliamentary Discourse. Armenian Folia Anglistika, 12(2), 66–81. http://www.ysu.am/files/2-1510145528-.pdf
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). Sage publications.
Crick, B. (2019). George Orwell: A Life. Sutherland House Books.
Elaref, A. I. A. (2022). Power’s Manipulation of the Minds and Language’s Creation of Knowledge: Foucault’s Power/Knowledge as Depicted in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. Journal of Qena Faculty of Arts, 54(1), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.21608/qarts.2022.110782.1320
Eriyanto. (2015). Analisis Wacana Pengantar Analisis Teks Media. LKiS.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. Pearson Education Ltd.
Fairclough, N. (2009). A dialectical-relation approach to critical discourse analysis in social research. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings (1972-1977) (C. Gordon (ed.); 5th ed.). Pantheon Books.
Foucault, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1343197
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press.
Haliti, T. (2019). Animal Farm-A Conceptual Metaphor on the Destructive Power of Totalitarianism and the Ultimate Corruption of this Power. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 18(1), 93–100. https://www.gssrr.org/index.php/JournalOfBasicAndApplied/article/view/10063
Hodge, R. I. V., & Kress, G. R. (1993). Language as Ideology (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data Management and Analysis Methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 428–444). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Kusno, A., Arifin, M. B., & Mulawarman, W. G. (2022). Identifikasi Konteks Ekstralingual Virtual Bahasa Media Sosial sebagai Penunjang Analisis Bahasa sebagai Alat Bukti Hukum. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 5(1s), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v5i1s.401
Mey, J. L. (1985). Whose Language? A study in Linguistic Pragmatics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Mills, S. (1995). Feminist Stylistics. Taylor & Francis.
Noggle, R. (2021). Manipulation in Politics. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.2012
Orwell, G. (1954). Why I Write. In G. Orwell (Ed.), A Collection of Essays. Doubleday and Company Inc.
Orwell, G. (2021). Animal Farm. Global Grey.
Putri, N. Q. H., Dianastiti, F. E., & Sumarlam, S. (2022). Narasi Korban Perkosaan pada Pemberitaan di Media Daring RRI Samarinda: Analisis Wacana Kritis Model Sara Mills. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v5i1.313
Samsuri, A., Mulawarman, W. G., & Hudiyono, Y. (2022). Ideologi Penggunaan Istilah-Istilah Covid-19 di Berita Online: Analisis Wacana Kritis Model Norman Fairclough. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 5(3), 603–618. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v5i3.442
Sanghare, M. M. (2019). The Issue of Power in Orwell’s Animal Farm and Dobbs’ House of Cards. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Sharhan, K. S., Hussein, N. S., & Younus, M. R. (2021). Dominant Ideology in Orwell’s Novel Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Selected Extracts. International Journal of Development in Social Science and Humanities, 11(2), 27–42.
Sugiyono. (2018). Metodologi Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
van Dijk, T. A. (1992). Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse (6th ed.). Longman Group UK Limited.
van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006
van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Discourse as Social Interaction: Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Vol. 2. SAGE Publications Ltd.
van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse and Manipulation. Discourse and Society, 17(3), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250
van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach. In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (pp. 62–85). SAGE Publications Ltd.
van Leeuwen, T. (2003). The Representation of Social Actor. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Text and Practices: Reading in Critical Discourse Analysis (3rd ed., pp. 32–70). Routledge.
Wodak, R. (2001). The Discourse-Historical Approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 63–94). Sage Publication.
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches (4th ed.). Sage publications.
Crick, B. (2019). George Orwell: A Life. Sutherland House Books.
Elaref, A. I. A. (2022). Power’s Manipulation of the Minds and Language’s Creation of Knowledge: Foucault’s Power/Knowledge as Depicted in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. Journal of Qena Faculty of Arts, 54(1), 189–209. https://doi.org/10.21608/qarts.2022.110782.1320
Eriyanto. (2015). Analisis Wacana Pengantar Analisis Teks Media. LKiS.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. Pearson Education Ltd.
Fairclough, N. (2009). A dialectical-relation approach to critical discourse analysis in social research. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Sage.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings (1972-1977) (C. Gordon (ed.); 5th ed.). Pantheon Books.
Foucault, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795. https://www.jstor.org/stable/1343197
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action, Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Beacon Press.
Haliti, T. (2019). Animal Farm-A Conceptual Metaphor on the Destructive Power of Totalitarianism and the Ultimate Corruption of this Power. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 18(1), 93–100. https://www.gssrr.org/index.php/JournalOfBasicAndApplied/article/view/10063
Hodge, R. I. V., & Kress, G. R. (1993). Language as Ideology (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data Management and Analysis Methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 428–444). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Kusno, A., Arifin, M. B., & Mulawarman, W. G. (2022). Identifikasi Konteks Ekstralingual Virtual Bahasa Media Sosial sebagai Penunjang Analisis Bahasa sebagai Alat Bukti Hukum. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 5(1s), 261–282. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v5i1s.401
Mey, J. L. (1985). Whose Language? A study in Linguistic Pragmatics. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Mills, S. (1995). Feminist Stylistics. Taylor & Francis.
Noggle, R. (2021). Manipulation in Politics. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.2012
Orwell, G. (1954). Why I Write. In G. Orwell (Ed.), A Collection of Essays. Doubleday and Company Inc.
Orwell, G. (2021). Animal Farm. Global Grey.
Putri, N. Q. H., Dianastiti, F. E., & Sumarlam, S. (2022). Narasi Korban Perkosaan pada Pemberitaan di Media Daring RRI Samarinda: Analisis Wacana Kritis Model Sara Mills. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 5(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v5i1.313
Samsuri, A., Mulawarman, W. G., & Hudiyono, Y. (2022). Ideologi Penggunaan Istilah-Istilah Covid-19 di Berita Online: Analisis Wacana Kritis Model Norman Fairclough. Diglosia: Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra, Dan Pengajarannya, 5(3), 603–618. https://doi.org/10.30872/diglosia.v5i3.442
Sanghare, M. M. (2019). The Issue of Power in Orwell’s Animal Farm and Dobbs’ House of Cards. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
Sharhan, K. S., Hussein, N. S., & Younus, M. R. (2021). Dominant Ideology in Orwell’s Novel Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Selected Extracts. International Journal of Development in Social Science and Humanities, 11(2), 27–42.
Sugiyono. (2018). Metodologi Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan R&D. Alfabeta.
van Dijk, T. A. (1992). Text and Context: Explorations in the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse (6th ed.). Longman Group UK Limited.
van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006
van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Discourse as Social Interaction: Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, Vol. 2. SAGE Publications Ltd.
van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Discourse and Manipulation. Discourse and Society, 17(3), 359–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250
van Dijk, T. A. (2015). Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach. In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (pp. 62–85). SAGE Publications Ltd.
van Leeuwen, T. (2003). The Representation of Social Actor. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Text and Practices: Reading in Critical Discourse Analysis (3rd ed., pp. 32–70). Routledge.
Wodak, R. (2001). The Discourse-Historical Approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 63–94). Sage Publication.