7

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter contains the theories which are used in this study. These theories

are used as the basic theory and the supporting theories aim to support the idea, prevent

ambiguity, and limit the discussion of the study to solve the problem during analysis.

Here are some theories which the researcher used for the research:

A. Critical Discourse Analysis and Power

Critical approaches differ from non-critical approaches in not just describing

discursive practices, but also showing how discourse is shaped by relations of power and

ideologies, and the constructive effects discourse has upon social identities, social relations

and systems of knowledge and belief, neither of which is normally apparent to discourse

participants (Fairclough, 1993).Then, discourse is the whole process of social interaction

(including the process of production and the process of interpretation) of which a text is

just a part (Fairclough, 1989). In addition, discourse analysis, a text may be either

written or spoken discourse (Fairclough, 1995). There are three stages of analysis in

Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 1989), they are Descriptive

Analysis,Interpretation, andExplanation.

Fairclough states in his book that there are two kinds of power, power in

discourse and power behind discourse (Fairclough, 1989). Power in discourse sees the

8

discourse as a site of the powerful participant controlling the non-powerful participant.

It means that in a discourse there is a process of power struggling between the

participants. Thus, there is a power distribution in a discourse. The power behind the

discourse sees the discourse as the stake in power struggles. It means that the social

orders of the societies are influenced, shaped and constituted by the power struggling. In

the other words, the whole social orders in discourse is put together and held together as

a hidden effect of power (Fairclough in Puspitasari, 2014).

In his book, Fairclough uses several language studies to analyze a discourse, as

known as Critical Discourse Analysis is a study that has more than one approaches to

analyze a discourse. They are Linguistics - as known as Critical Discourse Analysis is

one of the branch of Linguistic. Sociolinguistics - it means that Social and Linguistic are

always related each other and it will make the sociologist sensitive to analyze how the

social structures and relations are instantiated the fine detail of daily social practices,

including discourse, and it will make linguists sensitive how the discourse is shaped by

and helps to shape social structures and relations (Fairclough, 1995). So, Pragmatic is

one of Linguistic branches and it contains power struggle which is discussed here.

The researcher used the Fairclough‟s version because it is appropriate to the

purpose of this research which is to analyze the power struggle of Obama in power

relation between the participants. The term power relation means that the participants of

the research have unequal position which is appropriate to Fairclough‟s theory.It is

because of Halliday on Farclough‟s book states that the interaction of the participants is

9

influenced by interpersonal function (Fairclough, 1995: 6). Multimodality itself is

involved in the interpersonal function. Furthermore, Fairclough (1995: 188) says that

contents are always necessarily realized in the forms, because different contents entail

different forms and vice versa. The forms of the discourse can be seen from the orders

of discourse (Fairclough, 1995: 188-189). In addition, Fairclough (1989: 28) says that

the actual discourse is determined by underlying conventions of discourse. It is

influenced by social conditions of discourse and the determination of discourse by social

structure. He states that discourse and practice are constrained by interdependent

networks which are called as „orders‟ (orders of discourse and social orders). Each

situation has each own type of practice. Each social order has each types of practice and

each structure. It influences the types of discourse, each types of discourse has each

order of discourse and each structure. Those are represented in the following figure.

Social order Order of discourse

Types of practice Types of discourse

Actual practices Actual discourses

Table 1.1 Social orders and orders of discourse (Fairclough, 1989: 29)

Fairclough (1989: 23) says that language is a form of social practice. So, there is

a relationship between language and society. According to Fairclough (1989: 25), a

discourse which is analyzed in CDA is influenced by the social conditions (social

conditions of production and social condition of interpretation). There are three levels of

social organizations in these social conditions. They are the level of social situation or

10

the immediate social environment in which the discourse occurs, the level of social

institution, and the level of society as whole.

Here, some points that need to understand in order to work on a discourse by

using Fairclough‟s version of CDA: Power Struggle in power relation, Power in and

behind Discourse, The three stages of Critical Discourse Analysis, and some Linguistic

Evidences.

1. Power Struggle

Political news interview are usually related to power struggle of the

politician as interviewee over the people. According to Fairclough (1992: 56), the

political nature of discourse-power struggle occurs both in and over discourse. It is

a little bit similar with power in discourse and power behind discourse.

Furthermore, Fairclough states in his book (1992: 67) that political practice is the

subordinate category, furthermore, discourse as a political practice is not only a site

of power struggle, but also a stake ill power struggle; discursive practice naturalize

particular power relations and ideologies and these conventions themselves, and the

ways in which they are articulated, are a focus of struggle. In addition, Fairclough

(1995: 244), it is often difficult to assess the full social and therefore its effect upon

power relations and power struggle in the institution concerned. It is because power

relations are always related to struggle. Meanwhile, Fairclough states in his book

(1992: 36) that discourse analysis is concerned not only with power relation in

discourse (compare conversation analysis), but also with how power relations and

11

power struggle shape and transform the discourse practices of a society or

institution. According to Fairclough (1989: 34) the different power relation is

classified into two types, first is social groupings in institutions (for example

between interviewer and interviewee, teacher and students, etc), it will affect the

power because of the social status. Second is social groupings in non-institutions

(for example between men and women, young and old, ethnic grouping, etc). Based

on the different social groupings and power relation there will be a social struggle

relation to see the unequal power between the social classes in the society. In this

research, the researcher analyzed the power struggle in power relation by the social

status between social groupings in a broadcast institution which consists of the

power relation between the interviewers and interviewees.

2. Power in Discourse

Power in Discourse is the relation of power based on the interaction in the

discourse. Fairclough (1989: 46) says that the first is face to face or spoken

discourse which shows the domination of powerful participants in controlling the

interaction toward the non-powerful participants. There are three aspects related to

the power struggle in power relation. They are contents (what is said/done),

relations (the social relation of people in discourse), and subjects (the subject

position that people can occupy). Second is power in cross-cultural encounters

which shows the different power relation related to the cultural aspect such as;

country, race, etc (Fairclough, 1989: 49). Third is hidden power. On

12

Fairclough‟s(1989: 49) book, this part explains the power relation, producers design

their contributions for the particular people they are interacting with-they adapt the

language they use, and keep adapting throughout an encounter in the light of

various sort of „feedback‟ they got from co-participants. It explains about how the

product of face-to-face discourse or two-way communication for example political

interview. The interview is influenced by the roles of the society as the audience,

the important figure, even the institution who are involved. It can be analyzed from

the use of words.

3. Power behind Discourse

In thePower behind Discourse, it is stated that the more powerful

participants usually control the non-powerful participants. It can be influenced by

Power behind Discourse. This correlation is shown in the Figure 2.2.

Constraint Structural effects

Contents

Relations

Subjects

Knowledge and beliefs

Social relationship

Social identities

Table 1.2 Constraints on discourse and structural effects (Fairclough, 1989: 74)

The figure above shows that the three aspects in Power behind Discourse

(contents, relations, and subjects) are influenced by the three aspects in Power

behind Discourse. Power behind discourse is power relation related to the power to

do something, to say something, and to access someplace, and to use formal

13

languagebased on the status, knowledge, and origin of the participants.For

examples, the doctors who cannot say something directly because of the ethical

code oh their profession (they have to say something by using a certain scientific

term), a priest who has full access in the church because of their knowledge about

religion, an employer who has special right related to the family relation or

something else, a person who has high social practice must use formal language,

etc. The correlation of the power in discourse and power behind discourse is seen

from the relation aspect. The relations in the discourse are seen from the social

relationship between the participants which will influence the contents of the

discourse. The contents of the discourse itself are influenced by the knowledge of

the participants and the belief in the society. The relationship of the participants and

the contents of the discourse will represent the subjects of the discourse and the

social identities of the participants. The formality aspect in Power behind

Discoursehas a correlation with the data of the research. The political interview is

constrained on the language form. The participants should use formal language

during the interaction. Fairclough (1989: 68) says that discourse and practice

generally in formal situations depend on special knowledge and skill which have to

be learnt.

Fairclough (1989: 75) states that there are three mechanism in achieving

coordination and commonality of practice in the respect of knowledge and belief,

social relationships, and social identities. First, the practice and discourse are

universally followed and necessarily accepted because there is no conceivable

14

alternative related to the knowledge and belief, social relationships, and social

identities which have been built. Second, the mechanism inculcation related to

„power behind discourse‟ itself which is maintained by the society. Third, the

mechanism communication is achieved through rational communication and debate.

4. Three Stages of Critical Discourse Analysis

As the researcher has explained in the previous chapter, there is correlation

between language and society. Fairclough (1989: 22-23) states that language is a

part of society he says that linguistic phenomena are social and social phenomena

are linguistics. It means that language and society are influenced each and another.

Fairclough (1989: 24) also classifies language as social practice the language of a

text is a product of social interaction process. The process consists of process of

production and process of interpretation. That processes are seen by analyzing the

properties of texts and considering the member resources (MR) that produce the

texts. The process of producing and interpreting are influenced by knowledge of

language, representations of the natural and social worlds, values, beliefs,

assumption, etc. However, the process of production and interpretation has to be

completed by considering the influence of social aspect (society). Fairclough (1989:

25) says that discourse is influenced by social conditions which consists of three

different levels of social organization (the level of the social situation or immediate

social environment in which the discourse occurs; the level of the social institution

which constitutes wider matrix for the discourse; and the level of society as whole.

15

As this research used CDA approach proposed by Fairclough, there are

several terms used in analyzing the discourse. Those are the Description Analysis,

that concerns on formal properties of the text, Interpretation Analysis that concerns

on the relationship between the text and the interaction, and Explanation analysis

that concerns on the relation between the interaction and the social context.

(Fairclough, 1989).

a. Description

In this research, the researcher does not only show and describe the

interview and the power of the President Barack Obama, but also attempts to get a

theory of how the President Barack Obama gets and struggles his power

lingustically. In the Description analysis, the Obama‟s interview was observed

through 10 questions arranged by Fairclough in his book “Language and Power”,

1989. Those questions are categorized into 3 categories; Vocabulary, Grammar, and

Textual structures.

Those 10 questions are:

A. Vocabulary

1. What experiential values do words have?

a. What classification schemes are drawn upon?

b. Are there words which are ideologically contested?

c. Is there rewording or overwording?

16

d. What ideologically significant meaning relations (synonymy, hyponymy,

antonymy) are there between words?

2. What relational values do words have?

a. Are there euphemistic expressions?

b. Are there markedly formal or informal words?

3. What expressive values do words have?

4. What metaphors are used?

B. Grammar

5. What experiential values do grammatical features have?

a. What types of process and participant predominate?

b. Is agency unclear?

c. Are processes what they seem?

d. Are nominalizations used?

e. Are sentences active or passive?

f. Are sentences positive or negative?

6. What relational values do grammatical features have?

a. What modes (declarative, grammatical question, imperative) are used?

b. Are there important features of relational modality?

c. Are the pronouns we and you used, and if so, how?

7. What expressive values do grammatical features have?

a. Are there important features of expressive modality?

17

8. How are (simple) sentences linked together?

a. What logical connectors are used?

b. Are complex sentences characterized by coordination or/ subordination?

c. What means are used for referring inside and outside the text?

C. Textual Structure

9. What interactional conventions are used?

a. Are there ways in which one participant controls the turns of others?

10. What larger-scale structures does the text have?

Figure 2.1The Description Framework (Fairclough, 1989: 110-111)

The interviewwas observed through those questions to get the pattern of

language from the smallest unit of language (Vocabulary) into the biggest unit of

language (Textual Structure) employed by the President Barack Obama to compose his

power.

The formal features in the description stage are separated into three values

consisting of experiential, relational, and expressive values. The experiential value is

related to the contents of the discourse and the knowledge and belief within discourse. It

analyzes the way the text producer shows the natural and world representation of the

discourse. The relational value analyzes the relations and social relationship between the

participants in the discourse. The expressive value is related to subject of the discourse

and social identities of the participants. It analyzes the producer‟s evaluation of the

reality. Those explanations are shown in Figure 2.3.

18

Dimensions of meaning Values of features Structural effects

Contents

Relations

Subjects

Experiential

Relational

Expressive

Knowledge/belief

Social relations

Social identities

Table 1.3 Formal features: experiential, relational, and expressive values

(Fairclough, 1989: 112)

b. Interpretation

In Interpretation Analysis, the pattern of the language used by the

President Barack Obamawas analyzed linguistically to get the pattern of

communication employed by the President Barack Obama toward the

interviewer and the society as the audience in the show. Through this

pattern, the power owned by the President Barack Obamawas examined.

Based on Fairclough(1989: 141), this stage is a combination of what is in

the text and what is in the interpreter in the sense of members‟ resources

(MR).This stage analyzesthe interpretation of context and the interpretation

of text which influence the production of the discourse by considering the

members‟ resources (MR). The interpretation of context and text are

represented in the following figure:

19

Figure 2.2Interpretation (Fairclough, 1989: 142)

The figure above shows that interpretation is separated into two parts.

The two lines above are considered as the interpretation of context, while the

four lower lines are considered as the interpretation of text. Both types are

influenced by two different terms which consist of interpreting and

interpretative procedures (MR). The right-hand column is related to

Social orders Situational context

Interactional history Intertextual context

Phonology, grammar,

vocabulary Surface of utterance

Semantics,

Pragmatics Meaning of

utterance

Cohesion, Local coherence

Pragmatics

Schemata Text structure and

„point‟

20

interpreting activity which consists of some points of interpretation of the

discourse. The left-hand column is related to interpretative procedures (MR)

which consist of some elements. Those elements are produced by MR that will

influence the form of some points in interpreting aspect. Firstly, the researcher

explains the interpretation of the lower section of the diagram related to the

interpretation of text which is separated into four levels.

First level, surface of utterance and it deals with phonology, grammar,

and vocabulary aspects of text, which are related to the process of marking

some recognizable words, phrases, and sentences. The second level is about

meaning of utterance and it deals with semantics and pragmatics aspect of a

text. It is a matter of assigning meanings to the utterances of the text, finding

the representation of the word used on it by combining word-meaning and

grammatical information, the work out the implicit meanings as a whole.For

pragmatics aspect, it deals with speech act(s) used in utterance. The third level

is about local coherence. It deals with establishing meaningful connections

between utterances, producing coherent interpretations of pairs and sequences

of them. There are two types of connections in Coherence in the discourse that

can be found in the text, they are the connection between the sequential parts

of text and between (parts of) text and the world. Then, local coherence deals

with the firs type of connections. Fourth level is the text structure and „point‟

interpretation. This is to find how whole texts hang together. It involves

schemata of MR which is related to frames and scripts. A scheme is

21

representation of particular type of the text in terms of predictable elements in

the predictable of sequence. Then, a frame is the representation of whatever

can figure as a topic, or a subject matter, or referent within an activity. In

addition, Fairclough says that the scripts represent the subjects who are

involved in the activities represented by schemata and their relationship (1989:

158-159). In conclusion, Interpretation of the text structure was done by

working out how a whole text could hang each other, as the researcher wrote

earlier.

Then, in the interpretation procedures, there is an interpretation of

context. It consists of situational and intertextual of context. Interpretation on

situational context was done by following this figure

22

Social order: societal

Determination of institutional setting

Social order: institutional

Determination of situational setting

Situation Discourse type

What‟s going on? Contents

(activity, topic, purpose)

Who is involved? Subjects

In what relation? Relations

What‟s the role of language

in what‟s going on? Connections

23

Figure 2.3 Situational context and discourse type (fairclough, 1989:146)

While the interpretation of intertextual context considers the background of the

text by figuring out which historical series it belongs to and what is the common ground

or what can be it presuppositions. As Fairclough written in his book, presuppositions not

only can be sincere or manipulative, but also can have ideological functions (1989:154).

c. Explanation

The last stage or third stage in Fairclough‟s book is an explanation. He says that

the objective of the stage of explanation is to show a discourse as part of a social

process, a social practice, showing how it is determined by social structures, and what

reproductive effects discourses can cumulatively have on those structures, sustaining

them or changing them. In addition, in this research, the social structures focus on power

struggle. The social processes and practices focus on social struggle (1989:163). The

procedure of explanation stage can be shown in this following figure below.

Societal Societal

Instituional MR Discourse MR Institutional

Situational Situational

Determinants Effects

Figure 2.4Explanation (Fairclough, 1989:164)

24

From the three levels in figure above, there are different ways of seeing the

same discourse according to whether we are focusing upon it as situational,

institutional, or social practice. Firclough (1989:166) says that to analyze the

explanation stage of CDA can be done by following these questions:

1. Social determinants: What power relations at situational, institutional and

societal levels help shape this discourse?

2. Ideologies: What elements of MR which are drawn upon have an

ideological character?

3. Effects: How is this discourse positioned in relation to struggles at the

situational, institutional and societal levels? Are these struggles overt or

covert? Is the discourse normative with respect to MR or creative? Does it

contribute to sustaining existing power relations, or transforming them?

5. Linguistic Evidence

Linguistic evidence commonly appears in the data analysis, part from three stages

that the researcher wrote above. It is a part of some types of linguistic aspects

which become the basic consideration in analyzing the power struggle of Obama

in the interviews section. Those aspects become the power indicators of the

discourse. Power is actually exercised and enacted in the discourse, with powerful

participants controlling and constraining the contributions of non-powerful

participants. Then, power indicators are divided into two aspects; verbal and non-

verbal aspects. It will explain by statement below.

25

a. Verbal aspect

Formality. Formality can be seen by this question “what relational values

do words have?” it contains formal and informal words used. It will make the

social relationship between the participants clear. In interview session what

must be there is a formality; even this research is about political interview

session. Fairclough says that the use of formality is to express politeness,

concern from participants for each other‟s face, and to respect the status and

position (1989:117-118).

Direct and Indirect. It can be seen by this question “what relational

values do grammatical features have?” and this is about “what modes are

used?” it can be declarative that consists of S followed by V, grammatical

question that is more complicated than both of them because there are different

types and it consists of yes/no question, and imperative that does not have S at

all, and starts with V (Fairclough, 1989:125-126). Imperative sentence usually

deal with speech act.Here, in political interview there are always statements

that the researcher already wrote. Furthermore, the one who is the giver (giving

information/interviewee) is the one who is more powerful than the receiver

(interviewer/audience).

Interruption. Interruption usually happens on the relationships between

the participants in a conversation.It usually happens in the unequal

conversation, in an unequal or in a formal conversation is when the one who is

more powerful will have their power to control the plot of the conversation. On

26

the other hand, political interview will provide the participant have the freedom

to interrupt.

b. Non-verbal aspect

Non-verbal aspect can be the indicators of power relation between the

participants. It can be found in the text, and can be seen by the expression of

the participant, the suit that they wear, make up from the face until the hair do,

the body language of the participants, the intonation, and so on. These non-

verbal aspects can show the revealing of the situational context surrounded by

the participants‟ power relation. For example, the suit that they wear can show

the identities of the formal or informal situation.

B. INTERVIEW

This study observedthree Obama‟s interview videos, that are from German

Television, Russian Television and CNN. Terminologically, an interview is also formal

meeting at which reporters try to get information, especially from a famous person or

public official (Cambridge online dictionary) or a mutual sight or view: a meeting face

to face; usually a formal or official meeting for consultation ; a conference ; as, the

secretary had an interview with the president (www.webster-dictionary.org). Interview

is a dialogue which is done by interviewer to gain information by interviewer. The

interviewer provides some questions ask, for explanation, take note, etc. The

27

interviewee (can be teacher, students, and staff) answer the question, explain and

sometimes give question back to the interviewer(Hadi, 2004). Interviews vary in terms

of how well they fit this archetype of interviewer and interviewee Speech Functions, but

also in terms of how Questions in particular are realized in Grammatical Mood

(Fairclough, 2003).Furthermore, Mats Ekstrom and Marianna Patrona(2011)say that

„…The politicians orient to their role of the answer in the political news interview while

at the same time indicating that they do not consider the question to be an appropriate

sort of question”.

This research employed Obama‟s interviews in German Television, Russia

Television and CNN video which have different background, ideology, power relation,

and power struggle.

C. International Political Theory

Data of this research came from three interviews from three different countries;

they are from United States of America, Russia and German. Everyone knows that they

have different relationship. America and German are allies but that is different from the

relation between America and Russia. Kimberly Hutchings says in his book that

“International Political theory is about different ways in which the nature of

international politics can be explained, understood, and judged (2005: 5)”. They are all

having different ideas, even with their allies.

28

D. Review of Related Studies

Once more, CDA is a study that analyzes the ideology, and power of participants

in a discourse. It analyzes the interaction between the participants in a discourse,

whether it is a one-way communication or two-way communication(Puspitasari, 2014).

It usually takes a presidential speech as its object such as that the researcher found it in

“Critical Discourse Analysis of Obama's Political Discourse”(JurajHorváth, 2009), he

analyzed Obama‟s speech in Obama‟s inauguration not Obama‟s interviews. He

analyzed the persuasive strategies and ideological component of President Barack

Obama as the newly president from Black American. His research focused on the

ideological of President Barack Obama‟s inaugural speech. But there is a little topic

about his power and the relationship between President Barack Obama with the people.

The overall, underlying theme of the speech is the need to be inspired and empowered

by the strength from our heroic past, which is America, has reach from some years ago.

The researcher hardly found the previous related study of CDA that

analyzesObama‟s interview because some of them take a presidential speech

inauguration case as their object study, the researcher decided to choose a CDA journal

that discusses a Classroom Discourse by Yunita (2014) entitled “An Analysis of Power

Relation between a Teacher and Highschool Students Interaction in The Movie Entitled

“Freedom Writers” (Based on Critical Discourse Analysis)” as the reference. It may be

a little bit different thing as it comes up from a different field of discourse, but actually

there is a similarity found in both texts. Firstly, the position of President Barack Obama

29

and Teacher here is under a same building. In a classroom discourse, logically a teacher

is the one who is more superior as s/he is in his/her “territory”, in a class, the same

position happens to the President Barack Obama who has power in the interviews

section on the note as the President of United States of America. As both discourses

come up from a different field of discourse, those discourses must be different. The field

of the previous discourse written by Yunita is a classroom discourse, but it has the same

thing that employs two-way communication, that perhaps the power struggling process

is clearly seen, while this study observes some interviews. The data of this research was

taken from YouTube entitled “Barack Obama‟s TV-Interview US-President Obama

with German Television”, CNN video entitled “Barack Obama‟s CNN interview-His

Diminished Expectation”, and from Russia Television “Obama-High on drugs during

interview on Sochi Olympic in Russia with Bob Costas”.