Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Discourse & Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Amer, M. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

`Telling-it-like-it-is': the delegitimation of the second Palestinian Intifada in Thomas Friedman's discourse

M. Mosheer Amer

THE UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA, m.amer{at}pgrad.unimelb.edu.au

The concept of legitimation is essentially social and political (Martin Rojo and Van Dijk, 1997). That is, what or who is legitimized depends to a large extent on who speaks and in what capacity, social status and role he/she speaks from. Legitimation, in this sense, is linked to power, with which comes the authority to `define the situation' (Parsons, 1986), and consequently the authority to determine what is right and wrong, and what is legitimate and justifiable and what is not. In this paper I examine the delegitimation of the second Palestinian Intifada in Thomas Friedman's discourse by analysing how the Intifada is discursively constructed in a column which Friedman contributed to the op-ed page of the New York Times. I aim to do this by (1) analysing the column's argumentative structure and moves employed in Friedman's delegitimizing construction of the Intifada, and (2) showing how the legitimation of political actors, including self-legitimation, is closely linked to Friedman's argumentation. I also report on the results of a critical discourse analysis of a corpus of Friedman's columns which support the analysis findings of the main text.

Key Words: argumentation • deictic centre • (de)legitimation • dominant themes • ingroup/outgroup presentation • Israel • NYT • Palestinian Intifada • Thomas Friedman

Discourse & Society, Vol. 20, No. 1, 5-31 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0957926508097093
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?