An ideological representation in shakespeare's Macbeth: critical stylistic analysis of soliloquies

Raad Mohammed Hussein; Abbas Lutfi Hussein

doi:10.21744/ijllc.v7n5.1919

Authors

Raad Mohammed Hussein
raadmohammed357@gmail.com
Department of English Language and Literature, College of Arts, Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq
Abbas Lutfi Hussein Department of English Language and Literature, College of Arts, Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq

Keywords:

critical stylistics, ideology, soliloquies, textual-conceptual functions

Abstract

Critical Stylistics is a new branch of linguistics that studies ideology in literary and political texts. It relies on criteria adopted from the stylistic analysis. Thus, this paper aims to apply Jeffries’ (2009) critical stylistics model to soliloquies in Macbeth written by Shakespeare. This study also aims at analyzing two soliloquies given by the character of Macbeth using only three of the textual-conceptual functions of Jeffries’ (2009) model. These functions are: Naming and Describing; Prioritizing; and Equating and Contrasting. These functions are adopted in this study because they reveal what the speaker is representing regarding his ideology. This study follows the qualitative and quantitative approaches of analysis; the qualitative analysis of the soliloquies is intended to show how the textual-conceptual functions are used, and the quantitative analysis shows the frequency of this use. This study concludes that Shakespearean soliloquies in Macbeth are loaded with ideology and this ideology is represented by the use of naming and describing words such as assassination, dagger, ambition to represent negative and dangerous ideology; furthermore, prioritizing some instances such as his murderer to contradict what is supposed to be the case.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Becker, J. C. (2020). Ideology and the promotion of social change. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 6-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.10.005

Benzon, W. L. (1998). At the edge of the modern, or why is Prospero Shakespeare's greatest creation?. Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems, 21(3), 259-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1061-7361(98)80003-9

Brunell, T. L., & Buchler, J. (2009). Ideological representation and competitive congressional elections. Electoral Studies, 28(3), 448-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2009.05.003

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures (The Hague: Mouton, 1957). Review of Verbal Behavior by BF Skinner, Language, 35, 26-58.

Dasih, I. G. A. R. P., Triguna, I. B. G. Y., & Winaja, I. W. (2019). Intercultural communication based on ideology, theology and sociology. International journal of linguistics, literature and culture, 5(5), 29-35.

Davies, M. (2007). The attraction of opposites: The ideological function of conventional and created oppositions in the construction of in-groups and out-groups in news texts. In Stylistics and social cognition (pp. 71-100). Brill.

De Saussure, F. (1986). Course in general linguistics. Open Court.

Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41-113). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(01)80004-6

Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. Pearson Education..

Freeden, M. (1996). Ideologies and political theory: A conceptual approach. Oxford University Press on Demand.

Gollwitzer, M., & Melzer, A. (2012). Macbeth and the joystick: Evidence for moral cleansing after playing a violent video game. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(6), 1356-1360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.07.001

Hassan, S., Mohammed, T. O., & Hoenig, L. J. (2019). Bardolph’s rosacea: skin disorders that define personality in Shakespeare’s plays. Clinics in dermatology, 37(5), 600-603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2019.07.021

Hodges, A. (2015). Intertextuality in discourse. The handbook of discourse analysis, 42.

Jeffries, L. (2007). Textual construction of the female body: A critical discourse approach. Springer.

Jeffries, L. (2009). Critical stylistics: The power of English. Macmillan International Higher Education.

Junaidi, L. M. (2018). Stereotypes as the Ideology of Feminism in Novels Authorized by Indonesian Female Authors. International journal of linguistics, literature and culture, 4(1), 1-15.

Kroeger, P. (2018). Analyzing meaning: An introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Language Science Press.

Mäkelä, H., & Laine, M. (2011, December). A CEO with many messages: Comparing the ideological representations provided by different corporate reports. In Accounting Forum (Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 217-231). No longer published by Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accfor.2011.06.008

Manchin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis.

Mann, E. O., & Paulsen, O. (2010). Local field potential oscillations as a cortical soliloquy. Neuron, 67(1), 3-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.06.036

Ras, I. (2020). Child victims of human trafficking and modern slavery in British newspapers. Contemporary Media Stylistics, 191-214.

Saeed, J. I. (2009). Semantics.

Shook, N. J., & Fazio, R. H. (2009). Political ideology, exploration of novel stimuli, and attitude formation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 995-998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.003

Simpson, P. (2003). Language, ideology and point of view. Routledge.

Simpson, P. (2004). Stylistics: A resource book for students. Psychology Press.

Söderbaum, P. (1999). Values, ideology and politics in ecological economics. Ecological economics, 28(2), 161-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8009(98)00139-6

Teo, P. (2000). Racism in the news: A critical discourse analysis of news reporting in two Australian newspapers. Discourse & society, 11(1), 7-49.

Threadgold, T. (1989). Talking about genre: Ideologies and incompatible discourses. Cultural Studies, 3(1), 101-127.