• Sujito sujito IAIN Surakarta
  • Indriana Indriana University of Kanjuruhan Malang
  • Wildan Mahir Muttaqin IAIN Surakarta
Abstract views: 903 , pdf downloads: 685
Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), Political Discourse, Discursive Structures



Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) deals with long term analysis of fundamental causes and consequences of issues. This paper is an attempt to explain how a single issue, that is the US presidential election, is correlated by the existence of jihadist militant and manipulated using political ideology. This study also examines the persuasive strategies of Donald Trump to win the US 2016 Election. In this study, van Dijk’s (2004) frameworks of Politics, Ideology, and Discourse is used to detect discursive structure within the transcript of Donald Trump’s speech and analyze the manner in which language can be a tool at the hands of speakers to persuade and create agreement toward the hearer. The macro strategy of positive self-representation and negative other representation, plus the other 25 more subtle strategies has become one significant way in the creation and neutralization of ideology and personal opinion. The application of this dichotomous categorization in CDA of Donald Trump’s strategy toward his addressee to win the US election has asserted the fact that ideological manipulations are used, expressed, enacted and implanted through discursive structures to persuade the audiences. The findings of this study can be conducive to expand students’ critical thinking abilities in comprehension and production of language and also in revitalizing the neglected construct of language proficiency.



Download data is not yet available.


Hornby, A.S. 2004. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. London: Oxford University Press. Accessed on 13 November 2016. trump-addressee-radical. Accessed on 10 November 2016. Accessed on 13 November 2016. Accessed on 10 November 2016.

Rahimi, A. & Sahragard, R. 2006. The Linguistics Journal. Critical Discourse Analysis:Euphemization and Derogation on the Emails Written on the Death of the Pope. Vol. 1(2): 29-87. Accessed on 13 November from Publications/266080999.

Rahimi, A. & Sahragard, R. 2007. Critical Discourse Analysis. Tehran: Jungle Publications.

Teittinen, M. 2000. Power and Persuasion in the Finnish Presidential Rhetoric in the Early 1990’s. Accessed on 13 November 2016 from findland/mariteittinen.

Van Dijk, T.A. 1998. Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. London: Sage Publications.

Van Dijk, T.A. 2004. Politics Ideology and Discourse. Accessed on 14 November 2016 from

Van Dijk, T.A. 2008. Discourse and Power. United Kingdom: Palgrave.

Widdowson, H. 2000. Applied Linguistics. On the Limitations of Linguistics Applied. 21 (1): 3-25. Accessed on 14 November 2016 from content/21/1/3.abstract.

Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. 2009. Methods for Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage Publications.

How to Cite
sujito, S., Indriana, I., & Muttaqin, W. M. (2019). CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ON DONALD TRUMP’S STRATEGY AGAINST HIS ADDRESSEE TO WIN THE US ELECTION. IJOTL-TL: Indonesian Journal of Language Teaching and Linguistics, 4(1), 27-38.