A Metafunctional Analysis of Barack Obama’s Second Term Inaugural Address

Table of Contents

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Metafunctions
• Cohesion
• Interpersonal Metafunction
• The Mood
• Polarity and Modality
• Studies Speeches Using Metafunctional Approach
• Data Analysis
• Interpersonal Metafunction Analysis of Obama’s Speech
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• References

Citation: Sadiq, A. & Modu, M.M. (2024). A Metafunctional Analysis of Barack Obama’s Second Term Inaugural Address. Tasambo Journal of Language, Literature, and Culture, 3(1), 182-10. www.doi.org/10.36349/tjllc.2024.v03i01.021.

A Metafunctional Analysis of Barack Obama’s Second Term Inaugural Address

Aminu Sadiq (PhD)
Department of English and Literary Studies
University of Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria
Email: sadiqamin@unimaid.edu.ng
Phone No: 08036951084  

&

Muhammad Mallam Modu
Department of English and Literary Studies
University of Maiduguri, Borno State, Nigeria
mmmodu@unimaid.edu.ng
+2348034590519

Abstract

This study presents a Metafunctional Analysis of Barack Obama’s second-term inaugural address. M.A.K Halliday’s Metafunction is used as a theoretical framework for the analysis in this study with the task of providing a better understanding of the speech. The data (Barack Obama’s written speech) is obtained from the internet. The speech is presented as data. Halliday’s cohesive devices (reference, ellipsis, conjunction, repetition) as well as mood and residue are identified and analysed using tables. It is found that additive conjunction is the most frequently used cohesive device . In terms of mood and residue, all the sentences in speech are declarative. The declarative mood helps the speaker to express his point of view and send his message. It also shortens the distance between the speaker and the listener/reader. It is concluded that Halliday’s Metafunctions help the reader to understand the intention and the message the speech is trying to pass across.

Keywords : Cohesion, Metafunctions, Mood, Residue, Barack Obama

Introduction

This study is an analysis of Halliday’s Metafunctions in Barack Obama’s second-term inaugural speech. Cohesive devices as well as mood and residue are identified and analysed in the speech using M.A.K Halliday’s Metafunctional Approach. The need for this study comes from the fact that Barack Obama’s second inaugural speech was an inspirational speech which needed the attention of analysts, students and critics.

President Barack Hussein Obama was born on August 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Hawaii, United States. He is the 44^th president of the United States, and the first African American to hold the office. Obama is a graduate of Columbia University and Harvard Law School, where he served as president of the Harvard Law Review.

In 2009, Barack Obama defeated Republican Nominee John McCain in the general election. Nine months after his election, Obama was named the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize laureate. He was re-elected president in November 2012, defeating Republican Nominee Mitt Romney and was sworn in for a second term on January 21, 2013 (Maraniss, 2013).

The analysis of this work is restricted to Halliday’s cohesive devices as well as mood and residue. The study covers the second inaugural speech delivered by President Barack Obama at the White House on January 21, 2013.

Literature Review

This section comprises a review of the concept of Metafuntion, Cohesion, Mood and Residue and studies on presidential speeches.

Metafunctions

Halliday’s Metafunction comprises Ideational, Textual and Interpersonal, however, this paper focuses on textual and interpersonal Metafunctions. These are discussed below. In this way, language functions are studied from three angles via ideational, interpersonal and textual roles. These are referred to as the meta-functions of language.

The ideational function of language is synonymous with the field of discourse i.e. the subject matter of the text and the context of language use i.e. is it a political or religious matter or any other field of discourse? Butt et al. (2003:6) explain that ‘the experiential (ideational) function uses language to signify experience and offers the means for creating our experience of the world in terms of event, objects and the relationship between them. This may be shared into logical and experiential functions, the former allows conjunctive, logical and casual meaning to be expressed, and the latter allows objects and events to be symbolized. This implies that language serves as a tool for the encoder of either speaking or writing to express and articulate his ideas and understanding internally.

The interpersonal or interactional function refers to the mood of the discourse of social relationship that exists among participants in a specific dialogue situation, which can shape or influence language usage in an expression, as such, it aids in creating and sustaining social affairs within participants in a text. Interpersonal function uses language to explore interactions to relay attitudes (style) and provide the means for endorsing social roles and relations as meaning in a text. This includes a variety of means for the speaker/author to create a text as a dialogue with the listener/reader.

According to Matthiessen, (1995) ‘Textual function provides resources for presenting information as text in context’ it enables individual expression to be appraised as a message as well as related to the context of expression either linguistic or extra-linguistic features as explained. Therefore, textual function uses language to establish experiential and interpersonal meanings into a precise and coherent mode; this can be achieved through the means of stylistic devices employed in a given text, as such, the textual aspect of this theory is particularly relevant to this study. It deals with the mode; the internal organization and the communicative nature of a text, these can be ascertained through the utilization of extra-linguistic features, which are the focus of this study. Leech and Short (1981:209) see Halliday’s textual functions of language as “… ways of using language to organize, understand and express information for effective communication”.

Textual Metafunction, according to Halliday (1994), is the internal organization and communicative nature of a text. It encodes its role in a greater span of a text. The textual metafunction comprises of Structural Component and Non-Structural Component of Texture. The Structural Component of Texture makes up the Theme-Rheme and Given-New, while the Non-Structural Component of Texture makes up cohesion. Cohesion which is the focus of this paper is discussed below.

Cohesion

In Halliday’s grammar, the analysis of cohesion is closely related to the analysis of Theme and rhyme. This is a feature connected to the textual metafunction of a language. A text is cohesive according to the language it is written or spoken in. Cohesion is thus dependent on the resources of a particular language. Halliday and Matthiessen (2004) identify four (4) types of Cohesion. They are as follows: Reference, Ellipsis, Conjunction and Repetition.

Reference : This is a cohesive device introduced in one place of a text, which is either taken as a reference point for something that follows or as a basis of comparison. However, references can exist within and outside a text. Reference within a text is called ENDOPHORA, while reference outside the text is called EXOPHORA.

Examples:

a.   H e is rich. Yes, Musa is rich. (Endophora)

b.   Those are worried. (Exophora)

From the above examples, “Musa” is a referent. “He” exists within the text while the referent of “Those” exists outside the text.

Ellipsis : This is simply a shortened representation of a set of words. It entails the omission of an earlier stated word or words. For example:

a. Attending lectures is very important. It brings the best out of you.

b. We are all human beings. Surely, we are.

From the above examples, “It” and “we are” respectively, are both shortened representations of the clauses that come before them.

 Conjunctions: These are cohesive devices used in linking words, clauses, sentences and even paragraphs together to make them unified. Example:

a. Amina travelled to Lagos and she brought her sisters (Fati and Aisha) to live with her for two weeks.

b. Hassan and Hussaini are twins.

The conjunction “and” in the first example links the clauses together while “and” links the two words together in the second example.    

Repetition : This is the repetition of words in a text for expressive purposes. For example: Messi, I like your style of play. I like your dribble; I like your passes; I like your goals. The continuous use of LIKE in the above sentence is an example of repetition.

Interpersonal Metafunction

 Interpersonal Metafunction according to Halliday & Hasan (1985) is considered as a piece of interaction between the speaker/writer and listener/reader. Language is considered as a way of reflecting. Thus, the interpersonal metafunction uses language to translate communications among people and also it illustrates how defendable or binding we find our proposition in a given discourse.

In interpersonal analysis, meaning is considered from the point of view of its function in the process of social interaction. In the interpersonal metafunction, a clause is analysed into Mood and Residue. The Mood element is made up of the Subject and Finite of a clause. The rest of the clause is called Residue which consists of Predicator, Complement and Adjunct. The Subject and Complement are typically realised by nominal groups. The Finite is realised by the finite element of the verb. The Predicator is realised by non-finite elements of the verbal group. The Adjunct is realised by an adverbial group or prepositional phrase.

The Mood

The mood of a clause can be identified from its grammatical structure. The statement is realised by declarative mood, the question is realized by interrogative mood, and command is realised by imperative mood. However, the speech function of a mood can be identified by interpreting the mood in its context.

Polarity and Modality

Polarity refers to the decision between YES and NO. Examples are can/can’t, do/don’t, have/haven’t. Modality is the intermediary between YES and NO. Modality consists of Modalisation realised by modal verb operators such as “may”, “maybe” “will” and “must” and Modulation realized by the mood adjuncts for instance, “no”, “not”, and “never”.

Structure of the Mood and Residue

Declarative clause

Yusuf	Is	Coming	Home	on Monday
Subject	Finite	Predicator	Complement	Adjunct
Mood(Decl.)		Residue

 

The hunters	Might	Reach	the jungle	Tomorrow
Subject	Finite	Predicator	Complement	Adjunct
Mood(Decl.)		Residue

 

Interrogative clause

What	Have	the mechanic	Done	to the car
Complement/WH	Finite	Subject	Predicator	Adjunct
Resi-	Mood		-due

 

Why	Are	all the animals	Running
Adjunct	Finite	Subject	Predicator
Resi-	Mood		- due

 

Imperative clause

Go	To school	Will	You
Predicate	Adjunct	Finite	Subject
Residue		Mode

 

Do	You	Like	Him
Finite	Subject	Predicator	Complement
Mode		Residue

 

Studies Speeches Using Metafunctional Approach

Several Studies have been carried out using Halliday’s Metafunctional Approach. For instance, Wang (2010), in a Critical Discourse Analysis theory and Systemic Functional Linguistics, analyses Barack Obama’s Victory and Inaugural Speeches (Nov.2008 and Jan. 2009 respectively) mainly from the point of transitivity and modality. He applies Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar, in terms of the three meta-functions: ideational function, interpersonal function and textual function.

Wang posits that Barack Obama used simple words and short sentences instead of difficult ones. His language is easy and conversational. Thus, it can easily shorten the distance between him and the audience. From transitivity analysis, the material process has been used most in his speeches. From the process, Obama shows what the government of the United States of America has achieved, what they are doing and what they will do. The use of transitivity in his speeches aroused the American people’s confidence in the president and his government in the following four years. Wang’s finding was that Obama made his audience understand and accept his political speeches more easily through the use of modal verbs. Eventually, Wang’s

Critical Discourse Analysis explores the relationships among language, ideology and power. Dickenson (2009) in another related study, analyses two Prime Ministerial speeches (Paul Keating and Kevin Rudd’s speeches). He studies the style and communicative functionality of two Prime Ministerial speeches on indigenous issues in further exploration of the relationship between text and context in politically sensitive texts. Dickenson reveals how the similarities and differences in the style and communicative functionality of the two speeches, realised by experiential, interpersonal and textual meanings, result from the relation between text and context.

Dickenson (2009) asserts that the analysis of the experiential, interpersonal and textual meaning choices of both texts has revealed how these similarities and differences were realised. The similarities in the two texts emerged from their sharing similar situational contexts, namely having a similar Mode, Field and Tenor. Likewise, differences in the general style and communicative function of the two texts were shown to have emerged from differences in other contextual factors such as purpose, setting and sociocultural context.

Ahmad (2016), in a Transitivity Analysis of the Inaugural Speech of President Umaru Musa Yaradua, investigates the transitivity process used in the 2007 inaugural speech of President Umaru Musa Yaradua. The study involves the distribution of the speech into sentences, then sentences to clauses as well as the transitivity process. The speech was obtained from the internet using the content method. However, process types were analysed and the semantic features were highlighted. The findings of the research show that the material process was the most frequently used process type followed by mental and verbal processes respectively. Ahmad also shows that there are significant differences in terms of the use of verbs and the roles of participants in the speech.

In a similar study, Khany and Zohre (2014) rhetorically analyse Twenty (20) speeches”. Halliday and Hasan’s (1989) SFG theory of language was used in this study as a method of analysing the rhetorical structure of political speeches, to reveal the Generic Structure Potential of political speeches. Based on the Systemic Functional Grammar theory which holds the view that there exists a pattern in behaviour, speeches were analysed to reveal a solid pattern of moves laid within them. Khany & Zohre started with Muammar Gaddafi who tried to downgrade his enemies in people's view by cultural means. On the other hand, Adolf Hitler needed to pull people to the war fronts so he tried to motivate a sense of loyalty within the soul of society. Gaddafi, for example, stated the following paragraph as a means to devalue his opponents and solidify his position.

Open the channel of Libya in Down Street. Open the Libya channel if your nerves hold off what you will see. Open the Libya channel if you hold… Berlusconi, Sarkozy, Cameron and others, make sure now you’re here is in the sea. And you are chasing a mirage. And you must be dreaming.

To depict a good image among people, Hitler, on the other hand, declared an obvious paradoxical statement, meaning “I am not the cause of war and just exposed to defending”. He uttered this statement:

I have been striving for two decades, with a minimum of intervention and without destroying our production, to arrive at a new socialist order in Germany, one that not only eliminates unemployment but also permits the productive worker to receive an even greater share of the fruits of his labour. The achievements of this policy of national economic and social reconstruction -- which strove for a true national community by overcoming rank and class divisions -- are unique in today's world.

Khany & Zohre’s rhetorical analysis is part of Halliday’s SFG; it gives the dictators’ speeches a better meaning and understanding.

Data Analysis

This section explicates on the analysis of four identified types of Cohesion, namely; Reference, Ellipsis, Conjunction and Repetition.

Analysis of Cohesion in Barack Obama’s Speech

Halliday and Matthiessen (2004) identify four types of Cohesion, namely; Reference, Ellipsis, Conjunction, Ellipsis and Repetition. All four types can be found in Barack Obama’s speech. Below is an analysis of Cohesive Devices in Barack Obama’s speech.

Reference : This is a cohesive device introduced in one place of a text, which is either taken as a reference point for something that follows or as a basis of comparison. When a reference occurs after its antecedent, it is called “Anaphoric Reference”. A reference before its antecedent is called a “Cataphoric Reference”. The table below shows the occurrence of references in Obama’s speech. Sentence numbers indicate the place of occurrence.

Table 1: Table Showing the Occurrence of References in Obama’s Speech

SN	Reference	Referent	Place of occurrence
1	She (Anaphoric Reference)	Little girl	30
2	That (Cataphoric Reference)	To make these words, these rights,...	71
3	We (Cataphoric Reference)	The people, Americans...	27,36,44,53,64
4	His/He (Anaphoric Reference)	God	7,89
5	They (Anaphoric Reference)	The patriots of 1776...	8,9
6	It (Anaphoric Reference)	Freedom	7
7	These (Anaphoric Reference)	Our celebration of initiative...	17
8	They, these things (Anaphoric Reference)	The commitments we make to...	42,42
9	It (Anaphoric Reference)	...this moment	26
10	That (Anaphoric Reference)	A nation that rewards the effort...	33,34,35
11	They (Anaphoric Reference)	All men...	5

 

The table above shows that eleven references were found in Obama’s speech, nine of which are Anaphoric references, while only two are Cataphoric references. ‘We’, which refers to ‘the people of America’, has the highest instances of reference in the speech.

Conjunctions : They are used to link or join words, phrases, clauses and sentences together. Halliday’s four categories of conjunction (additive, adversative, causal and temporal) are adopted for the analysis.

Table 2: Table Showing the Occurrence of Conjunctions in Obama’s Speech

Conjunction types	Conjunctions	No. of occurrence	Place of occurrence (Sentence No.)
Additive	And, or, nor	93	3(2),5,9(2),10,11(3),12,13(3),14,15(2),16,17(2), 19(2),20(5),21,22,25(3),26,27,29,30,32(2),36,37,38,39,40,41(2),42(2),45,46(2),47,49,50(3),53,54,57(2),58(2),59,61,62,63(3),64(4),66,67,69,70(2),71(2),75,76(2),78(2),80,82,83,84,85(2),86,87(3),89
Adversative	But	11	18,33,38,45,48,57,59,62,63,81,85
Causal	So, because	5	18,30,32,59,63
Temporal	Then, when	4	29,30,39,67

 

The table above shows that all four categories of Conjunction namely: Additive, Adversative, Causal and Temporal were found in Obama’s speech. Additive conjunctions, having occurred ninety-three times, have the highest number of occurrences and it is the most frequently used conjunction. Adversative conjunction, having occurred eleven times, is the second highest. Causal conjunction follows with five occurrences. Temporal conjunction with only four occurrences is the least used conjunction.

Ellipsis : Ellipsis is a shortened representation of an earlier mentioned word or group of words, or the omission of a word or words where the subsequent word has the same reference as the first.

Table 3: Table Showing the Occurrence of Ellipsis in Obama’s Speech

SN	Word(s)	Ellipsis	Number of Occurrence	Place of Occurrence
1	Little girl	She	4	(30)
2	To make these words...	That	1	(71)
3	The people, Americans...	We	46	(27,36,44,53,64)
4	The patriots of 1776...	They	1	(8&9)
5	Freedom	It	1	(7)
6	Our celebration of initiative...	These	1	(17)
7	The commitments we make to...	These things	1	(42&43)
8	...this moment	It	1	(27)
9	A nation that rewards the...	That	1	(33,34,35)
10	All men...	They	1	(5)

 

 From the above table, it is obvious that ellipses such as “that”, “these things”, “” “”, “”, “” and “these” are all shortened representations of the word(s) that come before or after them.

Repetition : This is the repetition of words in a text for expressive purposes. Lexical items frequently repeated throughout the speech can be seen below.

Table 4: Table Showing the Repetition of Lexical Items in Obama’s Speech

S/N	Lexical Items	Number of Occurrences	Place of occurrences
1	We	61	1(2),2,3,5,6,10,11,12,13,14,15,16(2),18(2),25,26(3), 27,28,29,30,31,32,36,37,38,39,40,41(2),42,44,45,48, 49(2),51,53,57(2),58,59(3),61,62,63,64(2),67(2),69, 75,76,77,78,80,82
2	Together	6	12, 13, 14, 15, 21, 26
3	Our journey	5	66, 67, 68, 69, 70
4	Government	4	8, 16, 31, 74
5	The people	6	9,27,36,44,53,64,
6	American(s)	17	4,19,22,25,26,28,29,30,33,38,44,47,60,62,71,79,89
	Total	84

 

The table above shows that out of eighty-four occurrences of lexical items repeated, ‘We’ occurred sixty-one times and is the most frequently repeated lexical item, followed by ‘America’ which occurred seventeen times. ‘Together’ and ‘The people’ occurred six times each, while ‘Our journey’ occurred five times. ‘Government’ occurred only four times and it is the least frequently repeated lexical item.

Interpersonal Metafunction Analysis of Obama’s Speech

Below is an interpersonal metafunction analysis of a part of Barack Obama’s second-term inaugural speech delivered at the White House on January 21, 2013. Numbers are used to identify sentences in the speech. Sentence and clause boundaries are also used to identify sentences and clauses in the speech. In the interpersonal metafunction analysis, a clause is analysed into Mood and Residue elements, that is, S(subject), F(Finite), P(predicator), C(complement) and A(adjunct) at the primary degree of delicacy (less detailed analysis).

1.      ///And for more than two hundred years[A], we[S] have[F].///

2.      ///Through blood drawn by lash and blood drawn by the sword[A], we[S] learned[F/P] that no union founded on the principles of liberty and equality could survive half-slave and half-free[C].///

3.      ///We[S] made[F/P] ourselves anew[C], //and vowed[F/P] to move forward together[C]./    

4.      ///Together[A], we[S] determined[F/P] that a modern economy requires railroads and highways to speed travel and commerce, schools and colleges to train our workers[C]./// 

5.      ///Together[A], we[S] discovered[F/P] that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play[C].///

6.      ///Together[A], we[S] resolved[F/P] that a great nation must care for the vulnerable,// and protect[P] its people[C] from life’s worst hazards and misfortune[A].///

7.      ///Through it all[A], we[S] have[F] never[A] relinquished[P] our scepticism of central authority[C],// nor[+] have we succumbed to the fiction that all society’s ills can be cured through government alone[C].///

8.      /// Our celebration of initiative and enterprise, our insistence on hard work and personal responsibility[S1],// these[S2] are[F] constants[C] in our character[A].///

9.       ///We[S] understand[F/P] that outworn programs are inadequate to the needs of our time[C].///

10.   ///So[+] we[S] must[F] harness[P] new ideas and technology[C] to remake our government[A1],// revamp our tax code[A2],// reform our schools[A3],// and empower our citizens with the skills they need to work harder, learn more, reach higher[A4].///

11.   ///But[+] while the means[S] will[F] change[P], our purpose[S] endures[P]: // a nation that rewards the effort and determination of every single American[C].///

12.   /// That[S] is[F] what this moment requires[C].///

13.   ///That[S] is[F] what will give real meaning to our creed[C].///        

14.   ///We[S1], the people[S2], still[A] believe[F/P] that every citizen deserves a basic measure of security and dignity[C].///

15.   ///We[S] must[F] make[P] the hard choices[C1] to reduce the cost of health care and the size of our deficit[A].///

16.   ///But[+] we[S] reject[F/P] the belief that America must choose between caring for the generation that built this country// and[+] investing in the generation that will build its future[C].///

17.  /// For[+] we[S] remember[F/P] the lessons of our past[C],// when twilight years were spent in poverty and[+] parents of a child with a disability had nowhere to turn[A].///

18.   ///We[S] do not[F] believe[P] that in this country freedom is reserved for the lucky,// or happiness for the few[C].///

19.   ///We[S] recognize[F/P] that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us at any time may face a job loss, a sudden illness, or a home swept away in a terrible storm[C].///

20.   ///The commitments we make to each other through Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security[S1],// these things[S2] do not[F] sap[P] our initiative[C],// they[S] strengthen[F/P] us[C].///

21.  /// They[S] do not[F] make[P] us[C] a nation of takers[C];

22.  // they[S] free[F/P] us[C] to take the risks that make this country great[A].///

Discussion

The analysis shows that all four (4) cohesive devices (reference, repetition, ellipsis and conjunction) occurred in Obama’s speech. Examples of their usage are seen below:

Reference: Several references were found in Obama’s speech. Examples of such references include:

(30). We are true to our creed when a little girl born into the bleakest poverty knows that she has the same chance to succeed as anybody else because she is an American; she is free, and she is equal...

(7). For history tells us that while these truths may be self-evident, they’ve never been self-executing; that while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth.

Repetition : This is the repetition of words in a text for expressive purposes. Several words were repeated in the speech. ‘We’ which occurred sixty-one (61) times was the most frequently repeated word. Examples are as follows:

(29). We know that America thrives when every person can find independence...

(30). We are true to our creed when a little girl is born into the bleakest poverty...

Conjunction: They help in linking words, phrases, clauses and sentences together in the speech. This is the most frequently used cohesive device in the speech. This is seen in the following examples.

( 12). We made ourselves anew and vowed to move forward together.

( 30). We are true to our creed when a little girl is born into the bleakest poverty...

Ellipsis: This is the omission of a word or words where the subsequent word has the same reference as the first. Examples of ellipses in the speech are as follows:

( 27). For we, the people, understand that our country

(42). The commitments we make to each other through Medicare and Medicaid and

Social Security , these things do not sap our initiative, they strengthen us.

In terms of Interpersonal metafunction, all the sentences in speech are declarative. The declarative mood helps the speaker to be able to express his point of view and send his message. It also shortened the distance between the speaker and the listener/reader. The Interpersonal Metafunction helps maintain the relationship between the speaker/writer and the listener/reader to express the speaker’s viewpoint.

Conclusion

One can conclude that Halliday’s Metafunctions play a very important role in showing unity and cohesion in the speech and also help maintain the relationship between the speaker/writer and the listener/reader to express the speaker’s viewpoint . Halliday’s metafunctions therefore provide a technical explanation of Barack Obama’s speech.

References

Ahmad, L. (2016). Transitivity Analysis of the Inaugural Speech of President Umaru Musa Yaradua. Unpublished M.A Project. Department of English. Bayero University Kano.

Butt, D. et al (2003) Using Functional Grammar: An Explorer’s Guide. Australia: Sydney National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research.

Dickenson, P. (2009). A Systemic Linguistic Analysis of Two Prime Ministerial Speeches. British Journal. Vol. 1, 254-261.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1975). Learning How to Mean. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Second Edition. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M.A.K.and Matthiessen, C. (2004). Systemic Functional Grammar: A First Step into the Theory. London: Edward Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1989). Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1990). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Second Edition. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.

Maraniss, D. (2013). Barack Obama: The Story. New York: Simon & Schuster. Retrieved from www.wikipedia.com/barackobama/2014/

Matthiessen, C. (1995) Lexico-Grammatical Cartography: English System. London: International Language Science Publishers.

Khany, R. & Zohre, H. (2014). “A Systemic Functional Grammar Analysis of Dictators’ Speeches”. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences 98, 917-924.

Wang, J. (2010). “A Critical Discourse Analysis of Barack Obama’s Speeches”. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, Vol. 1, No. 3, 254-261, May 2010.

Get the full PDF here: