A Critical Stylistic Analysis of Major Kaduna Nzeogwu Coup Speech

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics, Department of English Language Education, Legos State University of Education, Oto/Ijanikin, Nigeria

2 Associate Professor of Applied Linguistics, Department of Nigerian Languages and Literature, Department of Nigerian Language Education, Lagos State University of Education, Oto/Ijanikin, Nigeria

3 Lecturer in Applied Linguistics, Department of English, Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago-Iwoye, Ogun State, Nigeria

Abstract

This research examines the ideological underpinnings of the coup speech delivered on January 15, 1966, by Major Kaduna Nzeogwu. Employing Jeffries' (2010) Critical Stylistics theory as a methodological framework, the study conducts a linguistic analysis to uncover the political viewpoints and intentions of the coup plotters. The analysis reveals how specific linguistic choices and patterns were employed to communicate the plotters' intentions to the public, suppress dissent, and advocate for the establishment of military rule instead of democratic governance. The speech underscores the plotters' portrayal of their actions as necessary for national salvation, while framing democratic processes as ineffective. Additionally, the use of emotive language and authoritative tones served to bolster legitimacy and rally public support for the coup. The analysis further elucidates how the adopted linguistic strategies functioned to justify the overthrow of the existing government and the suspension of democratic institutions in Nigeria’s First Republic. This Critical Stylistic study highlights the intricate power dynamics that underpinned the military intervention and emphasizes the role of language as a tool for ideological persuasion. By revealing the linguistic resources employed by the coup plotters, this research contributes to a deeper understanding of how language can shape political realities and influence public perception during times of upheaval.

Keywords

References

Berlin, L. N. (Ed.). (2020). Positioning and stance in political discourse: The individual, the party, and the party line (p. vii). Vernon Press.
Croteau, D., & Hoynes, W. (2003). Media society: Industries, images, and audiences. Pine Forge Press.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Oxford University Press.
Fowler, R. (1991). Linguistic criticism. Oxford University Press.
Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315819679
Jeffries, L. (2007). Opposition in discourse: The construction of opposition in meaning. Continuum.
Jeffries, L. (2010). Critical stylistics: The power of English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Jeffries, L. (2014). Critical stylistics. In M. Burke (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of stylistics (pp. 408-420). Routledge.
Newsome, C. (2002). The use of slogans in political rhetoric. The Corinthian, 4(1), 3.
Nørgaard, N., Montoro, R., & Busse, B. (2010). Key terms in stylistics. Continuum.
Salami, O. (2010). The life and time of language (Inaugural Lecture Series 229). OAU Press.
Simpson, P. (1993). Language, Ideology, and Point of View. Routledge.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. Pompeu Fabra University.
Wikipedia contributors. (2024, November 13). 1966 Nigerian coup d’état. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_Nigerian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat
Applied Linguistics Inquiry
Volume 2, Issue 1
March 2024
Pages 8-17

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 14 October 2023
  • Revise Date: 06 December 2023
  • Accept Date: 09 January 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics