...........................
CHAPTER THREE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK,METHODOLOGY AND DATA DESCRIPTION........... 9
3.1 Theory Comparison..................................9
3.1.1 Discourse Analysis ............................9
3.1.2 Critical Discourse Analysis ..........................10
CHAPTER FOUR DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION............. 14
4.1 Introduction ....................................14
4.2 Identifying Discursive Features of the National Security Concept...............14
CHAPTER FIVE SYNTHETIC ASSESSMENT AND EXPLANATION . 31
5.1 Introduction ............................31
5.2 Understanding the Rhetorical Functions ......................31
CHAPTER FIVE SYNTHETIC ASSESSMENT AND EXPLANATION
5.1 Introduction
A comprehensive explanation will be taken up in this chapter with the approach ofCultural Discourse Studies, which focuses on purposes, historical and intercultural relations ofbuilding up America’s national security concept. Additionally, possible factors that might havehelped shape the current security concept will be discussed as well, expecting to achieve adeeper understanding of America’s concept of national security.
According to Cultural Discourse Studies, discourse does not only refer to the text itself,but is profoundly concerned with a set of interrelated categories for interpreting discursiveevents. In particular, purpose of the communicative action will be taken into consideration. Asfor the 2017 NSS document, which is released at a certain time, must embodies specific aims.In other words, the document is not an isolated text but embraces diverse factors concealedbehind. In this section, the motives of constructing the current America’s national securityconcept will be evaluated as a part of extension of that concept.
The document is released after the Trump Administration come into power for only elevenmonths, the period of which is shorter than that of G. W. Bush and of Obama. One importantreason may lie in the highly problematic establishment of Trump’s national security system(Burke, 2017, p. 574). Consequently, distrust of Trump’s statecraft intensified, also, theapproval rating dropped continuously given by the citizens. At this moment, it is exceedinglynecessary to release a National Security Strategy document to retain domestic support (C. Liu,2018, p. 59).
.............................
CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION
6.1 Summary of Findings
This dissertation has attempted to attain a thorough and comprehensive understanding ofthe discursive construction of America’s national security concept through the analysis of the2017 NSS document. To this end, the study draws on Cultural Discourse Studies whereby thedocument is seen as a cultural-communicative event, where discursive agents, contents, forms,purposes, cultural and historical relations are examined. With reference to the central researchquestion, a number of findings can be summarized as follows.
To begin with, the national security concept of the U.S. emerges as self-centered, superior,and hegemonic in relation to those of other nations on account of three broad discursivefeatures, (1) the “America First” strategy; (2) creating enemies through binary ways of thinking,and (3) showing (off) military and economic prowess by saber-rattling. It is formulated indirect as well as implicit ways with plain and easy-to-remember expressions and especiallyabundant discursive strategies of binary ways of thinking, saber-rattling, fear-mongering,repetition, boasting, emphasis, definition, categorization, inference, contrast, hyperbole,derogatory term, aggressive term and vague expression. Put another way, the concept ischaracterized by global hegemony, superiority, self-centeredness, principled realism,world-security-divis
