Argumentation in the Ethiopian Renaissance Dam Issue in English and Arabic Written Media Discourse (2013-2014): A Contrastive Study

Abstract

The present study attempts to analyze the argumentative structures, fallacies, topoi, argumentative moves as well as the most commonly utilized visual modes of argumentation as apparent in selected English and Arabic newspaper editorial and opinion editorial “op-ed” articles tackling the controversial Ethiopian Renaissance Dam crisis. The study adopts van Dijk’s (1995; 2000; 2008) approach to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as its framework of analysis integrating the pragma-dialectical approach as elaborately discussed in van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984; 2004) as well as van Eemeren at al. (1996; 2002) together with the taxonomy of topoi as illustrated by Wodak and Meyer (2001) and Birdsell and Groarke’s (1996; 2006) delineation of the visual modes of argumentation as the tools of analysis. The sources of data analyzed in the present study are fifty-two selected editorial and opinion-editorial articles tackling the construction of the controversial Ethiopian dam. This body of data is divided into twenty-four English editorial and op-ed articles selected from the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Telegraph, the Guardian, the Ethiopian Observer and the Ethiopian Reporter together with twenty-eight Arabic editorial and op-ed articles from Al-Ahram, Akhbar Alyoum, Al-Masry Al-Youm, Al-Watan, Al-Hayat, and Asharq Al-Awsat covering the span of two years 2013-2014. The study aims at: 1- highlighting the Arabic, Western and Ethiopian cultural nuances and specificities with regard to argumentation techniques and discursive strategies examining to what the extent each culture abides by the ideal/normative model of argumentation, and to what extent each of them departs from or violates the ideal model opting for bias as a counterpart for objectivity as a means to validate its standpoint; 2- highlighting the persuasive function of language that serves not only as a tool to express the difference in opinion but rather as a tool to create a different version of reality and