|
چکیده
|
Despite extensive critical attention to George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, systematic comparative analyses that examine the specific linguistic mechanisms of ideological control through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis remain limited. This study addresses that gap by investigating how language operates as a mechanism for shaping and governing reality in the two novels, and how their respective approaches to linguistic manipulation differ – specifically, Orwell’s fear based, coercive model versus Huxley’s pleasure based, seductive model. Employing a comparative Critical Discourse Analysis framework grounded in Fairclough’s (1995) three dimensional model (textual analysis, discursive practice analysis, and social practice analysis), the study examines key passages from both texts, focusing on lexical reduction, doublethink, historical revision, hypnopaedic conditioning, slogan saturation, and counter discourses. The analysis confirms that while both authors depict authoritarian systems that exploit language to sustain power, their methods are fundamentally distinct. Orwell’s 1984 embodies a repressive approach in which language is deliberately stripped down through Newspeak to restrict the very parameters of cognition. Conversely, Huxley’s Brave New World illustrates a manipulative approach in which language is emptied of substance via incessant slogans and hypnopaedia indoctrination, yielding a society governed not by terror but by engineered satisfaction. Through an examination of their methodologies, rhetorical techniques, and the prospects for opposition, this study contends that Orwell’s primary concern lies in the annihilation of truth, whereas Huxley warns against the erosion of significance. The findings contribute to both literary criticism and discourse studies by demonstrating how CDA can systematically uncover the linguistic underpinnings of ideological control in dystopian fiction.
|