The appraisal perspective of the Iraqi and Kuwaiti press discourse towards abrogating the navigation agreement

Abstract

Evaluative language in media content is an important factor in shaping the image of events and how they are perceived by the audience. The process is achieved through the use of language to convey a writer's perspective and discursive strategy to reinforce the meanings communicated, whether they are negative or positive, due to specific ideological biases. This study examines aspects of evaluative language in Iraqi and Kuwaiti newspaper articles on the Federal Court's decision to cancel the maritime agreement with Kuwait, which has caused political and media controversy. To this end, six newspapers were analyzed, including three from Iraq and the same from Kuwait. The researcher used a mixed quantitative and qualitative approach to achieve the main objective of the study, which is to clarify the nature of evaluative views in the sample newspaper discourse on the issue under study. Martin and White’s appraisal theory framework and Van Dijk’s ideological square analysis strategies were used. The sample included 18 articles during the period of September and October 2023. According to the results, the viewpoints of the authors of articles in both nations demonstrate a negative degree or ideological divide towards each other. Furthermore, their perspectives are captured in the evaluations conducted by these agencies and represent evidence of political and institutional factors that shape the journalistic discourse.