الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 114 |  |  |
| | | from | 114 | | |
Abstract
This study aims to analyze American political discourse on the Syrian war in terms of two cognitive models: the Strict Father (SF) model and the Nurturant Parent (NP) model proposed by Lakoff (1996). The study is a practical attempt to test the degree to which these two models are manifested in the political discourse of Obama about the Syrian crisis. The objective of this study is to examine two main questions: first, to what degree does the American framing of the Syrian war conform to Lakoff’s theory of Moral Politics? And second, how far the Arabic translated speeches manifest the same Strict Father/Nurturant Parent moral values expressed in the original speeches? To examine these questions, an analysis of both Obama’s speeches and their Arabic translation is conducted in the light of Cienki’s (2004) method of approach. Contrary to what was hypothesized in this research, the findings of the study have shown that the Strict Father moral worldview is more present in Obama’s speeches about the Syrian war than the Nurturant Parent one. Obama’s political messages are mostly framed in accordance with the Strict Father doctrine. The study also asserts that translating moral political discourse is not only about transferring value-laden political messages from the source to the target text, but is also about considering the importance of other syntactic and semantic linguistic features that participate heavily in producing high-coherent translated texts.