Demystifying the magic of language: Critical linguistic case analysis of legitimation of authority

Abstract

This study is an analysis two pieces of discourse which were embedded within a larger conflict in a religious organization over leadership and authority. Faced with a direct challenge to their authority, the elders of the church sought to legitimize their leadership through linguistic performances. Principles from linguistic criticism were used to analyze the nature of the challenge to authority and the resulting legitimation attempt. Specifically the discourse was analyzed in terms of transitivity, modality, grammatical transformations, classifications, speech acts, and implicatures.

The study found that syntactic and semantic structures that challenged authority were ironic, filled with internal contradictions, inviting multiple readings. The most potent linguistic strategy employed was implicature which created double binds for the elders of the church and for members. The elders were disadvantaged in being forced to make any kind of statement regarding their authority. They walked a fine line in trying to place responsibility on the other side for the conflict without appearing to be victims.