In this work we analyze a particular instance of how language is used for political ends, namely for political persuasion. Official discourse in the United States after September 11th has revolved mainly around a semantic axis built on the concepts of war and terrorism, combined into a major political motto: “War on terror(ism)”. By analyzing conceptual problems related to the definition of war and, especially, of terrorism, we find a semantic overlap between the two and we comment on the resulting interplay. Next, we study a corpus of relevant texts, mainly by President Bush, to show how both concepts are articulated into a standard speech model.... (Ver más) Finally, we conclude that confusion between these concepts can be used to overlook established legal frameworks like civil rights and public accountability, and thereby to implement a far-reaching domestic and foreign policy agenda.

In this work we analyze a particular instance of how language is used for political ends, namely for political persuasion. Official discourse in the United States after September 11th has revolved mainly around a semantic axis built on the concepts of war and terrorism, combined into a major political motto: “War on terror(ism)”. By analyzing conceptual problems related to the definition of war and, especially, of terrorism, we find a semantic overlap between the two and we comment on the resulting interplay. Next, we study a corpus of relevant texts, mainly by President Bush, to show how both concepts are articulated into a standard speech model.... (Ver más) Finally, we conclude that confusion between these concepts can be used to overlook established legal frameworks like civil rights and public accountability, and thereby to implement a far-reaching domestic and foreign policy agenda.