نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسنده
دکتری تخصصی زبانشناسی، پژوهشگر زبانکده ملی، تهران، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسنده [English]
This study presents a critical discourse analysis of the competitive language used in relation to Iran’s National University Entrance Exam (Konkur) within educational policymaking. Employing a mixed-methods approach, the qualitative data are analyzed through the discourse-historical argumentation model and the appraisal theory of language, focusing on three core components: attitude (affect, judgment, appreciation), engagement, and graduation, framed within Critical Discourse analysis (CDA). Quantitative analysis uses statistical charts and tables to classify linguistic fallacies and Topoi. The dataset includes over 50 purposively sampled official and media texts from institutions such as the Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution and the National Organization for Educational Testing, collected between 2023 and 2025. Findings reveal that the dominant Konkur discourse utilizes linguistic fallacies and conventional argumentative patterns to consolidate the authority of educational policymaking institutions while imposing heightened psychological pressure on candidates through contradictory reports. Furthermore, through linguistic appraisal, the discourse justifies educational justice and consciously or unconsciously privileges medical fields while marginalizing other disciplines—a phenomenon that elevates the social prestige of some fields and influences students, schools, families, and public perceptions.
کلیدواژهها [English]
)