Cover not available
Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 30:2 (2007) ► pp.19.1–19.18

Doing battle with a noun

Notes on the grammar of ‘terror’

| Research Centre for Languages and Cultures Education, School of International Studies, University of South Australia
Studies from a range of disciplinary perspectives have highlighted how the public rhetoric of the Bush administration has shaped the representation of the conflict which has followed 9/11. However, the literature in this area raises but does not itself address the question of how the administration’s use of ‘terror’, ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist(s)’ contributes to this representation. This paper addresses the question by providing a preliminary analysis of how these terms participate in the grammar of twelve of George W. Bush’s speeches since 9/11. Drawing on Systemic Functional Grammar, the analysis suggests that ‘terror’ has become interchangeable with ‘terrorism’ and ‘terrorist(s)’, resulting in the personification of ‘terror’ as an abstract agent. The implications of this construction are explored in relation to the literature on the rhetoric associated with the ‘war on terror’.
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 1 January 2007
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.2104/aral0719
References (46)
Abuaisha, H. 2003. ‘The rhetoric of the “War on terror”’. Situation Analysis 21: 62–72.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. 1991. Language and symbolic power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1998. Practical reason. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bush, G. W. 2001a. ‘Remarks by the President Upon Arrival’. Washington D.C.: The White House Accessed 26 March 2006. Available from: [URL].
2001b. ‘Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 26 March 2006. Available from: [URL].
2002. ‘President Thanks World Coalition for Anti-Terrorism Efforts’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 30 March 2006. Available from: [URL].
2003a. ‘President George Bush Discusses Iraq in National Press Conference’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 3 April 2006. Available from: [URL].
2003b. ‘President Bush Addresses the Nation’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 25 March 2006. Available from: [URL].
. 2003c. ‘President Bush Announces Major Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from: [URL].
2003d. ‘President Addresses the Nation’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from: [URL]
2003e. ‘President Bush Addresses United Nations General Assembly’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from: [URL].
2003f. ‘President Bush Addresses Nation on the Capture of Saddam Hussein’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from: [URL].
2004a. ‘State of the Union Address’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from:[URL].
2004b. ‘President Bush Reaffirms Resolve to War on Terror, Iraq and Afghanistan’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from: [URL].
2004c. ‘President Outlines Steps to Help Iraq Achieve Democracy and Freedom’. Washington D.C.: The White House. Accessed 2 April 2006. Available from: [URL].
Butt, G; Lukin, A; Matthiessen, C. 2004. ‘Grammar – the first covert operation of war’. Discourse & Society 15 (2-3): 267–290. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Candlin, C. 1997. ‘General editor’s preface’. In The construction of professional discourse, edited by Gunnarsson, B-L.; Linell, P.; Nordberg, B.. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ching, M. 2003. ‘Initial Presidential speeches on the Dec. 7, 1941, and Sept. 11, 2001, attacks: A linguistic/rhetorical analysis’. Southern Journal of Linguistics 25 (1-2): 1–15.Google Scholar
Cronick, K. 2002. ‘The discourse of President George W. Bush and Osama bin Laden: A rhetorical analysis and hermeneutic interpretation’. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research (July) 3 (3). Accessed 23 April 2005. Available from: [URL].
Eckert, J. 2005. ‘The politics of security’. Working paper number 76. Max Planck Institute for Social Anthropology Working Papers, Max Planck Gesellschaft.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. 2004. ‘After the fall’. Discourse & Society 15 (2-3): 155–184. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fairclough, N. 1992. Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. 1979. Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
1980. Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar
Gearty, C. 2003. ‘Terrorism and morality’. European Human Rights Law Review 41: 377–383.Google Scholar
Getler, M. 2003. The language of terrorism. Washington Post Ombudsman. September 21, p. 6.Google Scholar
Giddens, A. 1991. Modernity and self identity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
1994. ‘Institutional reflexivity and modernity’. In The polity reader in social theory, edited by Giddens, A.; Held, D.; Hubert, D.; Seymour, D.; Thompson, J.. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Giddens A.; Held, D.; Hubert, D.; Seymour, D.; Thompson, J. 1994. ‘Introduction’. In The polity reader in social theory, edited by Giddens, A.; Held, D.; Hubert, D.; Seymour, D.; Thompson, J.. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Graham, P; Keenan, T; Dowd, A-M. 2004. ‘A call to arms at the end of history: A discourse–historical analysis of George W. Bush’s declaration of war on terror’. Discourse & Society 15 (2-3): 199–221. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habermas, J. 1984. The theory of communicative action, volume one: Reason and the rationalization of society, translated by McCarthy, T. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1981).Google Scholar
1987. The theory of communicative action, volume two: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason, translated by McCarthy, T. Boston, MA: Beacon Press. (Original work published 1985).Google Scholar
Halliday, M. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
1985. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
1998. ‘On the grammar of pain’. Functions of Language 5 (1): 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M.; Hasan, R. 1985. Language, context and text. Geelong: Deakin.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M. 2001. ‘Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: Methods or paradigms?’ Discourse & Society 14 (6): 751–781. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. 2005. ‘War on terror, rest in peace’. Alternet. Accessed 16 February 2007. Available from: [URL]/.
Lazar, A; Lazar, M. 2004. ‘The discourse of the new world order: “Out-casting” the double face of threat’. Discourse & Society 15 (2-3): 223–242. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leudar, I; Marsland, V; Nekvapil, J. 2004. ‘On membership categorization: ‘us’, ‘them’ and ‘doing violence’ in political discourse’. Discourse & society 15 (2-3): 243–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Makdisi, S. 2002. ‘Spectres of “terrorism”’. Interventions 4 (2): 265–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McArthur, T. 2002. ‘English and “the war on terror”’. English Today 69 (18:1): 3–7. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norton, C. 2003. ‘Marines versus Fedayeen: Interpretive naming and constructing the “other”’. Bad subjects 63. Accessed 13 May 2005. Available from: [URL].
Record, J. 2003. Bounding the global war on terrorism. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rudd, P. 2004. ‘Weapons of mass destruction: The unshared referents of Bush’s rhetoric’. Pragmatics 14 (4): 499–525. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saraceni, M. 2003. ‘The strange case of Dr Blair and Mr Bush: Counting their words to solve a mystery’. English Today 19 (3): 3–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Wilson, John
2015. Political Discourse. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ► pp. 775 ff. DOI logo
Herring, Eric & Doug Stokes
2011. Critical realism and historical materialism as resources for critical terrorism studies. Critical Studies on Terrorism 4:1 ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.