INVESTIGATING METADISCOURSE MARKERS IN UK AND PAKISTAN’S POLITICAL LEADERS SPEECHES: A CORPUS-BASED MD ANALYSIS APPROACH

Abstract

This study investigates the use of metadiscourse markers in political speeches by leaders from Pakistan and the United Kingdom, utilizing a corpus-based Multidimensional Analysis (MD) approach grounded in Biber’s Five-Dimensional Model (1988) of Register Variation. Given that English serves as an official language and a critical medium for international discourse in Pakistan, this research addresses the linguistic and rhetorical strategies that Pakistani leaders, speaking in English, employ to communicate on international platforms compared to native English-speaking UK leaders. Specifically, this study examines how Pakistani political figures adapt their rhetorical style to align with or diverge from the stylistic conventions employed by UK political leaders, focusing on the degree to which these markers support persuasive and culturally resonant communication. The study involves a comparative analysis of eight speeches, with four delivered by Imran Khan and four by Theresa May at international forums. The research questions explore the degree to which these leaders align with Biber's five dimensions of register variation and differ in their use of interactional metadiscourse features. Using MAT Tagger and AntConc 4.3.1, metadiscourse markers are categorized into dimensions of involvement, narration, explicitness, persuasion, and concreteness, providing insights into each leader’s communicative approach and cultural framing. The findings reveal both shared and divergent metadiscourse patterns, with Imran Khan emphasizing unity, emotional appeal, and inclusivity, while Theresa May utilizes a more directive, policy-oriented stance, subtly shaping narratives to support her political agenda. This comparative analysis underscores the impact of metadiscourse markers in shaping political messages and their reception in cross-cultural contexts, suggesting that these linguistic tools play a critical role in political persuasion. The study’s corpus-based methodology highlights systematic differences in political discourse strategies and recommends extending such analyses to other cultural settings to better understand the role of language in political communication and leadership.