The Semantic Shift of War: A Comparative Analysis of Political Discourse on the Gaza Conflict across News, Speech, and Social Media

Authors

  • Sutarman Sutarman Universitas Bumigora
  • Zainudin Abdussamad Universitas Bumigora

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37630/jpb.v15i4.3764

Keywords:

Semantic Change, Political Discourse, Israel-Gaza Conflict, Pragmatics, Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract

This study investigates the rapid semantic shifts of political terminology within the context of the 2025 Israel-Gaza conflict. Grounded in the cognitive-functional frameworks of Blank and Traugott and Dasher, the research analyzes how lexical meaning is constructed and altered across three distinct registers: international news media (Al Jazeera), diplomatic speech (UN Secretariat), and institutional social media (UN Human Rights). Using a qualitative descriptive approach, 15 key lexicons were analyzed to identify patterns of semantic change, including broadening, narrowing, and pejoration. The findings reveal three divergent trajectories of meaning: (1) Institutional Specialization in diplomatic speech, where general ethical terms like accountability are narrowed into performative legal demands; (2) Pragmatic Broadening in news media, where technical terms like ceasefire expand to encompass complex humanitarian narratives; and (3) Emotive Intensification on social media, where descriptive phrases undergo hyperbolic shifts to mobilize digital publics. The study concludes that political conflict acts as a catalyst for semantic change, driven by the opposing forces of institutional need for legal precision and the media’s drive for affective impact. These results support the view that semantic change is fundamentally discourse-driven and highly sensitive to the communicative affordances of the platform.

References

Al Jazeera. (2025, September 30). N General Assembly: What did world leaders say about Israel’s war on Gaza? Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/30/un-general-assembly-what-did-world-leaders-say-about-israels-war-on-gaza-4. Al Jazeera

Blank, A. (1999). hy do new meanings occur? A cognitive typology of the motivations for lexical semantic change. In A. Blank & P. Koch (Eds.). In Historical semantics and cognition (pp. 61–90). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110804195.61

Cap, P. (2013). Proximization: The pragmatics of symbolic distance crossing. John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.230

Chouliaraki, L. (2006). The spectatorship of suffering. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446220659

Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.x

Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315834368

Geeraerts, D. (2010). Theories of lexical semantics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198700302.001.0001

Guterres, A. (2025, August 28). Gaza: Another deadly escalation — Press remarks by António Guterres. United Nations. https://www.un.org/unispal/document/gaza-another-deadly-escalation-press-remarks-by-antonio-guterres-secretary-general-of-the-united-nations-on-the-situation-in-gaza/. United Nations

Hart, C. (2014). Discourse, grammar and ideology: Functional and cognitive perspectives. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472593574

KhosraviNik, M. (2014). Critical discourse analysis, power, and new media. In Critique, Social Media and the Information Society (pp. 222–237). Routledge. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203795293

Lakoff, G. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant!. Chelsea Green Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472544927

Leech, G. (1981). Semantics: The study of meaning (2nd ed.). Penguin Books.

Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective publics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199999736.001.0001

Pehar, D. (2001). Historical rhetoric and diplomatic ambiguity. Diogenes, 49(193), 55–63. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/039219210104919305

Richardson, J. E. (2007). Analysing newspapers: An approach from critical discourse analysis. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-20455-3

Serrano-Puche, J. (2016). Internet and emotions: New trends in an emerging field of research. Comunicar, 24(46), 19–26. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3916/C46-2016-02 Bagian: CONCLUSION & GENERAL DISCUS

Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2002). Regularity in semantic change. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486500

United Nations Human Rights [@UNHumanRights]. (2025, October 15). #Israel Government’s plan for a complete military takeover... [Tweet]. X. https://x.com/UNHumanRights/status/1953724174368670178

Van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Ideology and discourse analysis. Ournal of Political Ideologies, 11(2), 115–140. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/13569310600687908

Wodak, R. (2009). The discourse of politics in action: Politics as usual. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230594616

Zappavigna, M. (2012). Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the web. Bloomsbury Publishing. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472542336

Downloads

Published

2025-12-27

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 4 (2025): JURNAL PENDIDIKAN BAHASA

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Sutarman Sutarman, Zainudin Abdussamad

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

  1. Seluruh materi yang terdapat dalam situs ini dilindungi oleh undang-undang. Dilarang mengutip sebagian atau seluruh isi situs web ini untuk keperluan komersil tanpa persetujuan dewan penyunting jurnal ini.
  2. Apabila anda menemukan satu atau beberapa artikel yang terdapat dalam Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa yang melanggar atau berpotensi melanggar hak cipta yang anda miliki, silahkan laporkan kepada kami, melalui email pada Principle Contact.
  3. Aspek legal formal terhadap akses setiap informasi dan artikel yang tercantum dalam situs jurnal ini mengacu pada ketentuan lisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
  4. Semua Informasi yang terdapat di Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa bersifat akademik. Jurnal Pendidikan Bahasa tidak bertanggung jawab terhadap kerugian yang terjadi karana penyalah gunaan informasi dari situs ini.