This paper observes that most discourses in a multilingual setting tend to be ideologically based. Using the multi-ethnic Nigerian situation as reference point, the study explores the ideological nature of reportage in selected newspaper headlines with a view to examining how the structures of media discourse are influenced by the structures of ideologies. The Triangulated Discourse Analytical Approach of Teun Van Dijk was adapted as the theoretical framework for the study. Twenty headlines, characterized by social properties of ideologies such as activity, perspective, rhetorical form, goal, resource and so on are purposively selected from five different Nigerian newspapers, formed the data which were content-analyzed. The surface structure of the newspaper headlines contained ideologies and belief system of the writers which were not overtly expressed but located in the linguistic expressions that characterized the selected newspaper headlines. The nature of language in the newspaper headlines indicate that the writers conceal their opinions in linguistic forms in order to create persuasion for ideological support.
There is no gainsaying the fact that social media such as facebook encapsulate language of obscenity, vulgarity and indecency. Using the stylistic approach that considers style as choice, the paper contends that stylistic strategy of euphemism can be deployed to mitigate obscenity and vulgarity in the language of social media. An article on facebook “Letter to my Boss” serves as data for the analysis of obscenity in the language of social media. Linguistic contents of the article, purposively selected and placed in the first columns of both tables I & II, represent the stylistic choices of the writer, while the linguistic content on the second columns of the tables represents the available linguistic options open to the writer. The analysis reveals that the writer carefully selects his/her linguistic choices while ignoring other choices of the available options even though they contain the same meanings. This is perhaps done in order to mitigate the obscenity that the article would have portrayed. The paper therefore suggests that this euphemistic strategy can be deployed as stylistic choice in any literary piece where vulgarity and obscenity are inevitable.
It is a fact that no other issue has occupied the centre stage of global discourses in recent times more than terrorism and its attendant counter. It is also a fact that the dominant strategy adopted against terrorism so far, and in the recent times is military action. Surprisingly however, just as terrorism has caused severe destruction to lives and property, just as it has dangerously threatened global peace and security, it is an observable fact that the adoption of military action against terrorism has always led to almost equal level of devastation within the affected territories. Thus, the search for an alternative strategy that can address the scourge, with minimal devastative consequences has become very necessary. The aim of this paper is to examine how effective use of language and other communication tools could be harnessed in this regard. The paper holds that terrorism is a product of loss of trust, mutual suspicion, betrayal, deceit among other factors. It is a reactionary mechanism for settling scores. The paper therefore, asserts that effective use of language holds great panacea towards engendering mutual trust and peaceful co-existence, and by extension, also, holds the potential to forestalling terrorism. The paper has adopted as its theoretical background, Critical Discourse Analyses. It is a relevant linguistic framework that seeks to analyse how language captures the power play in human co-existence. Furthermore, the paper has been segmented into internally related sub-headings for clarity and orderly presentation. The paper in its conclusion does not rule out the need for military action as option to counter terrorism. It however submits that there is need to look beyond military action for further solution, especially from the point of view of avoiding terrorism instead of fighting terrorism