A Sociolinguistic Study Of Jega S Speeches

1
A SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDY OF JEGA’S SPEECHES DURING THE 2015
NIGERIA’S GENERAL ELECTION
A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF ARTS (B. A.) IN THE DEPARTMENT OF
LINGUISTICS, IGBO AND OTHER NIGERIAN LANGUAGES, UNIVERSITY
OF NIGERIA, NSUKKA
BY
ABOH, SOPURUCHI CHRISTIAN
REG NO: 2012/181313
(Tel: +2348066268518)
SUPERVISOR: MR. N. O. AHAMEFULA
AUGUST 2016

2
TITLE PAGE
A SOCIOLINGUISTIC STUDY OF JEGA‘S SPEECHES DURING THE 2015
NIGERIA‘S GENERAL ELECTIONS

3
CERTIFICATION/APPROVAL PAGE
This is to certify that this project has been supervised and approved for the
award of Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in the Department of Linguistics, Igbo and
Other Nigerian Languages, University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
By
…………………………… ……………………………..
Mr. Ahamefula, N. O. Prof. (Mrs.) R. I. Okorji
(Supervisor) Head of Department
……………………………… ……………………………..
External Examiner Member of the Committee
……………………………
Prof. Patrick Uchenna Okpoko
(Dean, Faculty of Arts)

4
DEDICATION
This research work is dedicated to my friends who started this journey but could not live
to finish the race:
Orji, Stanley Ekemezie (1990-2014)
Ugwuanyi, Sampson Ekene (1992-2015)
Whyte, Chinecherem Elizabeth (1991-2016)
And to Professor Attahiru Jega, the best INEC chairman I have ever seen.

5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I want to use this medium to thank God almighty for His love, grace and strength
showered on me throughout my stay in the university. I praise His name for His
faithfulness. I also thank my parents, Mr and Mrs Linus Aboh Nwankwo and my uncle,
Arc. Innocent Okoli for their moral and financial support.
In the educational domain, I acknowledge the fatherly care of my supervisor,
Deacon Ahamefula, N. O. for seeing to the success of this research work. I also
appreciate the care of Head of the department, Prof. Mrs. R. I. Okorji. I will not forget the
lecturers in the Department of Linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian Languages: Prof.
(Mrs) C. I. Ikekeonwu, Prof. I. U. Nwadike, Prof. C. N. Okebalama, Prof. G. I.
Nwaozuzu, Associate Prof. J. O. Uguru, Prof. B. N. Anasiudu, Prof. B. M. Mbah, Dr. C.
U. Agbedo, Mrs. M. C. Onyejekwe, Dr. Mrs. E. E. Mbah, Dr. E. S. Ikeokwu, Dr. and Dr.
Mrs G. O. Iloene, Dr. S. O. Babarinde, Dr. C. O. Okeke, Dr. C. N. Ugwuona, Dr. J. O.
Onu, Mrs. M. C. Akaeze, Mr. M. O. Ndiribe, Mrs. B. C. Odii, Mrs. G. T. Okeke, Mrs. M.
O. Uzoagba, Mr. D. T. Waya, Mr. K. O. Obitube, Mr. G. C. Ezika, Mrs. E. Ihedigbo,
Mrs. C. Eze, Mr. C. C. Ezebube and Miss N. Ukaegbu.
I want to also appreciate my classmates who have been influential in my life
especially Vivian; Ijeoma; Chioma; Onyeso, Linda. Others include: Adaobi, Mary, Lydia,
Michael, Esther (my class rep), Goodluck, Joshua, Ewa, Bright, Sylvanus, Miracle,
Nkem, Hannah, Chiamaka, Kete, Oluchi, Loveth, Chinedu, Nwoye, Ifunanya, Fr. Titus,
Florence, Ogwudu, Jennifer, Okechukwu, Chinaza, Modesta, Sandra, Victoria, Chinyere,
Chisom, Chekwube, Paschaline, Queen, and my roommate, Okeoma, Obinna for his
assistance all this while. Big shout out to S. C. Anorue, A. P. Nwachukwu, Secunda, and
E. O. Ejioke for their encouragements.

6
I will not end this acknowledgment without appreciating the help of my siblings;
Nwankwo, Obinna; Oluchi, Chibuzor, Chinedu and Chidiebere. My appreciation also
goes to Our Lady Cause of Our Joy Praesidium, St Peter‘s Chaplaincy and Nigerian
Federation of Catholic Students (NFCS) for guiding me aright in this den of hungry lions
and lionesses. I also thank those that worked with me as executives in the 2015/2016
NALLS administration. If I did not remember you in my acknowledgements, I greet you
in a special way. I thank you all.
Aboh, Sopuruchi Christian
Department of Linguistics, Igbo and Other Nigerian Languages, UNN.

7
Table of contents
Title page ………………………………………………………………………………. i
Approval page …………………………………………………………………………. ii
Dedication ……………………………………………………………………………... iii
Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………………. iv
Table of contents ………………………………………………………………………. v
Abstract …...………………………………………………………………………….. vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study …………………………………………………………... 1
1.2 Statement of the problem ………………………………………………………….. 5
1.3 Purpose of the study ……………………………....……………………………….. 6
1.4 Research questions ………………………………………………………………… 6
1.5 Significance of the study …………………………………………………………... 7
1.6 Scope of the study …………………………………………………………………. 7
1.7 Limitations of the study ……………………………………………………………...8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical studies ……………………………………………………………….... 9
2.2 Empirical studies ………………………………………………………………… 28
2.3 Theoretical framework ……………………………………………………………...34
2.4 Summary of literature review …………………………………………………….. 35
CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0 Preamble …………………………………………………………………………... 37
3.1 Research design …………………………………………………………………… 37

8
3.2 Area of study …………………………………………………………………….... 37
3.3 Population of the study ……………………………………………………………. 37
3.4 Sampling method and sampling procedure ……………………………………….. 38
3.5 Method of data collection ………………………………………………………..... 38
3.6 Method of data analysis …………………………………………………………… 38
CHAPTER FOUR: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Analysis of the structural pattern of Jega‘s speeches ……………………………. 39
4.2 Analysis on the extent at which Jega‘s speeches reflected the value of INEC …... 57
4.3 Analysis of the information strength of Jega‘s electoral speeches ……………….. 67
4.4 Analysis of the outcomes/effects of Jega‘s electoral speeches …………………... 70
CHAPTER FIVE: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Summary of findings and conclusion ……………………………………………. 73
5.2 Recommendations ……………………………………………………………….. 76
References
Appendices

9
Abstract
In every election period in Nigeria, the INEC chairman delivers speeches on the conduct
of elections. It is in line with this that this research work tends to look at the electoral
speeches of Jega in the just concluded 2015 general elections. In the view of this, the
research adopts the cooperative principles and Critical Discourse Analysis as its
theoretical framework. It also adopts the descriptive research method to analyse the two
speeches of Jega: Statement on timetable and conduct of polls from the sociolinguistic
perspective. By adopting the maxims of the cooperative principle in analysing the
structural pattern of speeches of Jega, the research finds out that the whole sections
fulfilled the maxim of quantity and relation while the speeches flouted the maxim of
quality and manner in section A and D where some veracity of some statements cannot
be verified because of its futuristic occurrence. The research also reveals that out of the
values of INEC, Jega reflected and abided by the value of teamwork to a great extent. In
the aspect of information strength of the speeches, the research discovers that a lot of
information can be derived from Jega‘s speeches. The research recommends that speakers
should subject their speeches to the maxims of cooperative principle before public
delivery.

10
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background to the study
In the Nigerian presidential system of government, there are three tiers: the
federal, state and local governments. The federal government is controlled by the
president who is the Commander-in Chief of Armed Forces and one who has the highest
authority. The governors are in charge of states and owe allegiance to the president at the
federal level while local governments are controlled by chairmen. The emergence of
either the president, governor or chairman can only be possible through the process of
election. The president or the governors are brought to power by the electorates through
the electoral processes. Election is one of the characteristics of a good democracy.
Kwaghga (2012:65) defines election as an ―institutionalized procedures for the
choosing of office holders by some or all the recognized members of a society.‖ He
further notes that election provides the citizen the rights to choose who best suits them
and maintains a good contact with them. Similarly, Bratton and Walle (1997) posit that
elections are fundamental elements for installing democratic governance and general
democratic consolidation. They further note that elections form a core element of
citizen‘s fundamental right in a democracy. Continuing, Eminue (2001) asserts that a
democratic election is one which allows the electorates to freely elect their leader without
intimidation or coercion. In any democratic country, election is conducted by an Election
Management Body (EMB).
However, election can only take place in a democratic state just as Nigeria. The
origin of democracy can be traced to the ancient Greece. Inter-parliamentary Union
(1998:IV) defines democracy thus:

11
Democracy is a universally recognized ideal as well as a goal,
which is based on common values shared by peoples throughout
the world community irrespective of cultural, political, social and
economic differences. It is thus a basic right of citizenship to be
exercised under conditions of freedom, equality, transparency and
responsibility, with due respect for the plurality of views, and in
the interest of the polity.
This implies that in a democratic state or nation, importance is placed on human
rights, freedom and public opinion. Similarly, Bassiouni (1998) remarks that democracy
in any of its meanings, requires the existence and free exercise of certain basic individual
and group rights without which no democracy, however perceived, can exist. Suffice it to
note that a free, fair and credible conduct of an election is a dividend of a good
democracy.
Nigeria as a country, conducts its general elections every four years. The conduct
of this election is made possible by an EMB known as Independent National Electoral
Commission (INEC). Iwara (2010) posits that election management connotes the
organization and conduct of elections to public office by an electoral body for a specific
number of years as enshrined in the constitution. He further remarks that election
management comprises structure and process. Structure, according to him, means the
bureaucracy that is set up to organize the election while process consists of the rules and
procedures that govern the electoral processes. In the same vein, Jinadu (1997) describes
the importance and function of election management as having to do with the
indeterminacy of elections, that is, the possibility of erstwhile winners becoming losers
and erstwhile losers becoming winners. This, according to him, is a function of an
impartial election management. In Nigeria, INEC is in charge for the conduct of election.

12
Kurfi (2005:10) asserts that following the proposal by the military government of
General Abdusallami Abubakar to relinquish power to a democratically elected
government in 1999, INEC was established as an institutionalized government body
through the instrumentality of law to manage the electoral process in Nigeria. He further
demonstrates that the establishment of INEC marked the sixth in the series of Election
Management Bodies in the anal of Nigeria‘s quest for democracy. The previous EMBs
according to him include: Electoral Commission of Nigeria (ECN), Federal Electoral
Commission (FEC), Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO), National Electoral
Commission (NEC) and National Electoral Commission of Nigeria (NECON). Jinadu
(2011) demonstrates that the change of name of these EMBs is to ensure that the
weaknesses and flaws of the old will not creep into the new. INEC, since its inception,
has successfully conducted five elections (1999, 2003, 2007, 2011, and 2015). Since its
inception as well, the leadership of INEC has undergone series of changes with the
appointment of Justice Ephraim Ayo Apata in 1998-2000, Dr. Abel Guobadia 2000-2005,
Prof. Maurice Iwu 2005-2010, Prof. Attahiru Jega 2010-June 2015, and the present
Acting Chairman, Mrs. Amina Bala Zakari.
The last election in Nigeria was conducted in the months of March and April
2015. During the pre- and post-electoral processes, the INEC chairman who was in
charge for the conduct of the elections to ensure credibility and fairness made some
speeches and these speeches are what this research tends to analyze. There is always the
incidence or need of one especially the INEC chairman to talk to a group of people
(technically called the electorates) just as there is equally the incidence or need to listen
to a group of people (the public). The content of these speeches may be to clear confusion
or to enlighten the masses on the situation on ground. Obitube (2014) asserts that a
speech is measured by its relevance or value. He further notes that every speech is
delivered with an aim and, so, when the aim of a speech is achieved, speech is said to be
effective and vice versa. Consequently, Chambers (2003) in his own observation remarks

13
that whenever we speak; we reveal not only some personality traits and certain sensitivity
to the contextual style but also a whole configuration of characteristics that we, by and
large, share with everyone who resembles us socially. Similarly, Agbedo (2015) avers
that social factors such as class, sex, age, occupation, region etc. affect the way we speak.
However, Obitube (2014) demonstrates that the value of speech can be viewed
from two angles. The first angle according to him is the angle of the speaker. Here, he
notes that a delivered speech should be able to convey the thoughts and ideas which the
speaker possesses in his mind. He further notes that any other message(s) conveyed by
the speech falls short of these thoughts and ideas of the speaker cannot, in any way, be
adjudged to have served its purpose. The second angle consists of the hearer/audience.
He posits that if the speech evokes from the hearer, the kind of response anticipated by
the speaker, the speech is said to possess value. Similarly, these kinds of response can be
integrated with other channels of communication such as gesture, head movements,
posture, interpersonal proximity, eye contact, gaze direction and facial expression.
Therefore, it is pertinent to critically analyze and discuss the language and speech
patterns of the immediate past INEC chairman, Professor Attahiru Jega during the 2015
Nigeia‘s general elections which reflects his motive to ensuring that elections were
successful and lives were not tampered with. All consider his motives as to efforts to
maintain the territorial integration of Nigeria as a democratic/political entity. Election in
Nigeria has been adjudged to be bloody and painstaking. Kwaghga (2012) asserts that
election processes in Nigeria are characterized by several underage voters, ballot bag
snatching, state intimidation via armed forces and Para-military agencies. The extent Jega
used language to communicate information; reduced the volatile and tensed situation in
order to ensure a free, fair and credible election are the major pre-occupation of this
research which will be done under the area of sociolinguistics which studies language
influence on the society. Language is not used in isolation but in social context so that its

14
meaning will be fully interpreted. This research, therefore, looks into the speeches of Jega
with the intention of dissecting his choice and use of language and their sociolinguistic
implications.
1.2 Statement of the problem
Within the 21st
century, many scholars, researchers and authors have carried out
extensive and well-articulated researches on speech and pragmatics. Some of these
researchers include: Obitube (2014), Ugwu (2013), Ibiere (2013), Agbedo and Akaan
(2012), Ahamefula and Okoye (2012), Aghalino (2004) etc. These scholars have analysed
various speeches and texts that are relevant to the audience.
Irrespective of these scholarly researches, no research has been done in the area of
analyzing the speech of an INEC chairman or any EMB chairman during elections. Some
scholars like Idiagbon (2010) and Obitube (2014) have analysed the speeches of
politicians and political party‘s flag bearers during elections but none has been done on
the speech of the INEC chairman who is in-charge-of the conduct of elections to the best
of our knowledge. The prospects, rules and achievements of any election are embedded
in the speeches of the INEC chairman.
However, it has been observed that when people speak, they do not know the
implications of the speeches. This is reflected in the sense that people make promises
without fulfilling them, thereby, flouting the conversational maxims. This has been a
problem during speech delivery and the need to bring this problem to the fore and to
enlighten the masses prompted this research.

15
1.3 Purpose of the study
This research sets out to analyse some selected speeches of the immediate past
INEC chairman, Prof. Attahiru Jega during Nigeria‘s 2015 general elections. The content
of these speeches, the values of INEC revealed, the speeches‘ information strengths are
the major concerns of this research. It is worthy to note that the main aim of every speech
is to communicate the intention(s) of the speaker effectively to the audience. Therefore,
this research sets out to:
 Find out the structural pattern of the electoral speeches of Jega.
 Find out the extent at which his speeches reflect the values of INEC.
 Discover the information strengths of Jegas‘ electoral speeches.
 Ascertain the outcomes/effects of the electoral speeches of Jega.
1.4 Research questions
In line with the above purposes, the following research questions have been
framed because the success of the research lies in its ability to unambiguously answer
these questions. Therefore, this research has the following research questions to answer:
i. What is the structural pattern of the electoral speeches of Jega?
ii. To what extent do Jegas‘ speeches reflect the values of INEC?
iii. What are the information strengths of Jegas‘ electoral speeches?
iv. What are the outcomes/effects of Jegas‘ electoral speeches?

16
1.5 Significance of the study
There are a lot of benefits from this research. For scholars and researchers, this
research will provide enough literature and reference points for researchers who want to
go into speech analysis.
Moreover, this research will reveal to public office holders to analyse their speech
before delivery because their speech reveals their ideology and may not achieve the
intended mission. Consequently, for the masses and electorates, the research will bring to
their notice the importance of not looking at speeches at the ephemeral level, rather; they
should pay critical attention to the speeches in order to ascertain the hidden information
and the intention(s) of the speaker. The knowledge of these are important because
Noonan (1980), avers that speeches are not only the way people measure public men.
Speeches have also been how people tell others who they are.
1.6 Scope of the study
The scope of this study is sociolinguistics which is the study of the relationship
between language and the society. Hudson (1980) defines sociolinguistics as the study of
the influence of language on the society. Thus, the study is limited to finding out the
structural pattern of the electoral speeches of Jega, to find out the extent his speeches
reflect the values of INEC, discovering the information strengths of the speeches, as well
as ascertaining the outcomes/effects of the speeches.
Sequel to the above purposes of the research, therefore, this research work is
limited to conducting a precise study of some selected electoral speeches of Jega during
the 2015 general elections in Nigeria using the theoretical frameworks of co-operative
principles and critical discourse analysis.

17
1.7 Limitations of the study
This research will adopt two Jega‘s speeches because of the difficulty posed to
obtain Jega‘s written speeches. Most of the data seen in the internet were interviews
granted to news men. This posed as a problem which made the researcher to only use the
two speeches found. These speeches include his speech on timetable poll delivered on
Saturday, February 7, 2015 and his speech on conduct of polls delivered on Sunday,
March 29, 2015.

18
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Theoretical studies
Every human communication is done through the use of language. Taiwo
(2009:80) notes ―Language is a conveyer belt of power. It moves people to demonstrate
support, vote, debate or revolt.‖ Language according to Anagbogu, Mbah and Eme
(2010) is a means which humans use for communicating their ideas, feelings, emotions
and desires, through complex vocal or written symbols. Similarly, Agbedo (2007) sees
language as a medium for interaction and communication between people. What these
definitions offer us is that the chief factor in expressing feelings, thoughts and ideas is
language.
Thus, the importance of language cannot be overemphasized in speech delivery
especially in the area of politics and elections. Waya and Nneji (2013:17) on the
importance of language in politics write:
The importance of language in expressing thoughts and ideas cut across all
sectors or fields of human endeavours. Language is essential to politicians.
Most activities performed by the politicians are done through the use of
language. These include: manifesto, campaign, rally, election,
victory/inauguration, policy formulation and implementation.
This implies that the importance of language to politics and political speeches is
as the importance of a mother to a new born baby. In Nigerian politics, particularly
during elections, speeches are made by the INEC chairman before, during and after
elections. The political party‘s flag bearer as well renders his speech during campaigns in
order to get the votes of the electorates. Montgomery (1995) sees speech as an
instantaneous and collaborative engagement of one participant with another with the

19
separate actions of each finely meshed together. He further avers that the process of
composing and planning speech goes hand in hand with the act of speaking itself and the
process of interpretation has to be just as instantaneous because the product is not
recoverable. Therefore, speeches do not only reveal information on a subject matter,
rather, it reveals to an extent the ideological perspective of the speaker.
In recent years, political speech is becoming a popular concept especially in the
area of linguistic research. The area of linguistics that studies political speeches is
pragmatics which is under the field of sociolinguistics. The study of political speeches is
relevant to sociolinguistic investigation because the delivery of political speeches
influences people and electorates whose actions affect the society. In support of this
claim, Opeibi (2009) affirms that language is a vital process of setting the personality and
the programme of the candidates to the public, with the primary aim of gaining their
support and mobilizing them to participate in the process of securing and controlling
power. Hudson (1980) posits that sociolinguistics is the study of language in relation to
the society. According to him, sociolinguistics throws more light on the nature of
language in general or on the characteristics of some particular language.
Wardhaugh (2006:15-18) writing about the preoccupations and methodology of
sociolinguistics notes, ―Sociolinguistics is charged with the duty of investigating the
relationships between language and society with the goal of a better understanding of the
structure of language and of how languages function in communication. Researches in
sociolinguistics must be oriented toward both data and theory: which means, any
conclusion arrived at must be solidly based on evidence but also be motivated by
questions that can be answered in an approved scientific way.‖
Anagbogu, Mbah and Eme (2010) claim that sociolinguistics proffers solution to
the linguistic problem of bilingualism, multilingualism and how to design a language
program for children. Bell (1976:187-191), drawing extensively from the work of Labov,

20
outlines a set of principles or axioms that sociolinguistic investigation should follow.
Thus:
i. The cumulative principle: The more that we know about language, the more we can
find out about it, and we should not be surprised if our search for new knowledge takes us
into new areas of study and into areas in which scholars from other disciplines are
already working.
ii. The uniformation principle: The linguistic processes which we observe to be taking
place around us are the same as those which have operated in the past, so that there can
be no clean break between synchronic (i.e., descriptive and contemporary) matters and
diachronic (i.e., historical) ones.
iii. The principle of convergence: The value of new data for confirming or interpreting
old findings is directly proportional to the differences in the ways in which the new data
are gathered; particularly useful linguistic data are gathered through procedures needed in
other areas of scientific investigation.
iv. The principle of subordinate shift: When speakers of a non-standard (or subordinate)
variety of language, e.g., a dialect, are asked direct questions about that variety, their
responses will shift in an irregular way toward or away from the standard (or
superordinate) variety, e.g., the standard language, so enabling investigators to collect
valuable evidence concerning such matters as varieties, norms, and change.
v. The principle of style-shifting: There are no ‗single-style‘ speakers of a language,
because each individual controls and uses a variety of linguistic styles and no one speaks
in exactly the same way in all circumstances.
vi. The principle of attention: ‗Styles‘ of speech can be ordered along a single dimension
measured by the amount of attention speakers are giving to their speech, so that the more
‗aware‘ they are of what they are saying, the more ‗formal‘ the style will be.

21
vii. The vernacular principle: The style which is most regular in its structure and in its
relation to the history of the language is the vernacular, that relaxed, spoken style in
which the least conscious attention is being paid to speech.
viii. The principle of formality: Any systematic observation of speech defines a context in
which some conscious attention will be paid to that speech, so that it will be difficult,
without great ingenuity, to observe the genuine ‗vernacular.‘
From the above axioms, it can be deduced that any sociolinguist who considers
them during the course of a sociolinguistic research is likely to come with a conclusion
that is objective. Also, recognition of the type of data to be used will help to arrive at a
valid conclusion. This recognition is important because data got in a natural speech event
gives the ideal nature of the language or variety of a language under study.
Within the domain of pragmatics and sociolinguistics, some theories have been
propounded by some scholars and researchers like Fairclough, Hymes, Grice etc. through
which speeches and texts may be analysed. A review of some of these theories is done to
help shed more light on this present work.
2.1.1 Pragmatics
Pragmatics is a field of study founded by Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914). It
studies discourse based on context. Horn and Ward (2004) note that the landmark event
in the development of a systematic framework for pragmatics was the delivery of Grice‘s
(1967) William James lectures, a masterful program that showed how a regimented
account of language use facilitates a simpler, more elegant description of language
structure. They also note that more recently, work in pragmatic theory has extended from
the attempt to rescue syntax and semantics from their own unnecessary complexities to
other domains of linguistic inquiry, ranging from historical linguistics to the lexicon,
from language acquisition to computational linguistics, from intonational structure to

22
cognitive science. Similarly, Agbanusi (2010:263) states, ―Pragmatics is an American
philosophy, which seeks to relate philosophy to practical life by making practical
relevance and usefulness the criteria for truth and meaning.‖ He also observes that the
development of pragmatism was engineered by John Dewey and William James, whose
efforts were more significant to the development of pragmatics. Therefore, the major pre-
occupation of pragmatics is analyzing meaning of discourse and its significance in a
human society.
Mey (1993) notes that pragmatics is a subfield of linguistics and semiotics which
studies the ways in which context contributes to meaning. Additionally, context here
encompasses the manner, the place, and the time a speech is made. He further asserts that
pragmatics encompasses speech act theory, conversational implicature as propounded by
Paul Grice, talk in interaction and other approaches to language behavior in philosophy,
sociology, linguistics, and anthropology. Therefore, pragmatics cuts across various
disciplines and it looks at speech and/or text based on its temporal and situational
context.
Agbedo (2008:117), on the presuppositions of pragmatics notes, ―In pragmatics,
the notions of context, background knowledge, inference, and implicature play equally
important roles in the interpretation of language in use. For any given speech event, there
are certain basic assumptions, which the speaker needs to make concerning the hearer in
relation to the subject matter on ground. Such assumptions are made without unnecessary
objections from the interlocutors because they are built on an assumed common ground.‖
He further notes that pragmatic presuppositions are assumptions and beliefs about the
context or the information.
Bassols (2003) observes that there is a relationship between Discourse Analysis
and pragmatics. She further asserts that while discourse analysts explain the interpretation
of the elements in question without going outside language, pragmatics resorts to other

23
ambits of human activity (beliefs, feelings, knowledge, intentions…). This implies that
pragmatics goes further in its investigation of utterances and discourse than Discourse
Analysis. It is with the help of pragmatics that the question, - why was this utterance
produced? - could be answered.
Obitube (2014:14) summarises the tenets of pragmatics thus:
In all, the interest of pragmatics is the study of the meaning a speaker
projects with regard to his beliefs and intentions, the context upon which
meaning is derived (as context influences the meaning of any message
conveyed), the shared knowledge about the identity of the speaker, time
and place of speech event, the study of the underlying meaning expressed
(i.e., implicatures of statements), the determinants of a speaker‘s language
choice, as well as, the demarcation between what a speaker says and the
meaning(s) he intends to express or the meaning(s) which he does not
intend to pass through to the listener(s).
2.1.2 Ethnography of communication
Every speech community has its own rules guiding speech events and utterances.
These rules must be adhered to in order to have a complete conversation. In the area of
sociolinguistic study, these rules are known as ethnographies or ethnography of
communication. According to Duranti (1997:85), ―Ethnography is the written description
of the social organization, social activities, symbolic and material resources, and
interpretive practices characteristic of a particular group of people.‖ From the words of
this author, ethnography must be documented and deals with the communicative practices
of people. Consequently, Wardhaugh (2006) notes that an ethnography of a
communicative event is a description of all the factors that are relevant in understanding
how that particular communicative event achieves its objectives. He further notes that in
ethnography of communication, the focus is on the language the participants are using

24
and the cultural practices such language reflects. Similarly, Lenore (2000) avers that
ethnography of communication rests on the basic premise that linguistic items cannot be
understood without reference to the context; both linguistic and extra-linguistic, in which
they are used. Wardhaugh and Lenore are of the view that the adequate understanding of
any speech event lies on determining the relevant factors and context in which the said
speech event occurred.
In the quest to achieve effective speech, Hymes (1974) propounded a theory of
language study, which he called ‗Ethnography of SPEAKING.‘ He further notes that
there are relevant factors which must be considered in order to have a good
communication. These relevant factors are what he represented with the acronym –
SPEAKING.
The Setting and Scene (S) of speech are important. Setting refers to the time and
place, i.e., the concrete physical circumstances in which speech takes place. Scene refers
to the abstract psychological setting, or the cultural definition of the occasion. Within a
particular setting, of course, participants are free to change scenes, as they change the
level of formality (e.g., go from serious to joyful) or as they change the kind of activity in
which they are involved (e.g., begin to drink or to recite poetry).
The Participants (P) include various combinations of speaker–listener,
addressor–addressee, or sender–receiver. They generally fill certain socially specified
roles. A two-person conversation involves a speaker and hearer whose roles change; a
‗dressing down‘ involves a speaker and hearer with no role change; a political speech
involves an addressor and addressees (the audience); and a telephone message involves a
sender and a receiver. A prayer obviously makes a deity a participant. In a classroom, a
teacher‘s question and a student‘s response involve not just those two as speaker and
listener but also the rest of the class as audience, since they too are expected to benefit
from the exchange.

25
Ends (E) refers to the conventionally recognized and expected outcomes of an
exchange as well as to the personal goals that participants seek to accomplish on
particular occasions. A marriage ceremony serves a certain social end, but each of the
various participants may have his or her own unique goals in getting married or in seeing
a particular couple married.
Act sequence (A) refers to the actual form and content of what is said: the precise
words used, how they are used, and the relationship of what is said to the actual topic at
hand.
Key (K), the fifth term, refers to the tone, manner, or spirit in which a particular
message is conveyed: light-hearted, serious, precise, pedantic, mocking, sarcastic,
pompous, and so on. The key may also be marked nonverbally by certain kinds of
behavior, gesture, posture, or even deportment.
Instrumentalities (I) refers to the choice of channel, e.g., oral, written, or
telegraphic, and to the actual forms of speech employed, such as the language, dialect,
code, or register that is chosen. Formal, written, legal language is one instrumentality;
spoken Newfoundland English is another; code-switching between English and Italian in
Toronto is a third; and the use of Pig Latin is still another.
Norms of interaction and interpretation (N) refers to the specific behaviors and
properties that attach to speaking and also to how these may be viewed by someone who
does not share them, e.g., loudness, silence, gaze return, and so on. For example, there are
certain norms of interaction with regard to church services and conversing with strangers.
However, these norms may vary from social group to social group, so the kind of
behavior expected in congregations that practice ‗talking in tongues‘ or the group
encouragement of a preacher in others would be deemed abnormal and unacceptable in a
‗high‘ Anglican setting.
Genre (G), the final term, refers to clearly demarcated types of utterance; such
things as poems, proverbs, riddles, sermons, prayers, lecture, and editorials. These are all

26
marked in specific ways in contrast to casual speech. Of course, in the middle of a prayer,
a casual aside would be marked too. While particular genres seem more appropriate on
certain occasions than on others, e.g., sermons inserted into church services, they can be
independent: we can ask someone to stop ‗sermonizing‘; that is, we can recognize a genre
of sermons when an instance of it, or something closely resembling an instance, occurs
outside its usual setting. (Wardhaugh, (2006:247-48).
This contribution of Hymes reveals that the act of speech delivery is a skilled one.
Any speaker must equip himself with the rules governing the language he converses with.
According to Littlejohn and Foss (2005), they remark that Dell Hymes‘ proposition of
ethnography of communication/speaking suggests that cultures communicate in different
ways, but all forms of communication require a shared code, communicators (who know
and use the code), a channel, a setting, a message form, a topic, and an event created by
transmission of the message. Suffice it to say that what Hymes captures in his
ethnography of speaking is of importance in any speech event. This is so because,
observing these identified relevant factors in any speech event will make the event
worthwhile.
Abrahams and Bauman (1971) remarks that the theoretical contributions of
ethnography of speaking/communication are centered on the study of situated discourse,
that is, linguistic performance as the locus of the relationship between language and
socio-cultural order. These authors are of the view that the use of language determines
the level of relationship that exists between language and the orderliness in the society
and culture.
2.1.3 Politeness theory
Politeness is a sociological feature which every culture adopts. Also, in language,
it is sociologically conditioned that during communication, the interlocutors must be
polite. Politeness during communication is of utmost importance in order to have a good

27
conversation. Brown (1980:15) asserts that politeness is ―saying and doing things in such
a way as to take into consideration the other people‘s feelings.‖ Duranti and Godwin
(2001) note that politeness is a technical term used in pragmatic and sociolinguistic study
of socio-communicative verbal interactions. In the same vein, Fraser (1990) observes that
politeness is expected in different social situations, that we will be obligated to adjust our
use of words to fit the occasion. Consequently, the choice of linguistic expression has to
match with the social status of the hearer or by the special nature of the setting in which
the conversation is taking place. Werkhofer (1992:156) explains politeness to be ―the
power of a symbolic medium that, being used and shaped in acts of individual speakers,
also represents social standards of how to behave or of what kind of conduct is
considered ―just and right‖. Reiter (2000:3) from her observation explains the concept of
politeness thus:
Politeness, then, is not a characteristic inherent to the action itself but is
constituted by an interactional relationship, a relationship based upon a
standard shared, developed and reproduced by individuals within a social
group. At the individual level, politeness is represented by the wide range
of alternative ways in which an actor can perform an act within the shared
standard. This standard is thus a collective one, one which is common to
people belonging to a certain group but maybe different between people
belonging either to other groups or categories within those groups.
From the different definitions and views of politeness, it can be deduced that
politeness is a phenomenon in communication which must be observed and practiced by
speakers in order not to have a bad conversation. Also, it is culture oriented.
Lakoff (1973), drawing extensively from the Grice‘s universal construct of
conversational principles in order to account for politeness phenomena, argues that
pragmatic rules will allow us to determine which utterances are deviant and respond

28
neither to a semantic nor to a syntactic problem but to a pragmatic explanation. She
further notes that grammars should not only specify the applicability of grammatical rules
but also include pragmatic factors, since as she says that the pragmatic component is as
much a part of the linguist‘s responsibility as is any other part of grammar. What Lakoff
offers here is that pragmatic rules do not basically look at the linguistic competence but at
communicative competence. In her further research, Lakoff (1975) posited the rules of
politeness as follows:
1. Formality: keep aloof
2. Deference: give options
3. Camaraderie: show sympathy
Reiter (2000) observes that although Lakoff has not until now specified what she
takes politeness to be, it can be deduced from her sub-rules that it has to do with not
intruding into other people‘s territory, letting the addressee take his/her own decisions
and making the addressee ‗feel good‘, hence politeness appears to be closely related to
the avoidance of conflict. In her subsequent work (1979:64), Lakoff describes politeness
as ‗a tool used for reducing friction in personal interaction.‘
Lakoff (1973) claims that Grice‘s maxims fall under her first pragmatic rule, since
they mainly concentrate on the clarity of the conversation. However, she later claims that
‗clarity‘ falls under her first rule of politeness: ‗don‘t impose‘ and that the rules of
conversation can thus be looked at as subcases of her first rule since the goal is to
communicate the message in the shortest time possible with the least difficulty, without
imposing on the addressee. Her theory attracted a lot of criticism. According to Brown
(1976:246), the problem with Lakoff‘s analysis is that she does not offer an integrating
theory which places her rules of politeness in ‗a framework which explains their form in

29
terms of social relationships and expectations about humans as interactants.‘
Consequently, Reiter (2000) observes that when it comes to the reformulation of her rules
of politeness, she does not provide a definition of the terms she uses; instead she appears
to equate formality with aloofness, camaraderie with showing sympathy. However, she
further notes that without a definition of how aloofness, deference and camaraderie work
in a particular society; it is very difficult to see how politeness will be expressed in that
particular group, and thus one cannot make claims for the universality of the concept.
One thing that is of note here is that Lakoff‘s contribution has helped in extending the
scope of the theoretical framework of politeness.
According to Fraser (1990) one can effectively distinguish four clearly different
views of politeness: the ‗social norm‘ view, the ‗conversational maxim‘ view, the ‗face-
saving‘ view and his own ‗conversational-contract‘ view.
The ‗social norm‘ view reflects the historical understanding of politeness. It
assumes that each society has its own prescriptive social rules for different cultural
contexts. These rules are not imbedded in the language and did not come about because
they were documented. Wardhaugh (2006) illustrates this with an example in French
language where ‗Vous‘ is used to show politeness and formality and ‗Tu‘ for informality.
2.1.4 Conversational maxim
The conversational maxim view is based on Grice‘s (1975) Cooperative Principle
(CP). Grice (1975:45) maintains that the overriding principle in conversation is one he
calls the cooperative principle: ―Make your conversational contribution such as is
required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk
exchange in which you are engaged.‖

30
Sequel to Grice‘s cooperative principle, he enumerates four maxims which must
be followed in other to have a cooperation during conversations. The four maxims
according to Grice (1975:47-48) are thus:
Maxim of quality
1. Do not say what you believe to be false.
2. Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.
Maxim of quantity
1. Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of
the exchange).
2. Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.
Maxim of relation
1. Be relevant.
Maxim of manner
1. Avoid obscurity of expression.
2. Avoid ambiguity.
3. Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).
4. Be orderly.
Grice (1975) further notes that these cooperative maxims do not apply to
conversation alone but to other endeavours of life. He further asserts that many people do
not follow these maxims which cause them to implicate something rather different from
what they actually say. They may violate, exploit, or opt out of one of the maxims, or two

31
of the maxims may clash in a particular instance. The act of not following the tenets of
these maxims results to conversational implicatures. Wardhaugh (2006:292) while
explaining the concept of implicatures posits thus:
The theory of implicature explains how, when A says something to B, B
will understand A‘s remarks in a certain way because B will recognize that
A said more than was required, or gave a seemingly irrelevant reply, or
deliberately obfuscated the issue. B will interpret what A says as a
cooperative act of a particular kind in the ongoing exchange between A
and B, but that cooperation may be shown somewhat indirectly. B will
have to figure out the way in which A‘s utterance is to be fitted into their
ongoing exchange, and B‘s operating assumption will be that the utterance
is coherent, that sense can be made of it, and that the principles necessary
to do so are available.
Ellis (1999:120-121) offers an example of a conversational implicature. He notes
that assuming a husband and wife are getting ready to go out for the evening:
8. Husband: How much longer will you be?
9. Wife: Mix yourself a drink.
In explaining the above sentences, he notes thus:
To interpret the utterance in sentence 9, the husband must go through a
series of inferences based on principles that he knows the other speaker is
using. The conventional response to the husband's question would be a
direct answer where the wife indicated some time frame in which she
would be ready. This would be a conventional implicature with a literal
answer to a literal question. But the husband assumes that she heard his
question, that she believes that he was genuinely asking how long she

32
would be, and that she is capable of indicating when she would be ready.
The wife . . . chooses not to extend the topic by ignoring the relevancy
maxim. The husband then searches for a plausible interpretation of her
utterance and concludes that what she is doing is telling him that she is not
going to offer a particular time, or doesn't know, but she will be long
enough yet for him to have a drink. She may also be saying, 'Relax, I'll be
ready in plenty of time.'"
Levinson (2001:141) opines, ―Grice‘s maxims provide the necessary interpretive
framework within which to establish the relevance of utterances to each other because
these ‗principles operate even when being flouted.‖
Notwithstanding the level of impacts Grice‘s cooperative principle maxims have
made on the study of pragmatics and sociolinguistics, Grice's theory is often disputed by
arguing that cooperative conversation, as with most social behavior, is culturally
determined, and therefore the Gricean Maxims and the Cooperative Principle cannot be
universally applied due to intercultural differences. However, looking at what Grice has
offered through his theory of cooperative principle, it has; to an extent helped people to
save their face and another‘s face during verbal and nonverbal communications.
The third view of politeness according to Fraser (1990) is the ‗face saving view.‘
The face saving view is drawn from Brown and Levinson‘s (1987) face theory. The
proponents of this model see communication as a purposeful-rational activity and
therefore use the notion of Goffman‘s (1967) ‗face theory‘ in explaining the model.
According to Goffman (1967), face is a mask that changes depending on the audience
and the social interaction. This means that good interaction brings forth bright face while
bad interaction brings forth chaotic face.
Scollon and Scollon (2001) opine that one of the most important ways in which
we reduce the ambiguity of communication is by making assumptions about the people

33
we are talking to. Scollon and Scollon (2001:46) further note: ―Any communication is a
risk to face; it is a risk to one‘s own face, at the same time it is a risk to the other
person‘s. We have to carefully project a face for ourselves and to respect the face rights
and claims of other participants.... There is no faceless communication.‖
However, borrowing extensively from Goffman‘s (1967) face theory, Brown and
Levinson (1987) hold that ‗face‘ refers to the respect a person has for him or herself and
holds that ‗self-esteem‘ in public or private situations. They further opine that face is the
public self-image that all rational adult members of the society possess. In accordance
with this assertion, Mutunda (2006) affirms that all participants are responsible for
maintaining their own and each other‘s face cooperatively in the course of interaction.
Meyerhoff (2006) observes that Brown and Levinson‘s goal was to provide a basis for
discussing similarities and differences between cultures in how politeness works.
Continuing, Brown and Levinson (1987) in their theory identify two types of
politeness as negative politeness strategies and positive politeness strategies. According
to them, those strategies that avoid offence by showing deference are referred to as
negative strategies while the strategies that avoid offence by highlighting friendliness are
the positive ones. According to the proponents, during interaction, people want to guard
their face against possible damage and consequently go about maintaining two different
kinds of face namely: the negative face and the positive face. Brown and Levinson (1987)
aver that the negative face is the want of every competent adult member of a community
that their actions be unimpeded by other, while the positive face refers to the want of
every member that their wants be desirable to at least some others. What Brown and
Levinson offer in this classification is that interlocutors must be conversant with one
another‘s face during conversation so that they will not annoy one another during
communication.

34
The face theory has helped the language users in everyday life since with the
knowledge of this theory, they will be able to design messages that protect face and
achieve other goals as well. The face theory has also helped to increase cooperation
during communication.
Irrespective of the inputs the face theory has made in sociolinguistic study, it has
attracted a lot of criticisms. Ide (1989) claims that Brown and Levinson assume the
speaker‘s volitional use of language which allows the speaker‘s creative use of face –
maintaining strategies toward the addressee but in East Asian cultures like Japan,
politeness is not so much achieved on the basis of volition as on discernment, or
prescribed social norms. Therefore, Brown and Levinson‘s theory lacks universal
application.
2.1.5 Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
One of the theories through which speech can be analysed is the theory of Critical
Discourse Analysis (CDA). CDA looks at speech in order to highlight the presence of
dominance and social power in it. How people use language to gain dominance and social
power are the major pre-occupations of CDA. CDA was first developed by the Lancaster
school of linguists of which Norman Fairclough was the most prominent figure. Idiagbon
(2010) asserts that research efforts of Norman Fairclough, Gunther Kress, Roger Fowler,
Teun van Dijk, Ruth Wodak, Sara Mills and Michael Toolan, among others, gave birth to
CDA.
Cuttings (2002) opines that CDA investigates how language is used to reflect
social classes and as a tool of power to control and maintain a social class. Fairclough
(1992) notes that the element of CDA by which it is differentiated from other forms of
discourse analysis lies in its attribute of being ‗critical‘. He further notes that ‗critical‘
implies showing connections and causes which are hidden; it also implies intervention,

35
for example providing resources for those who may be disadvantaged through change. In
line with this, Idiagbon (2010:33) opines thus:
CDA is not solely about politics; it goes beyond it. It analyses a discourse
from ideological, social and historical undertones which may not be
apparent to the hearer or reader. Thus, every text has some ―hidden‖
meaning. CDA analysts therefore advocate a critical reading of or
listening to texts with a view to uncovering the ‗hidden‘ messages. This
they do by paying attention to linguistic and extra-linguistic features of
discourse in relation to the user and society. CDA is applicable to any
discourse that involves the use of language – politics, media practice,
advertorial, legal issues, and education, even to domestic matters.
It can be deduced that CDA looks at speech in order to reveal its hidden
information. Consequently, CDA also looks at speech to reveal the ideologies of the
speaker. Fairclough and Wodak (1997: 271-80) summarize the main tenets of CDA thus:
 CDA addresses social problems
 Power relations are discursive
 Discourse constitutes society and culture
 Discourse does ideological work
 Discourse is historical
 The link between text and society is mediated
 Discourse analysis is interpretative and explanatory
 Discourse is a form of social action.
2.1.6 Discourse analysis
Discourse Analysis (DA) according to Bowles (2008) is concerned with meaning
in use, that is, the meaning which is produced by speakers/writers and understood by
listeners in everyday life. The major preoccupation of DA is not only spoken form but it

36
encompasses written form as well. McCarthy (2011) traces the development of discourse
analysis to the emergence of semiotics and the French structuralist approach to the study
of narrative.
Reed (1997:16) defines DA as a ―framework with which the analyst approaches a
text and explicates what it says and how it has been said, in addition to what has been
understood and how it has been understood.‖ This means that DA looks at text at the
ephemeral level i.e. at the sentential level. Similarly, Brown and Yule (1983) remarks
that DA is a study of how humans use language to communicate and, in particular, how
addressers construct linguistic messages for addressees and how addressees work on
linguistic message in order to interpret them. McCarthy (2011) opines that discourse
analysis is fundamentally concerned with the relationship between language and the
contexts of its use.
DA claims that its analysis goes beyond the word level. Louw (1992:18) avers
thus: ―While phonology, morphology, and syntax may be important elements in
analyzing the discourse, they are not the major focus of the discipline. Rather, DA moves
beyond the ―low‖ level of expression toward a wider view—that is, it reads the text
beyond the word level.‖ In support of this, Tannen (2002:36) remarks, ―the analysis of
language using DA goes beyond the sentence, which contradicts with types of analysis
more typical of modern linguistics, which are chiefly concerned with the study of
grammar.‖
According to Louw (1992), there are three major sets of features that DA studies.
Extra-linguistic features include time, place, typography, format, medium of presentation,
and the background and history of a text. Para-linguistic features include punctuations,
intonation, pause, speech acts, genre, and discourse types (narrative, exposition,
description). Linguistic features are, for example, word order, embedding,
nominalization, and levels of language. He further notes that it is not the purpose of DA

37
to seek an interpretation of the text. In addition, he remarks that a Discourse Analysis of
any text is simply an analysis of its structure; when one moves beyond this and into
application, one moves outside of the range of Discourse Analysis. This implies that DA
is a descriptive analysis and not prescriptive.
From the above reviewed theories, the theory which will be used in this research
is the Critical Discourse Analysis. The adoption of this theory will ensure that Jega‘s
speeches will be analysed in other to reveal hidden information and the social problems
contained in his speeches.
2.2 Empirical studies
Over the years, a number of researchers have carried out researches on speech
especially political speeches. Idiagbon (2010) conducted a research on the language use
during campaigns of three politicians during the 2007 Nigerian general elections namely:
Donald Duke, and Okhai Mike Akhigbe of Peoples Democratic Party, and Atiku
Abubakar of Action Congress. He adopts a descriptive study using the theory of Critical
Discourse Analysis as his framework. After his analysis, he discovers that language is
constructed to champion and promote individual interest and it is carefully and skillfully
structured and presented without the awareness of the readers/hearers.
He further notes that politicians in Nigeria take advantage of the low level of
education of majority of the electorates as well as poverty to manipulate the thoughts of
the electorates. This is manifested in the choice of the title, slogans and diction in the
speeches delivered at campaign rallies. He equally observes that in Nigeria, aspirants do
not base their arguments on the established socio-political theoretical perspectives; rather,
they allow emotions and sentiments to chart their positions. Thus, persuasions are
strengthened with religious allusions. He finally posits that political campaign speeches
reflect many ideological differences in terms of party politics, policy formulation and

38
individual views. These form parts of the products which politicians in Nigeria seek to
sell to the electorates.
Nweze (2010) in her research adopts a pragmatic analysis. Using the Brown and
Levinson (1980)‘s four major polite expression strategies as her theoretical framework,
she observes that in the Bible, such words like Rabbai, my Lord, o favoured one,
Almighty, my beloved son etc. were used to fulfill the following functions: to bridge
communication gaps, foster relationship, mark respect, as well as avoid conflicts. She
also observes that politeness behavior or expression does not imply the notion of
subordination, that is, it is not only used for superiors or elders; it shows willingness on
both parties to maintain faces. In the Bible according to her, polite expressions were used
by both superiors and inferiors although it is more with inferior persons.
In the study conducted by Ahamefula and Okoye (2012), they look at the use of
language by the then president of Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and pointed out
from their study that the then president violates the basic tenets of the Gricean co-
operative principle and Austin‘s felicity conditions which all propagate the need for good
communication between and among people and groups of people. Thus, they pointed out
the following expressions in the then president‘s words which they observed from their
findings to buttress their point: ―This idiot, go get a job‖- a statement he used against the
media chiefs to express his frustration towards their attempts to analyze and broadcast his
words and actions as the president; ―Shut up‖- his outburst to the victims of Ikeja
Military Cantonment Bomb blast when they cried out to him.
In the research conducted by Obitube (2014) - which is serving as a blueprint to
this present research – he sets out to discover the structural pattern of the Independence
Day speeches of President Goodluck Jonathan, the ideological perspectives of President
Jonathan as reflected in his Independence Day speeches, to reveal the information of his
speeches, and to find out the contemporary relevance of the President Jonathan‘s

39
Independence Day speeches. To achieve these objectives, the researcher adopted Grice‘s
cooperative principle and discourse analysis in his analysis. In conducting this study, the
2012, 2013, and 2014 Independence Day speeches of Goodluck Jonathan were analysed
by the researcher.
From the study, the researcher observes that the Independence Day speeches of
President Goodluck Jonathan are structured/patterned into five sections which include:
- Greetings and introduction of the occasion
- Incorporating every Nigerian as contributing to Nigeria‘s history and
current status.
- Highlighting the achievements made, the challenges facing Nigeria and
efforts being made to handle them.
- Messages of hope and promises, and call for collective responsibility, and
- Conclusion with compliments.
The research also observes that the entire structuring of the speeches meets the
cooperative principle maxim of quantity and manner as they provide the required
information in the speech in the best proportion. The analysis based on the maxim of
relation shows that the president, in 2012, made maximum effort to remain relevant in his
speech. In 2013, the researcher observes that the president‘s switching of topics was poor,
roaming from one topic to another. Therefore, the 2013 Independence Day speech
contains structures which do not meet the maxim of relation. The researcher also
observes that the speech of 2014 fulfills the maxim of relation with thorough switching of
topics and relevance of statements as well.
Consequently, the research also observes that the President utilized more of
declarative sentences to ensure that his speeches were informative and viewed by

40
listeners to be authentic, rather than being viewed as skeptical and questionable; as well
as to enable him to assume the right personality of a strong, confident and reliable leader
through his speeches. Finally, the researcher finds out that the information strength of the
speech of 2013 was the least informative with meager information strength of 20%,
followed by the 2012 speech with 31% information strength while that of 2014 had the
best information strength of 44%. Thus, the Independence Day speech of President
Goodluck Jonathan in 2014, best fulfilled the maxim of relation by proving more relevant
than that of 2012 and 2013.
Agbedo (2008) researches on the speech act analysis of political discourse in the
Nigerian print media. In his paper, he studied the speech acts of Bayo Onanuga and
Yakubu Mohammed, which they performed during the Dele Olojede‘s reception to mark
his Pulitzer Prize award. The researcher adopts the Grice‘s cooperative principles and J.
L. Austin‘s felicity conditions in his analysis. He also examined the illocutionary force of
their speech acts in the light of their peculiar type of journalism practice as evident in the
Newswatch and TheNEWS magazines, where Onanuga and Yakubu hold sway as Deputy
Editor-in Chief and Editor-in-Chief respectively. The researcher observes that that the
illocutionary acts deriving from their individual speech acts failed to meet J. L. Austin‘s
felicity conditions. These include sincerity, preparatory, executive, and fulfillment
conditions. As a result, their individual speech acts are adjudged infelicitous. Their
infelicitous speech acts equally failed to meet Grice‘s cooperative principles, which
participants in any given communicative event are expected to adhere to. Consequently,
the four maxims of quantity, quality, relevance, and manner are violated, thus giving rise
to conversational implicature. The researcher further notes that the implication of the
foregoing for the journalism profession in Nigeria is to say the least gravely unsavoury.
He therefore calls for a radical policy shift intended to stem the tide of unethical practices
that have become an albatross around the neck of the noble profession in Nigeria.

41
Another prominent contribution on speech analysis was the research conducted by
Omozuwa & Ezejideaku (2007) on the stylistic analysis of the language of political
campaigns in Nigeria. Here, the authors set out to unravel the significance of the aesthetic
use of language in campaign speech. They observe that political campaign language is
characterized by propaganda through attack on party, exaggeration, vagueness and
diatribes. Furthermore, they note that rhetorics in forms of promises, religious allusions,
repetitions, figurative expressions, coinages, pidgin, are also observed as essential
components characteristics of the language of campaigns, etc.
Waya and Nneji (2013) in their work adopted the Speech Act theory of Austin
(1962) and Searle (1969) in the analysis of the speech corpora. Using the Overall
Relative Frequency Percentage (ORFP) as a methodological technique, the study
discovers that Jonathan made use of assertive acts than other speech acts. They
discovered that the sentences that were vindictive and directive made way for him to
assert authority and exercise constitutional power as the president. The authors conclude
that good governance becomes visible and possible if the leaders work in line with their
beautiful promises.
In the research carried out by Horvath (2001), he critically analyzes the discourse
of political speeches of President Obama‘s inaugural address. Using the Fairclough‘s
assumptions in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), he observes that the results of the
biblical references have shown that Obama‘s choice of scripture references – quoting the
Corinthians ―love section‖ was to strengthen the notion of unity and brotherly love
among the various members of the American diverse society.
Igwedibia (2011) in her contribution carried out a research on selected speeches
of Barrack Obama entitled: Race to America, Political Reform, Religion, Education
Reform, and Economic Renewal. The researcher‘s purposes were to discover the extent to
which the co-operative principles of quantity could be applied to the political speeches of

42
Obama, to find out the degree to which his political speeches violate the principles of
quantity and quality, as well as to discover the extent to which his political speeches
violate the principles of manner and relation. The author adopted Grice‘s conversational
implicature as her theoretical framework.
The researcher discovers that adopting pragmatic principles to analyse speech is
of upmost importance. She further asserts that the political speeches of Barrack Obama
obeyed the Grice‘s cooperative principle by generally being as informative as possible,
well founded, extensively relevant in their respective contexts, and have the posture of
perspicuity or clarity.
2.3 Theoretical framework
The theoretical frameworks used in this research are Grice‘s cooperative
principles and Critical Discourse Analysis. Grice (1975) proposed a framework through
which speeches can be analysed. He avers that in any given conversation, some principles
have to be observed in other to achieve cooperation in conversation. These principles are
regarded as the cooperative principles. ―Grice lists four maxims that follow from the
cooperative principle: quantity, quality, relation, and manner. The maxim of quantity
requires you to make your contribution as informative as is required. The maxim of
quality requires you not to say what you believe to be false or that for which you lack
adequate evidence. Relation is the simple injunction: be relevant. Manner requires you to
avoid obscurity of expression and ambiguity, and to be brief and orderly. This principle
and these maxims characterize ideal exchanges. Such exchanges would also observe
certain other principles too, such as ‗Be polite.‖ (Wardhaugh, 2006:291).
On the other hand, the next theory adopted in this research is Critical Discourse
Analysis. van Dijk (2000) notes that Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a type of
discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse,
dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the

43
social and political context. He further notes that critical discourse analysts take explicit
position, and thus want to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality.
Critical research on discourse needs to satisfy a number of requirements in order
to
effectively realize its aims:
a. As is often the case for more marginal research traditions, CDA research has to be
"better" than other research in order to be accepted.
b. It focuses primarily on, social problems and political issues, rather than on current
paradigms and fashions.
c. Empirically adequate critical analysis of social problems is usually
multidisciplinary.
d. Rather than merely describe discourse structures, it tries to explain them in terms
of
properties of social interaction and especially social structure.
e. More specifically, CDA focuses on the ways discourse structures enact, confirm,
legitimate, reproduce, or challenge relations of power and dominance in society.
(van Dijk, 2000:353).
Agbedo (2015) notes that it is obvious that critical discourse analysis (CDA) as an aspect
of discourse analysis, deals with the relationship between discourse and power.
In essence, CDA is a critical tool that analyses discourse with the aim of revealing
hidden information in discourse and to x-ray the topics of social inequality, social
problems, inequality, political discourse, media discourse. In line with this, this research
paper analyses the speeches of Jega in the 2015 general elections with the aim of finding
out the structural pattern of his speeches, the extent to which his speeches reveal the
values of INEC, the information strength of the speeches and the outcomes/effects of his
speeches.

44
2.4 Summary of literature review
This section has reviewed many theories and researches carried out by researchers
in order to help elucidate the aim of this study. In the first section, key sociolinguistic
theories were analysed which include: politeness theory, CDA, ethnography of speaking,
and pragmatics. Subsequently, the second section reviewed a good number of researchers
which have been carried out in order to give an insight of what this research is all about.
The theoretical frameworks of this research were subsequently looked into.
From the review thus far, it can be seen that none of the researchers have carried
any research on the speeches of an INEC chairman in Nigeria. It is from the gaps seen
from the review that this research tends to fill.

45
CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0 Preamble
In this section, the methodology and procedure used in this research will be
outlined.
3.1 Research design
This research adopts the descriptive case study research method in its analysis.
This study sets out to analyse the electoral speeches of Jega using the frameworks of
Grice‘s cooperative principle and Critical Discourse Analysis.
3.2 Area of study
The area of this study is sociolinguistics which studies the relationship between
language and the society. The sub-area of sociolinguistics which this study belongs to is
pragmatics which according to Agbanusi (2010:463) is ―a philosophical theory which
attempts to provide a method for determining the meaning and value of an idea‖ Yule
(1996:127) on his own part sees pragmatics as ―the study of intended speaker meaning‖,
it is in line with this that this study sets out to analyse Jegas‘ speeches during Nigeria‘s
2015 general elections using the theoretical frameworks of cooperative principle and
Critical Discourse Analysis so as to help x-ray some expressions of the INEC Chairman.
3.3 Population of the study
The population of this study comprises two electoral speeches of Jega. These
speeches include his speech on timetable poll delivered on Saturday, February 7, 2015
and his speech on conduct of polls delivered on Sunday, March 29, 2015. The findings of
this research will be useful to linguists, political scientists and to the general masses.

46
3.4 Sampling and sampling procedure
Nworgu (2006) notes that in accidental sampling, only elements which the
researcher can reach are included in his research work. Professor Attahiru Jega made few
written speeches during the 2015 general elections. Most of his words were interviews
granted to members of the press, reactions etc. Sequel to this, only two written speeches
were found. As a result, the researcher adopts the accidental sampling procedure. The
sampling size was selected based on the available materials on the internet. In accidental
sampling, only the data which the researcher can reach are included.
Nworgu (2006) notes that the only determining factors are the researcher‘s
convenience and economy in terms of time and money. He further illustrates that the
consideration is not whether these data possess some specific characteristics or not; for
example, a student who carries his/her copies of questionnaire to his/her area and
distributes to any teacher he/she finds or that comes his/her way is applying accidental
sampling rather than simple random sampling.
3.5 Method of data collection
The data employed in this research were got from the internet. Different websites
were checked to ensure that there is no omission or mistake.
3.6 Method of data analysis
The first research question which is to find out the structural pattern of Jegas‘
electoral speeches will be answered using the Paul Grice Maxims of quantity, quality,
manner and relation while the other research questions were tackled using the theoretical
framework of critical discourse analysis. The data obtained will be majorly analyzed
qualitatively.

47
CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
4.1 Analysis of the structural pattern of Jega’s speeches
Here, the speeches (speech on timetable for 2015 general elections and speech on
conduct of polls) in the appendix, are looked into in order to discover the structural
pattern of the speeches. Henceforth, the former will be regarded as speech A while the
latter will be regarded as speech B. In doing this, the cooperative principle will be used to
account for this structure. This is imperative because it will help us to know whether this
structure fulfils the four maxims of the cooperative principle. The structure of the
speeches consists of four (4) sections. These sections include:
SECTION A: Greetings and introduction
SECTION B: Situations at hand
SECTION C: Problems encountered and the solution put in place
SECTION D: Conclusion with messages of hope and faith
4.1.1 Greetings and introduction
From the data, it can be deduced that greetings and introduction are the first
aspect of the speeches of Jega though different methods were used for this act.
In speech A, this section begins thus:
Ladies and Gentlemen, we invited you here today to make known the
position of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on
the timetable for the 2015 general elections. Let me state from the outset
that the Commission‘s position was reached after carefully weighing the
suggestions from briefings held with different stakeholders in the

48
electoral process. The conduct of elections in a country like Nigeria is
invariably a collective venture that involves not just the Election
Management Body (EMB), but also a diverse range of stakeholders,
notably security agencies, political parties and their candidates, voters, as
well as interest groups, such as the civil society organizations and the
media. To guarantee successful conduct of elections, there are things that
are wholly the responsibility of the EMB. But there are other things
critical for the success of elections, which fall outside the control of the
EMB.
In speech B, this section is patterned thus:
INEC wishes to commend Nigerians for their large turnout and peaceful
conduct during the elections. The Commission commends Nigerians for
the resilience and understanding exhibited in the face of these difficulties.
4.1.1.1 Analysis of section A of the speeches using the cooperative maxims
of quantity, quality and manner.
i. Maxim of quantity
This maxim avers that a speaker should make his contribution as informative as is
required (for the current purposes of the exchange) and should not make his contribution
more informative than is required. From the above data, it is observed that Jega made this
first section to be informative as required. In a simple greeting, he made the statement:
‗Ladies and Gentlemen‘ before giving the audience the purpose of their gathering which
he represented in the statement:

49
…we invited you here today to make known the position of the
Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on the timetable for
the 2015 general elections.
He further gives the information of collective venture in achieving a success in
the election. In speech B, he simply gave a greeting of commendations to all Nigerians
for their resilience throughout the election period. Therefore, from the analysis thus far,
Jega fulfilled the maxim of quantity in the section A of his speeches.
ii. Maxim of quality
This maxim notes that a speaker should always say the truth. He should not say
what he believes to be false and should not say that for which he lacks adequate evidence.
The section A of Jega‘s speeches fulfilled this maxim in speech A because it is to make
known the position of INEC on the election timetable that the conference was organised.
But he flouted this maxim in speech B. In speech B, he made the statement:
INEC wishes to commend Nigerians for their large turnout and peaceful
conduct during the elections.
From the above assertion, the term ‗peaceful‘ used made this statement to be false. This
is so because the 2015 general elections were characterized with different chaos and
problems. Jega even contradicted his statement subsequently when he said that:
We received reports of a Boko haram attack and a few ad-hoc staff of
INEC lost their lives. We have reached out to the family of the bereaved
and it is an unfortunate event.

50
Therefore, the above statement nullified the peacefulness of Nigerians during the
election as stated by Jega in the section A of his Speeches. To this effect, the section A of
speech B of Jega‘s speeches flouted the maxim of quality.
iii. Maxim of manner
The maxim of manner stipulates that a speaker should express his speech clearly,
transparent, brief and easy to understand. In the Section A of Jega‘s speeches, some
sentences fulfil the maxim of manner like where he gave the full meaning of the acronyms
given such as Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and Election
Management Body (EMB). But, some aspects of the Section fail to fulfil this maxim.
From the above data, it will be observed the Jega flouted the maxim of quantity in
the first section of his speeches especially in speech A because he repeated many things
which should have been represented in a single sentence. For instance, he says:
The conduct of elections in a country like Nigeria is invariably a
collective venture that involves not just the Election Management Body
(EMB), but also a diverse range of stakeholders, notably security
agencies….
The above statement is a repetition in thought of the statement below:
To guarantee successful conduct of elections, there are things that are
wholly the responsibility of the EMB. But there are other things critical
for the success of elections, which fall outside the control of the EMB.
The above statements were saying the same thing which is that the successful conduct of
election is collective venture. Therefore, he fails to be brief.

51
4.1.2 Situations at hand
Here, Jega revealed to the masses the present situation at hand. That is the current
incidences that is occurring.
In speech A, the content of this section runs in this format:
In addition, INEC has been doing everything it can to facilitate the
collection of the PVCs by registered members of the public. As at 5th
February 2015, the total number of PVCs collected was 45, 829, 808,
representing 66.58% of the total number of registered voters. In the
delivery and deployment of electoral materials, INEC is also at a comfort
level in its readiness for the general elections as scheduled (see the
presentation to the Council of State). The Commission‘s preparations are
not yet perfect or fully accomplished. But our level of preparedness,
despite a few challenges, is sufficient to conduct free, fair and credible
elections as scheduled on February 14th and February 28th. Compared
with 2011 when, within a short time, we conducted general elections that
were universally adjudged free, fair and credible and the best in Nigeria‘s
recent electoral history, our processes are today better refined, more
robust and therefore capable of delivering even better elections.
In speech B, it has the following expressions:
It is also gratifying to note that the card readers worked well in the
majority of the Polling Units (PUs). Though there were areas where the
difficulties experienced necessitated additional guidelines. The guidelines
by the Commission allow for manual accreditation of voters as
announced yesterday. Osun, Kebbi, Ekiti, Adamawa, Borno, Jigawa,

52
Anambra, Akwa Ibom and Ebonyi state reported manual accreditation in
some PUs. As a result of these difficulties, elections could not be
concluded yesterday in a few PUs and voting in underway today.
4.1.2.1 Analysis of section B of the speeches using the cooperative maxims of
quantity, quality and manner
From the data above, the section B of Jega‘s speeches fulfil the maxim of quantity
because it gives the information required in the perfect quantity which explained to the
masses in general and the electorates in particular the readiness of INEC towards the
conduction of election in speech A, and how elections have been conducted in different
states in speech B as seen in the statements below:
Speech A:
INEC is also at a comfort level in its readiness for the general elections as
scheduled (see the presentation to the Council of State). The
Commission‘s preparations are not yet perfect or fully accomplished. But
our level of preparedness, despite a few challenges, is sufficient to
conduct free, fair and credible elections as scheduled on February 14th
and February 28th.
Speech B:
Osun, Kebbi, Ekiti, Adamawa, Borno, Jigawa, Anambra, Akwa Ibom and
Ebonyi state reported manual accreditation in some PUs. As a result of
these difficulties, elections could not be concluded yesterday in a few
PUs and voting in underway today.

53
The section B of these speeches fulfilled the maxim of quality to an extent. The
information on card readers failing to function properly in some Polling Units (PUs) is
true and that of adopting manual accreditation. But there are some statements in this
section that one can question the validity of the information it provided. In speech A, the
assertion:
Compared with 2011 when, within a short time, we conducted general
elections that were universally adjudged free, fair and credible and the
best in Nigeria‘s recent electoral history….
is not true. This is so because, an election cannot be universally adjudged to be free and
fair. This statement lacks quality. The United States Institute of Peace (2011) commented
on the 2011 general elections by saying that Nigeria‘s 2011 general election received high
praise for being well-managed but post-election violence claimed 800 lives over three
days in northern Nigeria and displaced 65,000 people, making the elections the most
violent in Nigeria‘s history. The same can be observed in the expression in speech A
below:
…our processes are today better refined, more robust and therefore
capable of delivering even better elections.
The validity of above statement cannot be verified. This is so because the content of the
statement is futuristic. The efficiency of the processes cannot be ascertained unless it is
put into work. Therefore, the section B of Jegas‘ speeches is characterized with the
fulfilment and the flouting of the maxim of quality.

54
The section B of these speeches have statements and assertions which fail to fulfil
the maxim of manner because of its contradictory nature and its lack of transparency.
Example of such is seen in the below assertion in speech A:
As at 5th February 2015, the total number of PVCs collected was 45, 829,
808, representing 66.58% of the total number of registered voters.
In the above statement, the figure is not clear and the percentage does not reflect
transparency. How he arrived at the percentage was not made clear to the electorates
because the figure of the total number of registered voters should have been given so that
how the percentage was got will be made clearer. Normally, a percentage as a figure is
got by multiplying a unit of the total figure by hundred and dividing the outcome of the
multiplication by the total figure. Jega failed to provide this total figure thereby making
the process of arriving at the percentage obscure.
Another instance where this section fails to fulfil the maxim of manner is in the
contradictory statements below:
In the delivery and deployment of electoral materials, INEC is also at a
comfort level in its readiness for the general elections as scheduled (see
the presentation to the Council of State). The Commission‘s preparations
are not yet perfect or fully accomplished. But our level of preparedness,
despite a few challenges, is sufficient to conduct free, fair and credible
elections as scheduled on February 14th and February 28th.
From the above excerpt, instances of contradiction are observed. The phrases
‗comfort level,‘ in line one, and ‗not yet perfect‘ in lines 2-3 make these statements to be
ambiguous. The question that will arise will be how can someone who is at the comfort
level in its readiness to conduct election now says that the preparations are not fully

55
accomplished or not yet perfect? Being at comfort level means that one can do anything
with ease but the aspect of the preparations not being perfect flouted the maxim of manner
which states that a speaker must avoid ambiguity and obscurity of expression.
Similarly, in speech B, the assertion:
Osun, Kebbi, Ekiti, Adamawa, Borno, Jigawa, Anambra, Akwa Ibom and
Ebonyi state reported manual accreditation in some PUs. As a result of
these difficulties, elections could not be concluded yesterday in a few
PUs and voting in underway today.
fails to fulfil the maxim of manner because of the use of ‗these‘ to refer to a single
identified problem which is the failure of card readers. This obscurity of expression will
confuse a reader or hearer because ‗these‘ as a demonstrative adjective is used for
plurality while ‗this‘ is for singular. Therefore, this section fails to fulfil the maxim of
manner.
4.1.3 Problems encountered and the solution(s) put in place
What characterize this section are the challenges faced by INEC and the different
mechanisms put in place to solve the challenges.
In speech A, this section was represented thus:
INEC not being a security agency that could by itself guarantee
protection for personnel and materials, as well as voters during elections,

56
the Commission cannot lightly wave off the advice by the nation‘s
Security Chiefs. The Commission is specifically concerned about the
security of our ad hoc staff who constitute at least 600,000 young men
and women, together with our regular staff, voters, election observers as
well as election materials painstakingly acquired over the last one and
half years. This concern is limited not just to the areas in the North-
eastern part of Nigeria experiencing insurgency; the risk of deploying
young men and women and calling people to exercise their democratic
rights in a situation where their security cannot be guaranteed is a most
onerous responsibility. Under such circumstances, few EMBs across the
world, if any, would contemplate proceeding with the elections as
scheduled. No matter the extent of INEC‘s preparedness, therefore, if the
security of personnel, voters, election observers and election materials
cannot be guaranteed, the life of innocent young men and women as well
the prospects of free, fair, credible and peaceful elections would be
greatly jeopardised. Consequently, the Commission has decided to
reschedule the 2015 general elections thus: the national elections (i.e.
Presidential and National Assembly) are now to hold on March 28th,
2015; while the state elections (Governorship and State Assembly) are to
hold on April 11th, 2015.
In speech B, this section has the following expressions:
We received reports of a Boko haram attack and a few ad-hoc staff of
INEC lost their lives. We have reached out to the family of the bereaved
and it is an unfortunate event. We received reports of underage voting
from Taraba and we have instructed that the PO involved be identified.
Underage voting is against the law, we are investigating reports and will

57
take measures once this is established. This morning, I received a letter
from APC calling for elections cancellation in Rivers, we are thoroughly
investigating this. After investigation, we will brief the political parties of
our findings.
4.1.3.1 Analysis of section C of the speeches using the cooperative maxims of
quantity, quality and manner
Section C of these speeches fulfilled the maxim of quantity. Jega gave the
information in this section as required as reflected in the expressions below:
Security Chiefs. Consequently, the Commission has decided to
reschedule the 2015 general elections thus: the national elections (i.e.
Presidential and National Assembly) are now to hold on March 28th,
2015; while the state elections (Governorship and State Assembly) are to
hold on April 11th, 2015.
The above expressions provided information as required in the sense that
the elections were shifted based on the advice given by the security officials. The
new dates of the elections were also given because he is addressing people on the
timetable poll. Therefore, the shifting of election date and the reason behind it
were required. Also, the shifting of the date was employed to tackle the problem
of insecurity of lives and property which was the major challenge of INEC and
the security agencies.

58
Similarly, in speech B, the information was given as required with the issue at
hand such as the problem of underage voting from Taraba and the investigation ongoing.
As well as the challenge of Boko haram attack and the reaching out to the family of the
bereaved for consolation. Therefore, for giving the information required based on the
section at hand, section C of Jega‘s speeches fulfilled the maxim of quantity.
Some expressions in this section fulfils the maxim of quality while the veracity of
some expressions cannot be verified because of its futuristic actions. Some of these
expressions which are true include the expressions below:
Security Chiefs. No matter the extent of INEC‘s preparedness, therefore,
if the security of personnel, voters, election observers and election
materials cannot be guaranteed, the life of innocent young men and
women as well the prospects of free, fair, credible and peaceful elections
would be greatly jeopardised. We received reports of a Boko haram
attack and a few ad-hoc staff of INEC lost their lives. We have reached
out to the family of the bereaved and it is an unfortunate event. We
received reports of underage voting from Taraba and we have instructed
that the PO involved be identified. Underage voting is against the law, we
are investigating reports and will take measures once this is established.
The above expressions are true because INEC cannot conduct a peaceful election
without the help of the security agencies. Also, some members of the ad-hoc staff lost

59
their lives as reported by the press. It is undisputable that underage voting is against the
law.
On the other hand, the truthfulness of some expressions cannot be ascertained
because of their being futuristic. Some of these expressions include:
If we find out that our staff are involved in any illegal acts, they will be
investigated and penalized according to the law. Consequently, the
Commission has decided to reschedule the 2015 general elections thus:
the national elections (i.e. Presidential and National Assembly) are now
to hold on March 28th, 2015; while the state elections (Governorship and
State Assembly) are to hold on April 11th, 2015.
In the first sentence of the above excerpt, the truthfulness of penalizing defaulted staff if
found guilty cannot be ascertained because the action is yet to take place. In the second
sentence also, having the elections hold on the pronounced date cannot be verified
because of its future occurrence. Therefore, some of the expressions in the section C of
Jega‘s speeches fulfilled the maxim of quality while the truthfulness of some
expressions cannot be verified because they are yet to occur.
This section fulfilled the maxim of manner which states that a speaker should
make his speech clear, transparent i.e. avoid obscurity and unambiguous. The reason for
the postponement of the election which is inadequate security was made clear by Jega.
However, the problems encountered during the election which are underage voting,
Boko haram attack etc. and the mechanism put in place to curb the problems were
clearly stated by Jega. These were made manifest in the assertion below:

60
This morning, I received a letter from APC calling for elections
cancellation in Rivers, we are thoroughly investigating this. After
investigation, we will brief the political parties of our findings. If we find
out that our staff are involved in any illegal acts, they will be investigated
and penalized according to the law.
4.1.4 Conclusion with messages of hope and faith
In this section, the speeches ended with concluding remarks which also contain
messages of hope and faith. Here, Jega called on all Nigerians to have faith in INEC as
they hope for a well conducted election.
In speech A, the following expressions characterize this section:
Finally, we wish to call on all Nigerians to accept our decision, which is
taken in good faith and the best interest of deepening democracy in our
country. Thank you.
In speech B, these statements fall under this section:
We will declare results when it has been collated from the states. You
start counting 48 hours when substantial amount of polling units has
concluded elections. Collation of results will begin at 12pm tomorrow.
We are not under any pressure to declare inconclusive elections. The
elections were slated to hold only on March 28 but were extended to the
29th due to difficulties experienced in some areas.

61
4.1.4.1 Analysis of section D of the speeches using the cooperative maxims of
quantity, quality and manner.
The section D of these speeches fulfilled the maxim of quantity because the
section gave the information required. In speech A, Jega called on all Nigerians to have
faith in them so as to deepen Nigeria‘s democracy which afterwards ended his speech
with ‗Thank you.‘ Similarly, in speech B, he concluded by telling the masses the time to
expect the result and also to have faith in them because they cannot declare inconclusive
election. All this information is in line with the topic at hand.
Jega‘s concluding expressions cannot be subjected to truth verification because
faith demands subjectivity not objectivity. The truthfulness of the statement that their
decision is for the interest of deepening democracy in our country cannot be verified.
Similarly, the truthfulness of the expressions below cannot be verified because of its
futuristic occurrence:
Collation of results will begin at 12pm tomorrow. We are not under any
pressure to declare inconclusive elections.
Some of the expressions in this section fulfilled the maxim of manner because of
their clarity, unambiguity and transparency while a few statement flouted this maxim.
These expressions fulfilled this maxim include:

A Sociolinguistic Study Of Jega S Speeches

A Sociolinguistic Study Of Jega S Speeches

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to A Sociolinguistic Study Of Jega S Speeches

Similar to A Sociolinguistic Study Of Jega S Speeches (20)

More from Tony Lisko

More from Tony Lisko (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A Sociolinguistic Study Of Jega S Speeches