An Analysis of Syntactic Devices in Israel-Hamas Treaty: A Syntactic Perspective on International Discourse

Abstract

This paper presents a syntactic analysis of the Israel-mediated peace treaty between the United States and Israel. The study examines structural sentence types (simple, compound, and complex), functional sentence types (declarative, imperative, interrogative, exclamatory, and optative), as well as the use of pronouns, adverbials, and coordinating conjunctions. The study uese qualitative methods to analyze treaty text, that is sourced from the official website. The findings reveal a predominance of simple sentences (based on one independent clause), eleven compound sentences (coordinating two independent clauses), and eleven complex sentences (an independent clause with at least one subordinate clause). Functionally, the text contains thirty declarative sentences, which serve to make commitments and define responsibilities, and ten imperative sentences, which provide instructions. Notably, there are no interrogative sentences, and only one exclamatory and one optative sentence, reflecting a reserved rhetorical style. Modal analysis shows that "will" appears thirty times to indicate intention and future promises, while "must" is absent. The coordinating conjunctions "and," "or," "for," and "so" are used, with "and" being the most frequent. Thirty adverbials enhance clarity and procedural sequencing. Pronoun usage is limited and selective, with only "we," "it," and "they" appearing, suggesting an impersonal, institution-based diplomatic tone. Future research could compare syntactic patterns across different peace agreements, explore cross-linguistic differences, or investigate how syntactic choices influence perceptions of authority, neutrality, and conflict resolution.