Verbal Voice as a Meaning-Making Resource in Political Forums: A Systemic Functional Linguistic Analysis

Abstract

To investigate how speakers' voices contribute to the construction of meaning in online political forums, this research employs the theoretical framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL). Instead of seeing voice as a simple active/passive dichotomy, the approach reframes it as a complex semiotic system where transitivity, agency, and ideological representation combine. An 85,000-word corpus of transcripts from various political contexts, including legislative debates and televised political conversations, is used in the research. In order to legitimize institutions, assign blame, and establish ideological stances, the research shows that political actors purposefully alter voice through construction, concealment, and negotiation of agency. Hallidayan transitivity analysis, voice categorization, and agent deletion procedures form the basis of its qualitative interpretative method. When claiming credit or demonstrating decision-making skills, people frequently use active voice formulations. Speakers, on the other hand, use passive or middle voice constructions to make the outcomes of contested policies seem inevitable or normal. An in-depth grammatical analysis of semiotic power bargaining in democratic deliberative environments is provided by this research, which expands the field of political discourse studies. By showing how voice interacts with ideational, interpersonal, and textual metafunctions in political speech all at once, it expands SFL theory as well.