Persuasive strategies in counsels' closing arguments: a critical discourse analysis of Ghana 2012 election petition hearing

Name of Presenter: 

Helen O. Ahialey

Date Time: 

Thursday, October 20, 2016 - 09:30


Faculty of Arts Conference Room


This study involves discovering through a rhetorical examination of the transcripts of closing arguments from the high profile case of Ghana 2012 Election Petition Hearing how persuasive strategies were used by counsels as a means of persuasion. The goal is to investigate the kind of persuasive strategies that were employed by the four counsels in their closing addresses to the judges and how they (counsels) use these strategies to try to get the judges to give ruling on behalf of their clients. The study which will be rooted in the qualitative research design will be anchored on Aristotle’s theory of Rhetoric, and the method of analysis will be based on the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The analytical framework for the study will be based on van Dijk’s (1998 and 2006) influential Ideological Square and van Dijk’s (2007) Sociocognitive Triangular Approach to discourse analysis. The preliminary findings revealed that counsels employ the use of argumentation and logical reasoning, narrative and analogy, evaluative language, figures of speech, emotive language and humour as persuasive strategies designed to win the favour of the trial judges.


.Dr. Moussa Traore


Degree Level: