Presupuesto semestral del servicio de mantenimiento

The conceptualization of agenda, liberal, and lobby in Arabic is grounded in a shared belief system among language users who are present in this study as authors, writers, and ordinary individuals who comment on news or articles to share their views. Language users are also social members affected by the dominant social and cultural repertoire which are enacted in their discourse explicitly and implicitly. The SCA (Van Dijk, 2014, 2016b, 2016a) illuminates this relationship between discourse and social members as cognitively mediated and, in the present study, Islam as the major religion, Arabs as homogeneous communities, and Arabic as the official language appear as typical assumptions among language users. When language users have shared knowledge, their mental representations as a group members operate accordingly which are partly affected by ideologies (Van Dijk, 1995a). Although there are differences in the interpretation and enactment of ideologies (e.g., political, religious) between Arabs as language users, this is not unordinary since eventually "An ideology is the product of man's need for imposing intellectual order on the world" (Shils, 1968, p. 69). In other words, the presence of ideologies in language use may vary, yet there is always an ideological position (Van Dijk, 2006; Fairclough, 1992; Fowler, 1991) being communicated.

The discourse semantic structure guides the construction and interpretation of the meanings of agenda, liberal, and lobby along with their ideological uses. Lexicalization is one aspect of discourse structure where loans co-occur with other words to form

156

phrasal units and certain meanings that serve language users' purposes. Through lexicalization, polarity, self/other-description, and identification were made observable (See 5.5.3 for instance). Hence, language users' attitudes, evaluative beliefs, and otherwise ideological positions were expressed mainly by lexicon. However, the lexicon used to express ideologies in loans was not limited to collocation but also other items in the discourse that were not necessarily frequent such as pronouns and demonstratives but were important to maintain the discourse surface cohesion (Halliday & Hasan, 1976) which help identify polarity, for instance. This is crucial in order to understand the relations between propositions where foreign words mentioned. The propositions of the present study describe the subject matter, arguments, entities involved, and audience among other elements. This helped identify the type of ideology (religious, political, linguistic), a set of issues being argued for or against (election, violence), ingroup and outgroup relations (Arabs as opposed to non-Arabs), as well as controversies among Arabs as sub-groups. Themes invoked by using loans fell mainly under enforcement of and resistance to certain ideologies or views. The enforcement of ideologies takes place, for instance, when language users call their ingroup members for executing or committing to a particular ideology as in he promised to help working on developing an Islamic liberal regime model (citation 86). Resistance communicates the rejection to influence native social belief system by imposing/importing a foreign view or ideology whether by ingroup or outgroup members (e.g. they have their own agenda). Under both themes, language users presuppose shared belief system with their addressees regardless of whether they constitute the majority in their communities. Among all semantic aspects

157

of discourse, the selection of words remains the most significant means to show ideological control on discourse meaning (Van Dijk, 1995a).

The interpretation of discourse by language users is a mental act that is accompanied by many aspects of world knowledge forming their conceptual representation (Van Dijk, 1985). The accumulation of past experience of particular discourses and topics, for instance Arabs relationship with the West, control the meanings of agenda, liberal, and lobby. Past experiences prompt language users to activate specific models of topics, actions, events or situations (Van Dijk, 1995a). Language users have a common basis to understand the discourse meaning utilizing their repertoire of social (e.g., shared values, attitudes, knowledge) and personal (models) cognition. When one aspect of social cognition is triggered, evaluative attitudes and propositions are communicated controlled partly by ideologies. Within the SCA , language users involve in a complex process to interpret discourse structures in their interactional and societal context such as meaning, syntax, style, rhetoric, models, sociocultural knowledge, and group attitudes (See Van Dijk, 1995, 2014, 2016b, 2016a). Ideological position is viewed here at the interface between the discourse of agenda, liberal, and lobby and Arab language users as members of a homogeneous society.

This study reveals two major sites where ideologies (religious, political, linguistic) are exercised using agenda, liberal, and lobby. The relationship with the West is one fertile site where collocates such as American, the Wes, Jewish, Israel, and Zionist address mainly the relationship and influence of the West. The relationship with and the perceived influence of the West were approached with caution and suspicion due to a prevailing attitude that associates the West with colonization and undesirable intervening

158

in Arab world. The history of colonization and the ongoing political conflict with the west may further strengthen the attachment to the religious and linguistic ideologies rendering them a political imperative. The co-occurrence of lobby with Jewish, Israel, and Zionist is attributed to a fundamental attitude shared among Arabs; that of looking at Israel as occupying power of an Arab land of Palestine. Another site of ideologies is that of sociopolitics among Arabs as individuals and groups which vary across Arabs states. For instance, language users in the present study address Arabs as a nation while others are in favor of a more patriotic tone to avoid conflict with local communities’ belief system, since Arab states have different political systems along with native ideologies (Ibrahim, 1989). Thus, competing ideologies within ingroup members as the case with nationalism-patriotism or Islamism-quietism are due to the nature of sociopolitical domain that is prone to controversies and debates.

Part of language users' attitude toward the meanings of agenda, liberal, and lobby can be explained in terms of how they were introduced in Arabic dictionaries provided by Almaany dictionary. It can be noticed that liberal is nativized in Arabic monolingual dictionaries as a freed person or a proponent of liberalism, one who believes in freedom and autonomy of individuals, and in social progress, whereas agenda is provided only in the sense of a list of items or a program and only in the bilingual English-Arabic dictionary (see Table 4). Lobby, on the other hand, was introduced in Arabic monolingual dictionaries only in the sense of a pressure group while the other sense (large hall) can be found in the bilingual English- Arabic dictionary. This discrepancy in foreign words meanings and listing in Arabic dictionaries contradict with the fact that those meanings

159

that were somehow excluded are widely used in formal and informal settings such as media as validated by the concordances of this study. This is also elaborated in 6.2.2.