This study investigates discursive strategies in public speeches from a pragmatic and critical perspective, focusing on Uzbek and English language contexts. Utilizing Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as the main methodological framework, discourse is interpreted as a form of social practice closely connected to ideology, power and audience influence. Through systematic analysis of lexical choices, agency construction, legitimization strategies and evaluative patterns, the research demonstrates how speakers strategically shape collective identities, normalize particular worldviews and guide audience interpretations. The results indicate that discursive strategies operate variously across genres relying on communicative goals, confirming the methodological relevance of CDA for comparative public speech analysis.  

Critical Discourse analysis, discursive strategies, power, ideology, pragmatics, public speech.

Charteris-Black, J. 2005. Politicians and rhetoric. Palgrave.

Dewangga, D., Budianto, S., Wijaya, K. 2025. Fairclough’s Three Dimensional Critical Discourse Analysis of Malcolm X’s Speech at Oxford Union Debate. Gudang Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu, Volume 3 Number 3. Pp. 70-81

Dewangga, D., Budianto, S., Wijaya, K. 2025. Fairclough’s Three Dimensional Critical Discourse Analysis of Malcolm X’s Speech at Oxford Union Debate. Gudang Jurnal Multidisiplin Ilmu, Volume 3 Number 3. Pp. 70-81

Entman, R. M. Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication. 1993.

Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (ed.), Dsicourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction (vol. 2, pp258-284). London: Sage.

Gyollai, D. 2022. The sociocognitive approach in critical discourse studies and the phenomenological sociology of knowledge: intersections. Journal of Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences. Vol. 21, Pp.539-558. Published online

Isokova, F. Sh. The Extralingusitic Features of Uzbek Political Discourse. The American Journal of Social Science and Education Innovations. 4 (11), pp111-114. 2024.

Reisigil, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The Discourse-historical approach. Sage.

Van Dijk, T. Critical discourse analysis. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Second edition. Edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Deborah Schiffrin. 2015. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Van Dijk, T. Critical discourse analysis. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Second edition. Edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Deborah Schiffrin. 2015. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Van Dijk, T. Critical discourse analysis. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Second edition. Edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Deborah Schiffrin. 2015. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Van Dijk, T. Critical discourse analysis. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Second edition. Edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Deborah Schiffrin. 2015. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Van Dijk, T. Critical Discourse Analysis. The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Second edition. Edited by Deborah Tannen, Heidi E. Hamilton, and Deborah Schiffrin. 2015. John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Van Dijk, T. A. 2017. The Socio-Cognitive Discourse Studies. The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies.

Van Dijk, T. A. 2006. Politics, ideology and discourse. Elsevier.

Van Dijk, T. A. 2017. The Socio-Cognitive Discourse Studies. The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies.

Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse and Society, Vol.4, pp. 249-283

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis.

Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. 2016. Methods of critical discourse analysis. Sage.

Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis. Longman.

Xing, Y. 2024. An Explosion Based on Fairclough’s Three-dimensional Modeling. Lecture Notes on Language and Literature. Volume 7, Number 4. Clausius Scientific Press, Canada. P. 181-184

Zakirova, B. B. (2023). CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS. Builders of the Future, 1(01)