Language as Ideology: A Study of Absurd Theatre
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59992/IJESA.2025.v4n7p11Keywords:
English Language, Ideology, Absurd TheatreAbstract
The study introduces absurdity to the reader and shows the emergence of Absurd Theatre. The research also gives definitions and explanations for the terms “Ideology”, “Linguistic Manipulation”, and “Power Dynamics”. This paper explores and reveals language ideology, cultural values, as well as power relations in Ionesco’s The Lesson. It provides references to the theoretical background of absurdity in pairing with linguistic manipulation. It epitomizes that the conspicuous aspects of the use of language to convey the power dynamics are anchored on absurdity which is the topic of Eugene Ionesco’s play The Lesson. It also gives evidence to the belief that examination of linguistic absurdity ideas is fully applicable to the Ionesco’s The Lesson.
References
• Abrams, M. H. (2018). A glossary of literary terms. Cengage.
• Bermel, A. (1975). Ionesco: Anything but Absurd. Twentieth Century Literature, 21(4), 411–420.
• Cornwell, N. (2016). The absurd in literature. In The absurd in literature. Manchester University Press.
• Couvalis, S. G. (1988). Feyerabend, Ionesco, and the Philosophy of the Drama.
• Dinerstein, A. C. (2016). The radical subject and its critical theory: An introduction. Social Sciences for an Other Politics: Women Theorizing without Parachutes, 1–15.
• Esslin, M. (1960). The absurdity of the absurd. The Kenyon Review, 22(4), 670–673.
• Innes, C. (2003). Avant Garde Theatre: 1892-1992. Routledge.
• Ionesco, E., & Pronko, L. C. (1963). Notes on my theatre. Tulane Drama Review, 7(3), 126–159.
• Jacquart, E., & Ionesco, E. (1973). Interview: Eugene Ionesco. Diacritics, 45–48.
• Modreanu, S. (2011). A Different Approach to the Theater of the Absurd With Special Reference to Eugene Ionesco. Cultura, 8(1), 171–186.
• Newberry, J. K. (1975). The Evolution of the Dramatic Technique of Eugene Ionesco. Nottingham French Studies, 14(1), 31–41.
• P lzler, T. (2018). Camus. feeling of the absurd. The Journal of Value Inquiry, 52, 477–490.
• Pronko, L. C. (1970). Fragments of a Journal by Eugne Ionesco. Modern Drama, 13(3), 341–342.
• Sagi, A. (2002). Albert Camus and the Philosophy of the Absurd (Vol. 125). Rodopi.
• Vannier, J., & Pronko, L. C. (1963). A Theatre of Language. Tulane Drama Review, 7(3), 180–186.
• Vasconcelos, F. (2014). Absurd Language in the Theatre and Arts in the 20th Century.
• Vassilopoulou, K. (2008). Possible Worlds in the Theatre of the Absurd. Lancaster University Postgraduate Conference on Linguistics and Language Teaching, 120–138.
• Wellwarth, G. E. (1962). Eugene Ionesco: The absurd as warning. Southern Journal of Communication, 28(1), 6–16.
• Irvine, J.T. & Gal, S. (2000). "Language ideology and linguistic differentiation." In P.V. Kroskrity (ed). Regimes of language: Ideologies, politics, and identities. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 35-84.
• Duranti, Alessandro, ed. (2004). A companion to linguistic anthropology ([Repr.] ed.). Malden, Mass. [u.a.]: Blackwell. pp. 496–517. ISBN 0-631-22352-5.
• Silverstein, M. (1979). Language Structure and Linguistic Ideology. In P. Clyne, W. Hanks, and C. Hofbauer (eds.), the Elements (pp. 193–248). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
• Marx, Karl, and Friedrich Engels. The German Ideology. New York: International Publishers, 1970.
• Marx, Karl. A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Co., 1904.
• Seliger, M. (1977). The Marxist conception of ideology: A critical essay. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Kroskrity, Paul V. (1998). Arizona Tewa Kiva Speech as a Manifestation of Linguistic Ideology. In Language ideologies: Practice and theory. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
• Fairclough, N., and Wodak, R. (1997). "Critical Discourse Analysis". In T. A.
• Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse Studies: A multidisciplinary introduction: Vol. 2. Discourse as Social Interaction. London, UK: Sage Publications.
• Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical inquiry, 8(4), 777 795.Retrievedon January 24, 2013 http://www.unisa.edu.au/Global/EASS/HRI/foucault_- _the_subject_and_power.pdf
• Reboul, A. (2017). Communication and Cognition in the Evolution of Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198747314.001.0001
• Buller, D.B. (1986, May). Selecting deceptive communication. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Chicago, IL.
• Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. London: Cambridge University Press.
• McCornack, S.A. (1988, November). The logic of lying: A rational approach to the production of deceptive messages. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, New Orleans, LA.
• McCornack, S.A. (1992). Information manipulation theory. Communication Monographs, 59, 1-16.
• McCornack, S.A., & Levine, T.R. (1990). When lies are uncovered: Emotional and relational outcomes of discovered deception. Communication Monographs, 57, 119-15
• Miller, G.R. (1983). Telling it like it isn't and not telling it like it is: Research in deceptive communication.
• In J. Sisco (Ed.), The Jensen lectures: Studies in contemporary communication (pp. 91—116). Tampa, FL: University of Florida Press.
• Irvine, J.T. & Gal, S. (2000). "Language ideology and linguistic differentiation." In P.V. Kroskrity (ed). Regimes of language: Ideologies, politics, and identities. Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 35-84.
• Duranti, Alessandro, ed. (2004). A companion to linguistic anthropology ([Repr.] ed.). Malden, Mass. [u.a.]: Blackwell. pp. 496–517. ISBN 0-631-22352-5.
• Silverstein, M. (1979). Language Structure and Linguistic Ideology. In P. Clyne, W. Hanks, and C. Hofbauer (eds.), the Elements (pp. 193–248). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
• Ionesco, E. (1982). The Bald Soprano and other plays. Grove Press.
