Discursive Construction Of "Citizen"

Discourse is composed of coherent units of sentences, propositions, words and speech acts. The analysis of discourse basicly refers to the analysis of those sentences that become Ð'- through frequent use, ideological character or historical significance Ð'- the main framework of all the other conversations. In other words, it refers to the systematic analysis of linguistic structures, although the very first studies of discourse analysis could not offer this beyond the sentence level. Why do I prefer to use sentence level refers to the fact that discourse analysis also has links with the wider social environment not just with the linguistic characters. From this kind of perspective one can argue that discourse analysis accepts that Ð''the meaning is not transferred as a thing, but is being created under influence of extralinguistic factors on denotative meanings in course of sending and reception'. (Ghiglione et al. 1985: 8 ) (1) . In that sense, linking with sociology, semiotics and other disciplines, its role enlarged by including not only the objective transfer of knowledge using language but also expressing the subjectivity (especially of semiologic processes) of the parties engaged in the conversation process. When it meets with sociology, language also becomes something which is used for the analysis of power relations. As Ducrot points out; "language includes catalogue of all human interrelations, all roles, that the speaker can choose for himself and to impose on addressee. It is not possible to reduce the function of language to the transfer of information". (Ducrot, 1972) (2).

I would like to draw on discursive construction of the term Ð''citizen' or the concept of Ð''citizenship' in media by referring mostly to the social aspect of discourse analysis. I believe that discourse is not only related to the interrelated words, speeches that form empty texts waiting for people to fill them in, but rather it is shaped according to the changing circumstances, identities (and also,subjectivities), political choices or more generally according to social environment. The concept of citizenship, in this respect, is changing rapidly especially through the people's increasing awareness of social changes through the public discourse. At this point, the importance of media should not be disregarded. Through the exposure of Ð''prepared' contents and meanings of the Ð''citizenship' concept by especially the politicians or lets call them Ð''authorities' (who should be called Ð''authority', is also something that must be discussed, however) in general; people (receivers/ readers/ audiences) begin to think and evaluate their positions, rights, duties as citizens, inside these established parameters. Even when they try to find solutions to their problems, they begin to look for solutions inside these parameters; in other words, they fall in to the trap of Ð''ideology'.

I will exemplify what I mean by making references to the newspapers' usage of the term citizen and also draw some examples from the places that are Ð''dedicated' or Ð''reserved' to the people (Ð''public' Ð'- halk Ð'- ) inside the newspapers. Following those, I would also like to draw on some instances from the Ð''letters to the editor' type of news which give striking definitions and redefinitions, reevaluations of Ð''citizenship' concept and make references to how Ð''our' relationship with that concept is mentioned through the mediation. Besides, it is also significant to mention what kind of meaning is attached to the people Ð'- as being Ð''citizen', Ð''public', Ð''masses', Ð''nation' Ð'- in different times and different contexts.

To begin with, the citizenship concept is used in the news as if it is only linked with the concept of Ð''service'. The service which would be taken especially from the municipalities, is at the core of the identification of Ð''citizens' and their needs or desires. Consider below example which is taken from Ð''BugÐ"јn' newspaper and the subtitle of the news about the services of the municipalities is as follows:

Ð''VatandaÐ"Ñ* Ð"-nce Hizmete BakÐ"Ð...yor'

Only by looking at the title Ð'- as it is also mentioned in the article by Dijk Ð'- one can understand what is significant and therefore be revelant content of the speech. So, first of all, lets try to analyze the kind of ordering of the words within this title: the subject of the sentence, Ð''vatandaÐ"Ñ*' is not used plural and this results in the understanding that all citizens are the same and thereby both Ð''totalizing' and imposing the Ð''similarity' on to the reading. The term Ð''Ð"¶nce' is prefered to be written just after the subject of the sentence, which implies both the significance of the actions and preferences of the citizens and also the kind of action that the municipality or other type of administrative organs should take; the citizen is, first of all, looking at the services that the state grant to them and then they are taking the other qualities or behaviors into account. Lets take a look at how the speech continues under this title:

".... Ð"‡Ð"јnkÐ"ј Ð"Ñœstanbullu genel seÐ"§imlerde oy verirken adaylardan ziyade partinin lideri ve belediyelerin hizmetlerini dikkate alacak........ Bu yÐ"јzden Ð"Ñœstanbul'da seÐ"§imin pusulasÐ"Ð... BÐ"јyÐ"јkÐ"Ñ*ehir Belediyesi'nin vatandaÐ"Ñ*a gÐ"¶tÐ"јrdÐ"јÐ"oÐ"ј hizmetlere baÐ"olÐ"Ð... gÐ"¶rÐ"јnÐ"јyor."

Now, the term Ð''citizen' is replaced by the term Ð''Ð"Ñœstanbullu' in the first sentence of the quotation. The kind of Ð''regionalism' or the affiliations of mentioning the region of the concerning people is evident, together with the continuation of the tendencies towards Ð''totalizing' kind of meaning by regarding the subject of the sentence as singular. The subjectivity issue is also evident when one looks at the differences between the content of the title and the content of the following speech. In the title, the signified term for the citizens is Ð''service'. However, the Ð''leader of the political party' is also mentioned