الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 152 |  |  |
| | | from | 152 | | |
Abstract
This research focuses on the Ideational meaning in Elizabeth Glaser’s and Mary Fisher’s speeches about acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Each speaker shows AIDS from a different ideological perspective. Elizabeth Glaser shows the problem from a political point of view; she refers to the passivity of the government that did not give hand to the people with the disease. Glaser condemns the government for racial discrimination: some people are fired from jobs, rejected from schools and treated as slaves. Glaser shows the government’s injustice and calls for a new leadership as she thinks that the President failed to be a president for all Americans. Mary Fisher shows that the problem is with the people not the government: Fisher shows that people are passive and afraid of being rejected by the society if they admit that they are human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positive. She inspires them to be courageous enough and admit that they are infected with the disease. The disease is infectious and does not discriminate between the poor and the rich, whites and blacks, Republicans and Democrats, so co-operation with the government is the solution. Fisher beautifies the government’s image by stating her story with the President and that he was compassionate and tried to help her through her illness. The present study aims to define the different processes, and ideologies used within the framework of Systemic Functional Grammar to persuade the audience of the gravity of AIDS. More specifically, it attempts an analysis of Transitivity patterns fulfilling the ideational function of the two texts, and how the two writers’ ideological perspective and attitudes towards the issue of AIDS are reflected in the speeches, and to show the clash of ideologies in the speeches by Fisher and Glaser.
Having applied the analysis using the Transitivity system, it has been found that there are different processes types employed by each speaker to convey their ideology. The dominant process employed in Fisher’s speech is Relational process followed by Material, Mental and finally Verbal processes. Meanwhile, the dominant process in Glaser’s speech is Material followed by Mental, Relational, Verbal and Behavioral processes. This means that Fisher tends to give information and express facts through her usage of Relational process while Glaser uses Material process more frequently as she inspires people to take action against the President. Moreover, the results of the analysis show that there are clash of ideologies in the speeches. Glaser’s speech shows the government’s weaknesses: the government’s injustice and passivity. The main theme in the speech is “leadership”. Meanwhile, Fisher beautifies the government’s image by stating the government’s support to her during her illness.