SINTA

2.5

Impact

Google Scholar

10

h-index

Indonesian Journal of Education Research (IJoER)

Open Access Journal

Politeness Strategies of President Duterte During Inquest on War on Drugs: Implications on Teaching Communication

Jessa Mae C. Anthony
University of Southern Mindanao Graduate School
Philippines
jmcanthony@usm.edu.ph
Dever Jay B. Pacate
University of Southern Mindanao Graduate School
Philippines
Donnie M. Tulud
University of Southern Mindanao ROR
Philippines
Estella B. Barbosa
University of Southern Mindanao ROR
Philippines
Share

  • Purpose of the study: This study aimed to explore and determine the politeness strategies employed by President Rodrigo Roa Duterte during the Inquest of the Blue-Ribbon Committee on the Philippine War on Illegal Drugs.

    Methodology: A qualitative research design was used, specifically utilizing discourse analysis to examine the politeness strategies employed by President Rodrigo Duterte during the Inquest Proceeding. Data was gathered through video transcription and translation. These data were analyzed using Brown and Levinson’s in 1987 politeness strategy framework to form discourse implications and conclusions.

    Main Findings: Results revealed that President Duterte employed all the politeness strategies during the Inquest, namely: bald-on-record, negative politeness, positive politeness and off-record strategy. Findings also showed that Duterte’s dominant use of Bald-On Record strategy mirrors his authoritative and assertive nature, projecting a straightforward and decisive leader. Meanwhile, his limited use of Off-Record strategies displays a strategic balance between explicitness and subtlety depending on the audience and context.

    Novelty/Originality of this study: This study provides valuable insights into the role of politeness strategies in political discourse, offering a deeper understanding of how language shapes power dynamics and public perception in high-stakes settings. This also suggests how educators can meaningfully integrate Duterte’s politeness strategies in discussing persuasive communication, public image construction, and the influence of authority in political settings and debates.

  • How to cite

    [1]
    J. M. C. Anthony, D. J. B. Pacate, D. M. Tulud, and E. B. Barbosa, “Politeness Strategies of President Duterte During Inquest on War on Drugs: Implications on Teaching Communication”, Ind. Jou. Edu. Rsc, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 234–246, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.37251/ijoer.v6i2.1538.

    More Citation Formats

  • 492
    Abstract views
    725
    Downloads

    Metrics — Badges

    1. D. Z. Kádár and M. Haugh, Understanding Politeness. Cambridge University Press, 2013. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781139382717. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139382717
    2. F.-X. Bonnet, “Portrait of Rodrigo Duterte - President of the Philippines.,” Institut Montaigne.
    3. R. C Casiple et al., “Roundtable: The 2016 Philippine Presidential Election,” Contemp Southeast Asia, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 177–208, Aug. 2016, doi: 10.1355/cs38-2a. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1355/cs38-2a
    4. Ranada, “Duterte’s SONA 2018 will be ‘straight from the heart,’” Jul. 05, 2018. Accessed: Feb. 16, 2025. https://www.rappler.com/nation/206554-duterte-sona-2018-philippines-straight-from-heart
    5. Aljazeera, “Rodrigo Duterte vows to abstain from cursing others,” 2016. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/10/rodrigo-duterte-vows-abstain-cursing-161028170733944.html
    6. R. Rubic-Remorosa, “President Rodrigo Roa Duterte’s Political Speeches: A Critical Discourse Analysis,” IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 72–87, 2018, https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol.%2023%20Issue8/Version-2/I2308027287.pdf
    7. V. Voinov, “Politeness devices in the Tuvan language (Order Number: 3568932),” ProQuest Central, 2013. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1426247419?accountid=31259
    8. E. D. Loepp, Crisis Rhetoric: A Theory of Communication in Times of Crisis. University of Richmond Libraries, 2008.
    9. D. G. Timberman, “Philippine Politics Under Duterte: A Midterm Assessment,” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 2019, https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/01/10/philippine-politics-under-duterte-midterm-assessment-pub-78091
    10. M. R. Thompson, “Bloodied Democracy: Duterte and the Death of Liberal Reformism in the Philippines,” Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 39–68, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1177/186810341603500303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/186810341603500303
    11. P. D. Kenny, Populism in Southeast Asia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108563772
    12. S. Harris, “Being politically impolite: extending politeness theory to adversarial political discourse,” Discourse & Society, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 451–472, 2001, https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/19314 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926501012004003
    13. R. ; Yasmeen, M. Jabeen, and A. Akram, “Politeness and the language of Pakistani politicians,” Academic Research International, vol. 5, no. 3, 2014.
    14. H. K. Mara, “Politeness theory and the classification of speech acts,” University of Victoria, Department of Linguistics, Victoria, 2015. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1886790138?accountid=31259
    15. E. Goffman, “On Facework: An Analysis of Ritual Elements in Social Interaction,” in The Discourse Reader, A. , & C. N. Jaworski, Ed., London: Routledge, 1967, pp. 306–321.
    16. V. Sagaravasi, “Intercultural communication strategies: Discursive strategies between Americans and Thais in an English language asynchronous argumentative online forum and their impact for language education (Order Number: 3509943),” ProQuest Central, 2012. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1021368854?accountid=31259
    17. E. Goffman, Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York, NY: Anchor Books, 1967.
    18. J. A. Maginnis, “Texting in the presence of others: The use of politeness strategies in conversation (Order Number: 3492187),” ProQuest Central, 2011.
    19. P. Brown and S. Levinson, Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
    20. A. J. L. Lupas and E. J. AU - Muico, “‘P**** I**’: A Pragmatic Analysis On President Rodrigo Duterte’s First and Last State of the Nation Addresses (SONAS 2016 - 2021),” The Pendulum, vol. 17, no. 1, Jul. 2023.
    21. N. Curato, “Flirting with Authoritarian Fantasies? Rodrigo Duterte and the New Terms of Philippine Populism,” J Contemp Asia, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 142–153, Jan. 2017, doi: 10.1080/00472336.2016.1239751. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2016.1239751
    22. E. Friginal and J. A. Hardy, Corpus-based Sociolinguistics: A Guide for Students. New Yokr: Routledge, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203114827
    23. D. Gomez and R. Manuel, “Politeness indicators of President Duterte’s speeches: A content analysis,” International Journal of Research Studies in Education, vol. 11, no. 7, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.5861/ijrse.2022.366.
    24. W. KONG-IN and A. Damnet, “The Implementation of ISSECI Model for Enhancing Thai EFL Students’ Intercultural Pragmatic Competence: Politeness Strategies,” Advances in Language and Literary Studies, vol. 9, no. 3, p. 34, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.3p.34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.3p.34
    25. S. Maslucha, W. Wachidaturrohmah, and I. K. Daulay, “Politeness Strategies in EFL Classroom Interactions: A Study from a Junior High School in the Southeast Asian Context,” ELT Worldwide: Journal of English Language Teaching, vol. 11, no. 2, p. 461, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.26858/eltww.v11i2.67024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26858/eltww.v11i2.67024
    26. D. A. Morand, “ Using politeness to model the psychosocial dynamics of power in organizational interaction,” International Journal of Organizational Analysis, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 247–273, 2014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-09-2011-0515
    27. H. Al-Duleimi, S. M. Rashid, and N. A. Ain, “A critical review of prominent theories of politeness,” Advances in Language and Literary Studies, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 262–270, 2016, https://search.proquest.com/docview/2188085834?accountid=31259 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.7n.6p.262
    28. M. Santosa, “The implications of politeness strategies among teachers and students in the classroom,” 2018.
    29. Y. Teng, “An Analysis of Pragmatic Functions of Hedging in American Presidential Inaugural Addresses,” Theory and Practice in Language Studies, vol. 5, no. 8, p. 1688, Aug. 2015, doi: 10.17507/tpls.0508.20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0508.20
    30. E. L. L. Duran, “Exploring Controversial Issues: Discursive Devices in Duterte’s Speeches,” International Journal of English Literature and Social Sciences, vol. 8, no. 2, Mar. 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22161/ijels.82.22
    31. T. A. van Dijk, “Editorial: Analysing Discourse Analysis,” Discourse & Society, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 5–6, Jan. 1997, doi: 10.1177/0957926597008001001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926597008001001
    32. M. T. De la Cruz, E. Protacio, F. Balanon, J. Yacat, and C. Francisco, “Trust and power: Child abuse in the eyes of the child and the parent.,” UP Center for Integrative and Development Studies Program on Psychosocial Trauma and Human Rights., 2001.
    33. L. P. Alampay and M. R. M. Jocson, “Attributions and Attitudes of Mothers and Fathers in the Philippines,” Parenting, vol. 11, no. 2–3, pp. 163–176, Apr. 2011, doi: 10.1080/15295192.2011.585564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15295192.2011.585564
    34. T. A. (Ed. ) Van Dijk, Discourse as structure and process. London: SAGE Publications, 1997.
    35. Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge, Éditions Gallimard. London: Tavistock Publication, 1972.
    36. G. . Y. Amper, “Team identity and politeness: An analysis of the University of the Philippines Diliman student council election standard bearers’ speech in Philippine Collegian interviews,” 2018. https://www.academia.edu/38190949
    37. P. , Brown and S. Levinson, “ Questions and Politeness,” in Politeness: Some universals in language usage, E. (Ed. ) Goody, Ed., Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1978.
    38. A. Mitchell, “Linguistic avoidance and social relations in Datooga (Order Number: 3725963),” ProQuest Central, 2015.
    39. J. P. Gee, How to do Discourse Analysis. Routledge, 2014. doi: 10.4324/9781315819662. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315819662
    40. U. Qoyyimah, “Handling translations of data for qualitative research,” Forum for Linguistic Studies, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 1, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.18063/fls.v5i1.1515. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18063/fls.v5i1.1515
    41. M. B. Miles, A. M. Huberman, and J. Saldaña, Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2014.
    42. H. Noble and J. Smith, “Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research,” Evidence Based Nursing, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 34–35, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.1136/eb-2015-102054. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102054
    43. D. Gomez and R. Manuel, “Politeness indicators of President Duterte’s speeches: A content analysis,” International Journal of Research Studies in Education, vol. 11, no. 7, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.5861/ijrse.2022.366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrse.2022.366
    44. R. R. Caguisa, A. D. Era, N. I. Gurne, O. M. , Lero, M. N. Marañon, and J. M. Molina, “ Cathexis on Face in Catastrophe: Politeness in President Duterte’s Late-Night Public Address Talk to the People on COVID-19,” Talastásan: A Philippine Journal of Communication and Media Studies, vol. 1, no. 1, 2022.
    45. O. Tatcho, “Beyond Strategic Maneuvering: Embodied Storytelling as Duterte’s Form of Argumentation,” Humanities Diliman: A Philippine Journal of Humanities, vol. 17, no. 1, Aug. 2020.
    46. C. J. Montiel, A. J. Boller, J. Uyheng, and E. A. Espina, “Narrative congruence between populist President Duterte and the Filipino public: Shifting global alliances from the United States to China,” J Community Appl Soc Psychol, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 520–534, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1002/casp.2411. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2411
    47. S. J. Flusberg, T. Matlock, and P. H. Thibodeau, “War metaphors in public discourse,” Metaphor Symb, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1–18, Jan. 2018, doi: 10.1080/10926488.2018.1407992. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2018.1407992
    48. N. Fairclough, Language and Power. Routledge, 2013. doi: 10.4324/9781315838250. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315838250
    49. J. P. Gee, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. Routledge, 2014. doi: 10.4324/9781315819679. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315819679
    50. J. Holmes, Women, Men and Politeness. Routledge, 2013. doi: 10.4324/9781315845722. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315845722