A Linguistic Analysis

of Diplomatic
Discourse
A Linguistic Analysis
of Diplomatic
Discourse:

UN Resolutions on the Question

of Palestine

By

Germana D’Acquisto
A Linguistic Analysis of Diplomatic Discourse:
UN Resolutions on the Question of Palestine

By Germana D’Acquisto

This book first published 2017

Cambridge Scholars Publishing

Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Copyright © 2017 by Germana D’Acquisto

All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without
the prior permission of the copyright owner.

ISBN (10): 1-4438-5072-1

ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-5072-8
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword ................................................................................................... vii

Gabriella Di Martino

Acknowledgements .................................................................................... ix

Introduction ................................................................................................. 1

Chapter One ................................................................................................. 5

The United Nations and the Question of Palestine
1.1 The role of UN Resolutions in the Middle East conflict
1.2 Language and Diplomacy: UN Resolutions and ‘negotiations’
in the Arabi-Israeli conflict

Chapter Two .............................................................................................. 13

A Functional Analysis of UN Resolutions
2.1 An overview of legal texts. UN Resolution: a hybrid text
2.2 The analysis of Un Resolutions: function, structure and genre
2.3 The genre of United Nations Resolutions
2.4 Enactment clauses
2.5 Personal Pronouns
2.6 Nominalization
2.7 Lexical choices: Plain language in prescriptive legal texts

Chapter Three ............................................................................................ 27

Modality in UN Resolutions
3.1 Quantitative and qualitative analysis of central English modals
3.2 Modal of obligation: must, should, shall
3.3 Modals of permission: may, might, can, could, cannot
3.4 Modal of volition: will, would
3.5 Passive voice vs. Active voice
3.6 English expressions of modality: adjectives; participles;
modal lexical verbs
vi Table of Contents

Concluding Remarks ................................................................................. 79

Appendix I ................................................................................................. 81
Lists of the Selected UN Resolutions

Appendix II................................................................................................ 85
The Main Events in the Arab-Israeli Conflict

Appendix III .............................................................................................. 87

Activities

Appendix IV .............................................................................................. 95
The UN Charter

References ............................................................................................... 125

 FOREWORD

In this corpus based study, the author, competently, applies methods

from corpus linguistics to investigate diplomatic discourse in UN
Resolutions concerning the main events related to the troublesome Arabi-
Israeli conflict from 1947 to the present day.
The book opens with Kofi Annan’s quotation “words have a
remarkable power which can be for good or ill” and it is in the light of
these words that the wide-ranging corpus has been examined and its
linguistic and pragmatic functions taken into account. The author
considers and evaluates the specialized language in diplomatic
negotiations with particular regard to lexicon and the strategic means
utilised for communicative interactions.
The core of the analysis focuses on the role of the verb forms in the
English language. Particular attention has been given to the quantitative
and qualitative analysis of English modal verbs and the expressions of
deontic, epistemic, dynamic, volitive, directive and commissive modality.
The study also examines the use of prescriptive and performative verbs
expressed in the diplomatic negotiation documents under scrutiny between
the legal authority, the United Nations, and the addressees, the Member
States and the International Community.
I have seen Germana D’Acquisto grow and develop in her latest
research project, an achievement which has been pleasing to witness, as it
undoubtedly provides a contribution to the application of corpus
linguistics in investigations on a variety of areas. This monography will
certainly add a new insight into existing publications on the field of
linguistic analysis on political documentations, enriching this area of
research.

Gabriella Di Martino
Università di Napoli Federico II
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my advisor Prof.

Pennarola Cristina for the continuous support of my Ph.D study and
related research, for her patience, motivation, and immense knowledge.
Her guidance helped me in all the time of research and writing of this
book. Besides my advisor, I would like to thank the rest of my thesis
committee: Prof. Gabriella Di Martino, Prof. Vanda Polese for their
insightful comments and encouragement, but also for the hard question
which incented me to widen my research from various perspectives. My
sincere thanks also goes to evryone who provided me an opportunity to
join their team as intern, and who gave access to the laboratory and
research facilities. Without they precious support it would not be possible
to conduct this research. Last but not the least, I would like to thank my
family: my parents and my sisters, my nephews, my houseband and son
and my friends for supporting me spiritually throughout writing this book
and my life in general.
 INTRODUCTION

This book centres on the language of United Nations Resolutions

concerning the Question of Palestine taking into account that since the
beginning of the conflict all diplomatic negotiations have been carried out
in English, despite both Palestine and Israel not being English speaking
countries. The corpus (see Appendix I) includes two sub corpora: sixty-six
Security Council Resolutions (2965 words) and forty General Assembly
Resolutions (2529 words) from 1948 to 2006 (see Appendix I) related to
the main events of the conflict starting from the Plan of Partition of
Palestine territory established in the General Assembly Resolution 181
(1947), up to the present day (see Appendix II)1.
In particular, the aim is to investigate the role of the English verbal
system and archaic expressions in relation to modality in the institutional
language of the United Nations as well as the different pragmatic purposes
of its normative text types, taking into account the communicative
interaction between the legal authority, the United Nations, and the
addressees, the Member States and the International Community. As
Williams (2007: 11) asserts: “Interpreting the intention of the lawmakers

1
The reason why I have taken into account both sub corpora is due to the
consideration that they have different roles within the Organization. As a matter of
fact, the General Assembly is the main deliberative, policymaking and
representative organ of the United Nations comprising all 193 Members of the
United Nations and it provides a unique forum for multilateral discussion on the
full spectrum of international issues covered by the Charter whereas the Security
Council has primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and
security. It has 15 Members, and each Member has one vote. Under the Charter, all
Member States are obliged to comply with Council decisions. The Security
Council takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to peace or an act of
aggression. It calls upon the parties in a dispute to settle it by peaceful means and
recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In some cases, the
Security Council can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorize the use of
force to maintain or restore international peace and security. The Security Council
also recommends to the General Assembly the appointment of the Secretary-
General and the admission of new Members to the United Nations. And, together
with the General Assembly, it elects the judges of the International Court of
Justice. See: http://www.un.org/en/sc/
2 Introduction

and those who drafted a particular law inevitably entails a detailed scrutiny
of the language used [...] the mere absence of a definite article in an
expression can give rise to heated and prolonged interpretative debate”2.
The linguistic investigation refers to the use of prescriptive and performative
verbs to express different degrees of obligation in the documents of the
United Nations. Specifically, the starting point is the definition of
prescriptive legal texts issued by international organizations and in
particular by the United Nations and the linguistic and pragmatic functions
of these text types.
This analysis develops two main themes:

1) A macro analysis concerning: sentence structure with regard to the

length and patterns of coordination and subordination, style and
structure of the prescriptive legal text, distribution of modal forms
and semi-modal forms, lexical choices including archaic or rarely
used words, foreign words and expressions.
2) The analysis of the context, including an overview of the origins
and causes of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the role of the United
Nations in the conflict in the light of the relationship between
language and diplomacy

The quantitative - qualitative analysis is based on Halliday’s Systemic

Functional Grammar (2004), a Corpus linguistics approach supported by
Antconc 2.0 software, Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (1995,
2001, 2003, 2006, 2007) and studies on Genre (Bhatia 2001; Trosborg
1997; Williams 2007; Cohen 2001; Nick 2001).
Chapter 1 focuses on diplomatic discourse from the past to present
times and on the importance of language as a specialised means in
diplomatic negotiations with a particular regard to lexicon.
Chapter 2 analyses:
1. The style and structure of the prescriptive legal text. Lexical choices
including archaic or rarely used words, foreign words and expressions
taking into account the guidelines of the Plain English Movement..

2
The translation of a legal text into different languages can cause misunderstandings.
For example, one of the most controversial of the UN Resolutions, S/RES 242
(1967), has two different versions in English and French. In the English version the
lack of a definite article “withdrawal of territories”, present in the French version
“des territoires”, gave rise to a prolonged interpretative debate.
 A Linguistic Analysis of Diplomatic Discourse 3

Chapter 3 focuses on English Modality and in particular on the

quantitative and qualitative analysis of English modals in the United
Nations Resolutions3 considering:

3
The United Nations Resolutions are normative texts issued by an authoritative
source, which refer to measures that do not become laws. The United Nations
Charter establishes that the Security Council has the power to intervene also with
the use of military force if a State undermines peace and Security among Nations:
Article 41
The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of
armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon
the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include
complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal,
telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of
diplomatic relations.
Article 43
All Members of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance
of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security
Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreement or agreements,
armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for
the purpose of maintaining international peace and security.
Nations sometimes resort to international arbitration when faced with a
specific question or point of contention in need of Resolution. In the past, there
were no official or formal procedures for such proceedings. Nowadays, these
proceedings are often carried out by the International Court of Justice, or other
formal commissions, agencies and tribunals working under the United Nations.
The language used to write and disseminate texts represents one of the most
relevant problems in diplomatic negotiations. In the past there were periods when
one language had the predominant role resulting from the political, strategic,
economic, cultural domination in international relations (Nick 2001: 39-47).
Nowadays, most international negotiations are carried out in English, the modern
global language or lingua franca. Treaties and other important documents are very
often drafted in English and international organizations conduct most of their
operations in English. The use of an International language such as English is
important for the efficient handling of international affairs but, at the same time, it
can generate problems of cross-cultural misunderstandings (Cohen 2001: 67).
Despite the existence of a universal model of the basic procedures in
negotiations, the misunderstanding in negotiation lies in the different meanings
attached to some words, which are strongly influenced by cultural factors. Cohen
(2001:67-91) points out,
The language of diplomacy is yet a further refinement of language as medium
of communication [...] Language is often a cause for misunderstanding and conflict
[...] The case for the importance of language and culture lies on the view that
semantic distinctions reflect different interpretations of reality and normative
4 Introduction

• English modal verbs and modality: deontic, epistemic, dynamic,

volitive, directive, commissive;
• English expressions of modality: adjectives, participles, nouns,
modal lexical verbs;
• Finite verbal constructions, Mood including passive vs. active
forms, positive vs. negative forms;
• Non / finite verbal constructions (non / finite ing forms, non / finite
ed form, infinitives).

The book offers some examples of possible activities with a didactic

aim aimed at students.

modes of behaviour [...] Ambiguity in diplomatic text may help to give up a state
of warfare, or hostility and at the same time it could be wise and convenient
 CHAPTER ONE

THE UNITED NATIONS

AND THE QUESTION OF PALESTINE

Language is an essential attribute of human nature.

Without it, we could not communicate any but the very simplest
thought […]
So language connects us to one another.
But ever since the Tower of Babel, it has also divided us […]
Words have a remarkable power, which can be for good or ill [...]”
—Kofi Annan

1.1 The role of UN Resolutions in the Middle East conflict

At the end of the First World War with the disintegration of the
Turkish Ottoman Empire, Palestine was placed under the administration of
Great Britain according to the Mandatory System. This decision failed to
take into account the wishes of the people of Palestine.
In principle, the Mandate was originally meant to cover a period of
transition until Palestine attained the status of a fully independent nation, a
status provisionally recognized in the League's Covenant, but sadly the
Mandate's historical evolution did not lead to the emergence of Palestine
as an independent nation. The mandate had as its main aim the
implementation of the Balfour Declaration issued by the British
Government in 1917, which supported the establishment of “a national
home for the Jewish people”.
By the turn of the century, the “Eastern question” was a predominant
concern of European diplomacy, as the Great powers manoeuvred to
establish control or spheres of influence over the territories of the
declining Ottoman Empire.
In 1916 negotiations between Britain, France and Russia, later also
including Italy, led to the secret Sykes-Picot1 agreement on the allocation

1
The Sykes-Picot-Sazanov Agreement of 1916 was a secret understanding
between the governments of Britain and France, with the assent of Russia, defining
6 Chapter One

of Ottoman Arab territories, the spheres of influence of the European

Powers and the recognition of an “independent Arab State” or “confederation
of Arab States”.
The Balfour Declaration 1971 became an integral part of the Mandate, it
underpinned its aims and was incorporated in the Mandate. Its
implementation sparked off Arab opposition and revolt and despite
growing anti-Semitism in Europe, only small groups of Jews settled in
Palestine.
In 1947 (see Appendix IV) after several attempts to solve the question
Great Britain decided to turn the problem over to the United Nations
resulting in the partition of Palestine with two independent States, one
Palestinian Arab and the other Jewish.
The United Nations by 1948 was inextricably involved in the Palestine
question. The General Assembly Resolution 181 (1948) known as the
partition Resolution, did not provide a solution to the Palestine problem
and in March 1948 the United States drafted a proposal to enable the
Council to act on the partition Resolution which had failed, with the
Council only calling for an end to the violence in Palestine.
Later that year, on 22 November, the Security Council unanimously
adopted, after much negotiation, Resolution 242 (1967), laying down the
principles for a peaceful settlement in the Middle East. The Resolution
stipulated that the establishment of an equitable and lasting peace should
include the application of two principles:

• Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from the recently occupied

territories and
• The termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect
for and the acknowledgement of sovereignty

In 1950 with the Resolutions 377(V)(1950), 377(V)B (1950) and

377(V)A “Uniting for peace”, the UN reaffirmed the importance of
unanimity of “veto” among the permanent members of the Security
Council on all problems which are likely to threaten world peace.
Furthermore, it reaffirmed article 43 of the UN Charter in which the
responsibility of the Security Council was established in the peace

their respective spheres of influence and control in west Asia after the expected
downfall of the Ottoman Empire during World War I. By the terms of the
agreement, Britain reserved the area which became Transjordan, France was to
obtain Iraq (other than Mosul and its district), Syria and Cilicia,. Russia was to
obtain Constantinople and the Ottoman Armenian vilayets.
 The United Nations and the Question of Palestine 7

agreement and negotiations and stated clearly that the Security Council
could under no circumstances shed this responsibility:
[...] Resolves that if the Security Council, because of lack of unanimity of
the permanent members, fails to exercise its primary responsibility for the
maintenance of international peace and security in any case where there
appears to be a threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of
aggression, the General Assembly shall consider the matter immediately
with a view to making appropriate recommendations to Members for
collective measures, including in the case of a breach of the peace or act of
aggression the use of armed force when necessary, to maintain or restore
international peace and security[...]

Resolution 242 (1967) is the most controversial of the Security Council

Resolutions. According to D. Pehar (2001:177) “it was the result of
bargaining between the powers sitting in the Security Council and it
reflected the deeply polarised political opinion at the United Nations in the
period following the war”. The reason why it is considered the most
controversial resolution lies in its numerous ambiguities. One example is
given by the following expression “Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces
from territories occupied in recent conflict”. The omission of the article
“the” before the word territories, present in the French version, is
ambiguous since it is not clear whether Israel is asked to withdraw from all
the territories occupied in the recent conflict or just certain territories.
Resolution 242 (1967 was thus formulated to be intentionally vague so as
to assure at least a formal acceptance by the state of the region-
Particular attention should be given to this Resolution and to its
translated version in French since some differences have fired debates and
controversies.
Below are the English version of Resolution 242 (1967), and then the
French version of the same Resolution:

1) Security Council Resolution 242 (1967) of

22 November 1967
The Security Council,
Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the
Middle East,
Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war
and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in
the area can live in security,
Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the
Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in
accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,
8 Chapter One

1 . Affirms that the fulfilment of Charter principles requires the

establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should
include the application of both the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied
in the recent conflict2

In the French version of Resolution 242 we can notice that the

underlined sentence in English omits the definite article “the” which is
present in the French version “des territories”. Furthermore the withdrawal
refers to “Every State” and we know that Palestine has never been
recognized as a “State”. (this is omitted in the quote)

Résolution 242 (1967) du 22 novembre 1967

Le Conseil de sécurité,
Exprimant l’inquiétude que continue de lui causer la grave situation au
Moyen-Orient,
Soulignant l’inadmissibilité de l’acquisition de territoires par la guerre
et la necéssité d’oeuvrer pour une paix juste et durable permettant à chaque
Etat de la région de vivre en sécurité,
Soulignant en outre que tous les Etats Membres, en acceptant la Charte
des Nations Unies, ont contracté l’engâgement d’agir conformément ò
l’Article 2 de la Charte,
1. Affirme que l’accomplissement des principes de la Charte exige
l’insaturation d’une paix juste et durable au Moyen-Orient qui devrait
comprendre l’application des duex principes suivant :
i) Retrait des forces armées israéliennes des territoires occupées
lors du récent conflict 3

The Jarring negotiations were conducted on the basis of Resolution

242 (1967), and thus did not address the fundamental issue of Palestinian
national identity, which underlay the conflict in the Middle East. Security
Council Resolution 242, adopted on 22 November 1967, and Resolution
338, adopted on 22 October 1973, are generally considered the axes on
which all subsequent discussions of a Middle East peace settlement rest.
With the question of Palestine unresolved, an uneasy peace, punctuated
by violence and acts of force, continued in the region from 1950 until
1967, when Israel came to occupy the entire area of the former British
Mandate of Palestine. Earlier armed conflict had erupted in 1956, when,
on 29 October, Israel embarked on military operations against Egypt,
joined later by France and the United Kingdom. In a politically charged
atmosphere, Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal in July of that year. The

2
My bold type
3
My bold type
 The United Nations and the Question of Palestine 9

crisis ended with a ceasefire called for by the General Assembly at an

emergency special session.
Since 1978 the Palestinian question has remained in the forefront of
debate in the United Nations. During the years conflicts have changed
their shape from inter-State conflicts to intra-State conflict and we know
that one of the limits is the respect of territorial sovereignty. Despite this
change, the main aim of the Security Council is still to balance and
mediate conflicts and find a solution even if this entails the use of force
when a State threatens peace and security among Nations.
Consequently, the main concern of the United Nations is to intervene,
by helping refugees and protecting archaeological and cultural sites.
In July 2000, United States President Bill Clinton invited the leaders of
Israel and the Palestinian Authority to peace talks at Camp David,
Maryland. The summit ended inconclusively, with the two sides unable to
reach an agreement on the final status issues. As a result, the situation in
the Middle East took a turn for the worse..
At the end of September 2000, a new wave of protest and violence
erupted in the occupied Palestinian territory.
Unfortunately recent years have not seen an improvement in this
situation. A series of subsequent negotiations led to the mutual recognition
between the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation
Organization but a long lasting peace has still not been achieved.

1.2 Language and Diplomacy: UN Resolutions

and negotiations in the Arabi-Israeli conflict
An important aspect in a diplomatic negotiation is represented by the
language or by the strategic means of communicative interactions. As
Scott (2001:153) points out:
In conference diplomacy, the successful diplomat engaged in the
negotiation of texts will often strive to persuade his interlocutors to reach
agreement on a form of words, which combines precision with ambiguity.
The two can be brought together in the same paragraph or longer text,
more rarely in the same sentence. The precision will as a rule serve the
purposes of his own side in stipulating claims or limits to commitments;
the sought-for ambiguity will serve to allay anxieties on either side or to
secure a margin for subsequent interpretation. As conference diplomacy
has steadily gained in importance, the terminology that it employs has
evolved, sometimes reflecting the simultaneous pursuit of both precision
and ambiguity.
10 Chapter One

Scott (2001:154) underlines the boundaries between precision and

ambiguity. In detail ‘precision’ according to his definition includes
accuracy of expression while ‘ambiguity’ is related to the possibility of
interpret a sentence in two or more possible senses or it refers to uncertain.
Thesetwo values - dual definition of ambiguity – gives rise to two different
concepts: duality and vagueness.
In particular, the author (2001: 155,156) suggests that:
When reflecting on the narrower subject of the uses to which diplomacy
may put ambiguity, the following points would seem to emerge from what
we have seen so far:

• Ambiguity occurs spontaneously or naturally (i.e. unintentionally) in

languages because, in order to be flexible, they do not spell everything
out and thus leave scope for alternative interpretations induced by
contextual factors.
• It is possible (even probable) that different languages, emerging from
and reflecting distinct cultures, offer varying scope for ambiguity,
intended or unintended. Some maintain, for example, that the Chinese
are predisposed to underspecification and ambiguity as a culture-
conditioned stance in interpersonal communications; […]

Diplomacy has long been of interest to linguists, (Hofstede 2001: 79-135)4

considers Power Distance, Uncertainty Avoidance, Individualism/Collectivism,
Masculinity/Feminility. (Hall 1985,1990) important factors of cross
cultural discrepancies. He further outlines two different levels for cultural
differences which are: a. Low Context Cultures characterized by clear
and direct communication and b. High Context Cultures characterized by
an implicit and indirect communication in which non-verbal communication
and the manner of expression are important factors. American English
Languages, for instance, are characterized by Low Context Cultures,
meanwhile Arab languages by High Context Cultures.

Taking into account the differences exposed above, diplomacy5 can be

defined as the art and practice of conducting negotiations between
representatives of groups or states and improving international relations
with regard to issues of peace-making, trade, war, economics and culture.
The ability to practice diplomacy is one of the defining attributes of a

4
Available on:
http://books.google.it/books?id=w6z18LJ_1VsC&pg=PR7&hl=it&source=gbs_sel
ected_pages&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false
5
This paragraph is mostly based on the information available on:
http://www.diplomacy.edu/resources/books/language-and-diplomacy
 The United Nations and the Question of Palestine 11

State, and diplomacy has been practiced since the first city-States were
formed.
Regarding the origins of modern diplomacy Nick (2001: 39-47) points
out that it dates back to the states of Northern Italy in the early
Renaissance, when the first embassies were established in the thirteenth
century. Modern diplomacy slowly spread to Eastern Europe and Russia
by the early eighteenth century. After the fall of Napoleon, the Congress of
Vienna of 1815 established an international system of diplomatic rank.
There are also incentives in diplomacy to act reasonably, especially if the
support of other actors is needed. The benefits of winning one negotiation
may be outweighed by the increased hostility expressed by other injured
parties. This is also called soft power. According to S. Nick (2001:39) :
The term Language in diplomacy can be interpreted in several ways [...]
the speech used by one nation, tribe, or by a large group of people. It can
also refer to a special way of expressing the needs of the diplomatic
profession including a particular form, style, manner or tone of expression.
In any of these senses, the use of language in diplomacy is very important,
but at the same time there are some problems: diplomats often are not able
to communicate in one language, common to all participants.

According to Cohen (2001) the Middle East Negotiating Lexicon

includes a series of key negotiating words in Arabic, Farsi, Hebrew and
Turkish. It is important to pay attention to how certain concepts such as
“right”, “peace”, “document” are interpreted in different cultures focusing
on the special features of use, the possible religious and historical
connotations, and analysing the social and cultural associations evoked by
the word for the native speaker. Here are several interesting examples
provided by the author: “the term ‘peace’, for example, in English refers to
a relationship established by treaty between states at the conclusion of a
war, an ideal prophetic vision of harmony, and tranquillity while the
reference term ‘Shalom’ shares in the Biblical vision of universal accord
but lacks the legal features that ‘peace’ acquired in the European state
system thanks to centuries of diplomatic practice”. Another example given
by the author is ‘Delegation’ “which is a neutral word in English denoting
a group of people authorized to represent their country in a diplomatic or
cultural capacity. By contrast, its Arabic equivalent is linked to the Arab
tradition of visiting”. Furthermore, “Negotiation concepts are lodged
within traditions, social organization and culture. Government agencies in
the West do not issue orders to economic and social groups but negotiate
with them. Whereas in highly hierarchical societies the free exchange of
ideas is discouraged”.
12 Chapter One

Finally, Cohen (2001) suggests the term ‘Compromise’ which “is

fundamental in the English-speaking world, is closely connected to the
concept of ‘agreement’. According to the Anglo-Saxon philosophy of
negotiation, it is the very process of ‘give and take’”.
 CHAPTER TWO

A FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
OF UN RESOLUTIONS

2.1 An overview of legal texts. Resolutions: hybrid text

In this paragraph it is useful to make some references to the features of
legal discourse in orderto focus the analysis on the co-text and context of
the analysed documents. In detail, I’ve taken into account Trosborg (1997:
32) distinction between “legal language”, “the language of the law” and
“the language of legal documents”. The author affirms that the former refers
to “language as realized specifically in legal documents, i.e. texts covered by
the scope or statute law and common law, namely (i) legislation, and (ii)
simple contracts and deeds. The second “Legal language” refers to legal
discourse in general. The expression “The language of the Law” refers to
written prescriptive texts. Finally “the language of legal documents” which
refers to “any form of legal discourse which can range from the language
of legal documents to the law reports published in newspaper to certain
forms of oral language such as legal instructions which are read out to jury
members”. (Williams 2007:23). This chapter focuses on the second
definition, “Language of the Law”, since Resolutions are texts which
suggest the idea of an “authority Speaking” even if they are not legally
binding documents since their aim is only to give recommendations.
Moreover, I’ve taken into account some definitions of genre. In detail,
Swales (1990:58) defines genre:
A class of communicative events, the members of which share some set of
communicative purposes. These purposes are recognized by the expert
members of the parent discourse community, and thereby constitute the
rationale and influences and constrains choice of content and style.

While Bhatia (1993:101) points out that ‘The language of the Law’:
[…] Encompasses several usefully distinguishable genres depending upon
the communicative purposes they tend to fulfil, the setting or contexts in
which they are used, the communicative events or activities they are
14 Chapter Two

associated with, the social or professional relationship between the

participants […] the background knowledge that such participants bring to
the situation […]

Based on these assumptions we can conclude that the members of

United Nations are a “diplomatic speech community” who share a set of
communicative purposes and that Resolutions being written legal texts
have a particular function, being to report the decisions made by the
Organs during their meetings after negotiations.
Another important point is that in English speaking countries legal
texts are drafted in British English even though each member country has
adapted the language to its own needs. The United Nations Resolutions are
drafted in English and French, the two working languages, and the
negotiations in the peace process to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict are
carried out in English. Although the UN headquarters are in New York the
language used derives from the legal English of Great Britain (Williams
2007:167:192).

2.2 Analysis of UN Resolutions:

function, structure and genre
United Nations Resolutions are formal expressions of the opinion or will
of United Nations organs. They generally consist of two clearly defined
sections: a preamble and an operative part. The preamble generally presents
the considerations on the basis of which action is taken, an opinion
expressed or a directive given. The operative part states the opinion of the
organ or the action to be taken. United Nations documents have a symbol,
which serves as a unique identifier. Each symbol is composed of letters
and numbers, which indicates the organ to which the document is being
submitted or the organ that is issuing the document. As clarified on the UN
web site section “Working documents”1, the basic format for the symbols
of Security Council documents is: S/[year]/[sequential number], e. g.,
S/1998/318. From 1946 to 1993, the format was S/[sequential number], e.
g., S/24111.
Resolutions of the Security Council have a symbol and the following
format: S/RES/[sequential number] ([year]). For more information on the
documents symbol, it is possible to visit the UN Documentation Research
Guide designed for researchers and information professionals who aim at
an overview of the various types of documents and publications issued by

1
See: http://www.un.org/en/sc/documents/
 A Functional Analysis of UN Resolutions 15

the Organization (e.g, reports, resolutions, meeting records, sales

publications, press releases) and gives guidance on how to work with
them2.
As regard the methodology, I’ve taken into account a key concept in
Halliday’s (2004) approachwhich is the context of situation and linguistic
“function”. Halliday (2004:61) identifies four metafunctions: Experiental,
Interpersonal, Textual, Logical.
In detail, the Textual function which includes vocabulary use, register
and is related to the coherence and cohesion of a text have been taken into
account; Interpersonal, which includes the analysis of involvement and
detachment, the use of pronouns, interactive items showing the position of
the speaker related to relational aspects highlighted in the text; Ideational,
which includes the analysis of modality and modal auxiliaries, modals of
obligation (must, should); modals of ability and possibility (can, could);
modals of epistemic possibility (may, might); modals of volition and
prediction (will, shall); hypothetical modals (would, should) related to the
capacity / ability of representing reality.
Furthermore, Halliday (2004: 44 - 45) in his functional grammar
considers the transitivity System as an aspect of the Ideational Function of
language, a cognitive function that allows the mental representation of the
semantic meaning of words, sentences and the whole text. Generally
speaking, in a transitivity System, Actors are the Agents that cause
Processes (causation) aimed at Goal. This cognitive representation of an
action can be expressed syntactically by both Active and Passive forms of
sentences with sentences being the framework of the whole text.
Moreover, Halliday (2004: 301) describes a number of Processes that
represent experience and inform the Transitivity System reflected in the
structure of clauses. He claims that there are two primary Processes
representing two essential aspects of experience: a. Outer experience,
representing the processes of the external world; b. Inner experience,
representing the processes of the conscious mind. Thus, Halliday (2004:
177, 310, 335, 351-54) points out that the cognitive representation of a
process consists of three experiential components:

• the Process itself, syntactically realized by a Verb (or Verbal

Group-i.e. Verb Phrase);
• the Participants in the Process (e.g. Actors and Goals in material
Processes) syntactically realized by Nouns (or Nominal Groups-
i.e., Noun Phrase);

2
See: http://www.un.org/Depts/dhl/resguide/
16 Chapter Two

• the Circumstance (of time, place, manner), syntactically realized by

Adverbial Groups (Adverbs and Adverbial Phrases) or Prepositional
Groups (Phrases that enclose prepositions).

Finally, Halliday defines six primary Processes: 1) material Processes

expressing the outer experience (concrete actions of doing); 2) mental
Processes, expressing the inner experience (thoughts, emotions, perceptions);
3) relational Processes, expressing classification and identification; 4)
behavioural Processes, expressing the outer manifestations of processes of
the conscious mind or physiological processes; 5) verbal Processes,
expressing the enactment of cognitive construction in the form of spoken
or written language; 6) existential Processes, expressing the existence or
happening of every kind of phenomena.
Starting from these theoretical considerations I will analyse the
structure of the Resolutions, in particular the clauses, the verbal system
and the lexical choices.

2.3 The linguistic analysis of verbal system of United

Nations Resolutions
As regards the frequency distribution of tokens in the two subcorpora
it is illustrated in table 1. :

Text type Tokens

Security Council Resolutions 36925
General Assembly Resolutions 60199

Table 2. Frequency distribution of tokens in the two subcorpora.

Based on the assumptions expressedin the previous paragraph, the

Security Council Resolutions generally begin with a title and are
introduced by the Logical Subject that is the Security Council and the
General Assembly, a series of paragraphs, which begin with verbs in the
present tense such as affirms, requests. Linguists have noticed the
presence, in prescriptive legal texts, of the auxiliary modal shall and must,
but they have stressed the presence of the present simple which is also the
most widely used tense in everyday conversation. As Williams affirms
(2007:153): “Whereas shall and may tend to be used frequently in main
clauses which regulate human behaviour [...] the present simple is the
verbal construction that is necessarily used when conveying explicit
performatives, to be found abundantly in Resolutions”.
 A Functional Analysis of UN Resolutions 17

We can notice a series of non- finite -ing forms: reaffirming, recalling.

Swan (1997:277) observes that:
When -ing form are used as verbs or adverbs, they are often called
“present participles”. (This is not a very suitable name, because these
forms can refer to the past, present or future). When they are used more
like nouns, they are often called “gerunds”. In fact, the distinction is not
really as simple as this, and some grammarians prefer to avoid the term
“participle” and “gerund”.

In UN Resolutions the non-finite - ing form occurs at the beginning of

clauses. We can notice a syntactic discontinuity in all the Resolutions
between the subject (Security Council or General Assembly) and the main
verb, which is separated by a series of recitals which according to
Trosborg’s (1997: 65) definition consist of information that forms the
foundation or background for the document. Generally they are introduced
by WHEREAS despite this word being archaic depending on the context.
In the UN the verbs are generally performative such as reiterate, call,
instruct, resolve, decide or requests which is the most frequently used in
the General Assembly Resolutions with a frequency of 114 and a
percentage of 0,19 and “calls” which is the most frequent verb in the
Security Council Resolutions. It occurs 37 times with a percentage of 0,27.
In the United Nations Resolutions we can notice the most frequent non-
finite - ing form is including as we can see in figure 1.:

Non finite -ing forms

140 127
120
100
80 freq
60
60
38
40 24
20
0,33% 0,16% 0,10% 0,06%
0
including recalling reaffirming concerning
freq 127 60 38 24
0,33% 0,16% 0,10% 0,06%

Figure 1. Occurrences of -ing forms in sisty-six Security Council Resolutions from

1948 to 2006 .
18 Chapter Two

In the United Nations Resolutions we can also find occurrences of the

perfect non-finite –ing forms and in the Security Council Resolutions this
particular structure/pattern occurs fifty-one times “having considered”,
“having noted”, “having heard”, “having studied”.
In the General Assembly Resolutions too the most frequent non-finite -
ing form is “including” as we can see in the following figure:

Non finite -ing forms

140 131

120 111
100
80 freq.
58
60
40 30
20
0,22% 0,19% 0,10% 0,05%
0
including recalling reaffirming recognizing
freq. 131 111 58 30
0,22% 0,19% 0,10% 0,05%

Figure 2. Occurrences of the -ing form in forty General Assembly Resolutions

from 1948 to 2006.

The presence of these forms contributes to creating a depersonalised

style since the Agent is not expressed. The presence of non-finite -ed
participles such as guided, together with repetitions at the beginning of the
paragraphs of the infinitive forms to assume, to carry out, to undertake can
be noted. Furthermore, the words convinced, determined and concerned
are often present at the beginning of the clauses. Non-finite - ed forms are
not necessarily performative verbs but they “typically express a
(collective) state of mind, generally of concern about a situation or of
determination to resolve it.” (Williams 2007: 164). In some examples this
state of mind expresses consternation such as the frequent expression
“shocked and alarmed”.

2.4 Enactment clauses

We can find the so- called enactment clause: “Deeply concerned over
the enactment of a basic law in the Israeli Knesset proclaiming a change
 A Functional Analysis of UN Resolutions 19

in the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, with its
implications for peace and security,” in which the nominalization blurs the
agent. In the UN Resolutions the so called application provision is
frequent (Resolution 1540 2004): “Gravely concerned by the threat of
terrorism and the risk that non-State actors such as those identified in the
United Nations list established and maintained by the Committee
established under Security Council Resolution 1267 and those to whom
Resolution 1373 applies, may acquire, develop, traffic in or use nuclear,
chemical and biological weapons and their means of delivery”. According
to Williams (2007:44): “Application provisions thus define the scope of a
given law or regulation”. A distinction can be made between mandatory
provision and directory norms. The former entails that the performance of
a specific act is required and are to be found in statutes; the latter can be
found in administrative regulations. In both cases permission is given by a
source of authority. The final part of a prescriptive text contains
commencement provisions, which specify under which conditions an
agreement may come into force.
In the United Nations Resolutions we find a wide range of explicit
performative verbs usually in the non-finite -ing form. In the central part
of Resolutions we find explicit performative verbs in the present simple as
in the following examples:

Affirming that prevention of proliferation of nuclear, chemical and

biological weapons should not hamper international cooperation in
materials, equipment and technology for peaceful purposes while goals of
peaceful utilization should not be used as a cover for proliferation,

Decides that all States shall refrain from providing any form of support to
non-State actors that attempt to develop, acquire, manufacture, possess,
transport, transfer or use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons and their
means of delivery;

The structure of Resolutions consists of: the name of the authorizing

body followed by subordinate sentences beginning with the -ing form, -ed
participles and a series of finite performative verbal constructions in the
present simple tense.
A strong presence of nominalizations represented by finite -ing forms,
-ed forms and declares, calls upon, instructs can be isolated identified in
the corpus. The presence of non-finite -ing forms and of -ed participles
and of noun phrases, enactment, acquisition, acceptance, fulfilment,
reveals a strong presence of nominalizations. The sentences are mainly
20 Chapter Two

declarative and are used to state facts, to give information from a sender to
an addressee whose role is that of a receiver.

2.5 Personal pronouns

The use of personal pronouns is important to investigate the role of
Agency agent. In the United Nations Resolutions we can notice the use of
gerundive forms and verbs in the present tense in the third person both
singular and plural. The occurrences of personal pronouns is very low and
we can notice that in the Security Council Resolutions there are no
examples of the use of the personal pronoun “We”, which is present,
instead, in the General Assembly Resolutions:

Text type I you he it we they

Security Council 0,04% 0,15% 0,04% 0,05%
Resolutions
General Assembly 0,14% 0,01% 0,04%
Resolutions

Table 3. Frequency distribution of Personal pronouns in the UN

Resolutions ptw.

In both the Security Council Resolutions and the General Assembly

Resolutions the most frequent pronoun is “it”, this is unsurprising in that
Resolutions are normative texts and consequently the impersonal form is
extremely frequent in prescriptive legal texts. In the General Assembly
Resolutions we can note the presence of the personal pronoun “we”, which
does not occur in the Security Council Resolutions. The personal pronoun
“I” occurs only when the addresser introduces the content of Resolutions
as in “I have the honour”:

S/1226
26 January 1949

24 January 1949
I have the honour3 to transmit herewith the text of the resolution
concerning Palestine which was adopted by the General Assembly at its
186th meeting on 11 December 1948.

3
My bold type