Article published In: New perspectives on conflict:
[Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 9:2] 2021
► pp. 215–236
The pen is mightier than the sword
Malala Yousafzai’s reaction to verbal and nonverbal aggression in her 2013 UN-speech
Published online: 2 April 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00034.kie
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00034.kie
Abstract
On October 9, 2012 Malala Yousafzai, a Pakistani schoolgirl, was severely wounded by a Taliban assassin’s bullet.
This was the culmination of a history of conflict in the Swat valley region of north-western Pakistan. The historical, ethnic,
political and religious reasons for this conflict are manifold. After several surgeries in Pakistan and Great Britain, Malala
Yousafzai miraculously recovered from her serious injuries and was even able to give a speech at the United Nations Youth Assembly
on her 16th birthday on July 12, 1. Malala Yousafzai: Speech at the United Nations Youth Assembly (12.7.2013). [[URL]; last seen on January 8, 2020; my own text is based on the transcription of the British newspaper The Guardian, which has been modified and corrected according to the video ([URL]; length of the video (within the ABC News Special Report): 19:35; length of Malala Yousafzai’s speech: 00:40 – 17:36, that is, 17 minutes; last seen on January 8, 2020)].
In this paper, Malala Yousafzai’s speech will be analysed in some detail regarding her main arguments and verbal
presentation strategies. Furthermore, I will focus on the way Malala Yousafzai deals with both the verbal and non-verbal
aggression of the Taliban. I would also like to show how determined she is to argue against the Taliban’s escalation of the
conflict without letting herself getting entangled in a spiral of verbal violence.
The theoretical framework for this analysis and the critical evaluation of the speech will be the concept of
“strategic maneuvering” as developed by van Eemeren (Eemeren, Frans H. van. 2010. Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. , Eemeren, Frans H. van. 2018. Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer. ) within his framework of Pragma-Dialectics. This concept has frequently been applied to the analysis
of political discourse (see e.g. Kienpointner, Manfred. 2013. “Strategic Maneuveringg in the Political Rhetoric of Barack Obama.” Journal of Language and Politics 12(3): 357–377. , Kienpointner, Manfred. 2017. “Reason and Passion in Political Rhetoric: The Case of Louise Michel’s (1830–1905) Revolutionary Discourse.” In Argumentation across Communities of Practice: Multi-disciplinary Perspectives, edited by Cornelia Ilie and Giuliana Garzone, 99–125. Amsterdam: Benjamins. ).
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Historical background – Overview of the life of Malala Yousafzai
- 3.Theoretical background
- 4.The speech of Malala Yousafzai
- 5.On the evaluation of the speech delivered by Malala Yousafzai
- 6.Conclusion
Source texts References
References (38)
1. Malala Yousafzai: Speech at the United Nations Youth Assembly (12.7.2013). [[URL]; last seen on January 8, 2020; my own text is based on the transcription of the British newspaper The Guardian, which has been modified and corrected according to the video ([URL]; length of the video (within the ABC News Special Report): 19:35; length of Malala Yousafzai’s speech: 00:40 – 17:36, that is, 17 minutes; last seen on January 8, 2020)]
Yousafzai, Malala and Lamb, Christina2. Yousafzai, Malala and Lamb, Christina. (2013): Ich bin Malala. München: Droemer (Engl. Original: M. Yousafzai and Chr. Lamb (2013): I am Malala. New York: Little, Brown and Company).
Aristotle. 2006. On Rhetoric: A Theory of Civic Discourse. 2nd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Das, Runa. 2017. “He Named Me Malala: Connecting the Historical, the Local, and the Global.” Social Identities. Journal for the Study of Race, Nation and Culture. 23(2): 195–211.
Eemeren, Frans H. van. 2010. Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Eemeren, Frans H. van. 2018. Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, and Bert Meuffels. 2009. Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij, and Jean H. M. Wagemans. 2014. Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 1984. Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht: Foris.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Amsterdam: SicSat.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Peter Houtlosser. 2002. “Strategic Manoeuvring with the Burden of Proof.” In Advances in Pragma-Dialectics, edited by Frans H. van Eemeren, 13–28. Amsterdam: SicSat.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Peter Houtlosser. 2006. “Strategic Manoeuvring with the Burden of Proof.” Argumentation 20(4): 381–392.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser, and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans. 2007. Argumentative Indicators in Discourse. Dordrecht: Springer.
Fahnestock, Jean. 2009. “Quid pro nobis. Rhetorical Stylistics for Argument Analysis.” In Examining Argumentation in Context, edited by Frans H. van Eemeren, 191-220. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1997. “A Multilevel Approach in the Study of Talk in Interaction.” Pragmatics 7(1): 1–20.
Kienpointner, Manfred. 1986. “Topische Sequenzen in argumentativen Dialogen.” Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 14(3): 321–355.
Kienpointner, Manfred. 2013. “Strategic Maneuveringg in the Political Rhetoric of Barack Obama.” Journal of Language and Politics 12(3): 357–377.
Kienpointner, Manfred. 2017. “Reason and Passion in Political Rhetoric: The Case of Louise Michel’s (1830–1905) Revolutionary Discourse.” In Argumentation across Communities of Practice: Multi-disciplinary Perspectives, edited by Cornelia Ilie and Giuliana Garzone, 99–125. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Kienpointner, Manfred, and Anna Orlandini. 2005. “La doxa de la justice à travers les langues et les époques.” Revue Internationale des droits de l’antiquité 521: 181–206.
Kienpointner, Manfred, and Maria Stopfner. 2017. “Ideologies and (Im)politeness.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, edited by Culpeper, Jonathan, Michael Haugh, and Dániel Z. Kádár, 61–87. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Khoja-Moolji, Shenila. 2018. “Why is Malala such a Polarising Figure in Pakistan.” April 1, 2018. [URL]
Lakoff, George. 2006. Whose Freedom? The Battle over America’s Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Larivée, Serge, Carole Sénéchal and Geneviève Chénard. 2013. “Les côtés ténébreux de Mère Teresa.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 42(3): 319–345.
Olesen, Thomas. 2016. “Malala and the Politics of Global Iconicity.” The British Journal of Sociology 67(2): 307–327.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
CONTESA, YENIS & Ahmad Sahide
Alam, Zainab
2021. Violence against women in politics. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 9:1 ► pp. 21 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
