Studies on Nigeria’s national anthem have largely considered the old anthem, ‘Arise, O Compatriots’, to identify its stylistic, pragmatic, and discourse features, with limited attention paid to the newly approved national anthem, ‘Nigeria, we hail thee’. This study, therefore, presents a comparative critical discourse analysis of the Nigerian old and newly approved national anthems, examining them as codified institutional discourse with the aim of identifying divergent and shared ideologies and how they are enacted through linguistic means. The data were obtained from the lyrics of the old and new Nigerian national anthems, sourced from official government records and verified archival documents. Drawing on Fairclough’s approach to critical discourse analysis and Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics, the study investigates the anthems to uncover how state ideology is linguistically encoded in a comparative perspective. The study adopts a qualitative approach to show the interconnectedness of language and political power. The findings reveal that the two anthems’ ideological convergence is evident in their shared emphasis on a common national identity, indexed by kinship-related metaphors and collective pronouns; patriotism and service, with lexical items relating to duty and service; positive national values; and an emphasis on freedom and divine intervention. However, the anthems manifest some ideological divergences. For instance, while ‘Nigeria, we hail thee’ suggests optimism, futurism, and acknowledges unity in diversity, ‘Arise, O Compatriots’ appears motivational, emphasizes immediacy, and does not acknowledge the diversity in Nigeria. The analysis reveals that the language of the anthems performs the social work of reconstructing national consciousness. Ultimately, this study contributes to the understanding of institutional communication by demonstrating how state actors deploy specific linguistic strategies within national symbols to legitimize governance, manage transitions, and embody the evolving ideologies of the nation-state.

The article explores the emotional aspects of quoting in diplomatic discourse within the framework of public political communication. The aim is to identify how different citation strategies contribute to the expression of emotivity in diplomats’ speeches. The study is based on 100 speeches delivered by the permanent representatives of the USA and the UK in the UN Security Council (1964–1965). Emotional polarity was assessed using automated tools: SentiWordNet, which assigns numerical values to words for their positive, neutral, or negative tone; VADER (Valence Aware Dictionary and sEntiment Reasoner), which considers contextual associations; and WordCounter, which analyzes the frequency of key lexical items. Discourse and quantitative analysis were applied to determine the frequency and function of various citation types. The findings show that direct quotation prevails, aligning with institutional requirements for evidentiality. However, significant differences in citation strategies were observed: British diplomats more often use indirect quotation, integrating others’ speech into their arguments, while American representatives favor scare quotation – using quotation marks to signal distancing, irony, or doubt. Quotations were found to serve not only referential but also emotional functions, especially in contrastive contexts as tools of opposition. This is the first study to apply automated sentiment analysis to the emotional aspects of quoting in diplomatic discourse. It reveals differences in citation strategies that reflect national rhetorical styles. Special attention is given to the pragmatic functions of citation, interpreted via H.P. Grice’s Cooperative Principle. The study shows how adherence to or marked violation of Gricean maxims is strategically used to strengthen rhetorical positions and shape evaluative framing. A methodology for integrating sentiment analysis tools into the study of quotation was developed, and a corpus-based analysis conducted, enabling the identification of key pragmatic functions in institutional discourse.

Nigeria’s university system has been plagued by recurring industrial actions arising from conflicts of interest between the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) and the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN), with the 2022 strike constituting the longest such action in the country’s history. The ASUU–FGN tussle has been explored in linguistics, but empirical work has relatively neglected a new and essential dataset—live TV interviews—in which strategic discursive frames that foreground the projected stances of spokespersons for the opposing camps are used in real-time, high-stakes, and mediatised interactions. Focusing on the 2022 impasse, this study examines how key social actors construct their stances and take ideological positions within specific discursive frames. Martin and White’s appraisal framework and Van Dijk’s socio-cognitive model of critical discourse analysis constitute the study’s theoretical framework. Using a qualitative analytical approach, the authors subject data comprising transcribed interactions from four TV interviews, featuring a key social actor from each camp, to discourse analysis. The findings show that social actors project their stances within the following discursive and argumentative frames: the constitutional/legal basis of the industrial action; the exploitation of ideologies of welfarism and inclusivity; the (de)valuation of Nigerian tertiary education; and the politicisation of the industrial action. These discursive frames are supported by appraisal subsystems (attitude and engagement) and representational strategies, including authority, polarisation, categorisation, actor description, comparison, lexicalisation, and populism, which enable favourable or derogatory representations of both groups’ actions. The study observes that, during TV interviews, social actors debate the industrial conflict primarily to legitimise and justify their actions rather than to propose effective mechanisms for conflict resolution. It also finds that discursive moves and stance expressions indicate greater confrontation and less diplomacy. The study provides insights into identity politics and the underlying complexities responsible for the persistently strained relationship between ASUU and the FGN.

Colleges of Education in Ghana occupy an important position in the country’s educational system as the primary institutions responsible for training professional teachers. However, the ongoing national educational reforms (elevating the college status to the university level) require effective administration and communication, which are essential for their success. Administrators in these institutions serve as the backbone of policy implementation, coordination, and institutional governance, yet empirical evidence on how they communicate and how effective these practices are remains limited. The primary goal of this paper is to examine the communication practices of administrators in selected Colleges of Education in Ghana, with a particular focus on their effectiveness and the challenges that hinder their sustainability. Using a mixed-methods sequential explanatory design, data were collected from 31 administrators in Tamale College of Education, Bagabaga College of Education, and St. Vincent College of Education in the Northern Region of Ghana through structured questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. The quantitative aspects of the data were analysed using descriptive statistics in SPSS, whereas qualitative data were analysed through thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke’s framework. The findings reveal that administrators employ a combination of formal channels, such as memos and meetings, informal interactions, including face-to-face discussions and digital platforms, such as email and WhatsApp, to perform their duties. The findings further indicated that communication practices were generally perceived as enhancing coordination, collaboration, and decision-making within the colleges. On the other hand, bureaucratic delays, limited Information and Communication Technology (ICT) infrastructure, resource constraints, heavy workloads, and cultural resistance to change emerged as significant barriers. Drawing on organizational communication theory, participatory decision-making models, and ICT adoption frameworks, the study concludes that strengthening communication effectiveness requires systemic reforms, including clearer institutional policies, improved ICT investment, targeted capacity-building, and workload redistribution.

In the context of the digitalization of modern communication, podcasting is becoming one of the leading channels for disseminating academic knowledge. A key element in promoting this media product is the brief episode description – a text performing a dual function: providing concise information about the content and exerting a persuasive influence on the potential listener. The syntactic organization of such texts plays a decisive role in realizing the author’s intent and establishing a dialogue with the audience. The aim of this study is to identify, systematize, and functionally analyze the syntactic features of English-language descriptions for academic podcasts, as well as to determine their pragmatic potential. The empirical material of the research comprises 40 synopsis texts from high-rated podcasts (20 American and 20 British), selected based on 2024–2025 rankings. The methodology is comprehensive, integrating methods of purposive and continuous sampling, structural-syntagmatic and functional-pragmatic analysis, as well as comparative methods and quantitative data analysis to identify dominant models. The research revealed a set of specific syntactic constructions ensuring the expressiveness and informational density of texts describing episode content. These include enumeration, repetition, contrast, as well as interrogative, exclamatory, and parenthetical constructions (commentary). Quantitative analysis demonstrated that enumeration, repetition, and contrast are the most frequent devices in both varieties of English, indicating the universality of these strategies. Enumeration creates an effect of broad topic coverage and expertise, whereas repetition strengthens addressability and emphasizes key ideas. Contrast is employed to dramatize issues and highlight content uniqueness. The author argues that podcast description syntax not only structures information but serves as a tool of professional marketing communication, simulating spontaneous conversational speech and fostering intimization. The theoretical and practical significance of these results lies in their applicability for optimizing the annotation of scientific and educational texts to enhance their persuasive impact on the audience.

Commenting on translations of scientific texts is part of metatranslation activity. Studies in this field traditionally involve analysing translation techniques, tactics and strategies explicitly presented in paratextual elements. Meanwhile, the discursive features of commentaries remain underexplored, especially in the context of Russian–French translations of works in linguistics. The present study examines translational metadiscourse as a medium through which translators and editors articulate the outcomes of translational decisions and their stance towards these choices when working on the translation of a scientific text in linguistics. The aim of the study is to identify translational metadiscursive acts in commentaries on translations of linguistic works, to determine their functions, as well as the pragmatic and epistemological grounds for the choice of particular means. To achieve this aim, the study applies discourse analysis to a corpus of commentaries produced by translators and editors of fundamental works in linguistics, including those by leading Russianand French-speaking linguists of the 20th century. A qualitative examination of metadiscursive elements is combined with the interpretation of their functions in the context of language and concept asymmetry between Frenchand Russian-speaking linguistic traditions. The study reveals a connection between the aporetic and constitutive character of linguistic discourse in general and specific translational metadiscursive acts. It further demonstrates that translator commentaries reflect not only language but also epistemological challenges characteristic of linguistic inquiry and the communication of its results. The findings highlight the translator’s active role in scholarly communication: translational metadiscourse operates as a tool for asserting and evaluating translation choices as well as for responding to the solutions of other translators and to the discursive features of the source text. The results contribute to translation theory and may be applied in the training of translators. Prospects for further research involve expanding the corpus of analyzed texts and developing practical guidelines for translators.