SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erciyes İletişim Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 4

The Use of Language in Public Relations Activities: The Example of T.C. Ministry of Family and Social Policies

Halkla İlişkiler Faaliyetlerinde Kullanılan Dil: T. C. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı Örneği

Ayşe Gül SONCU
Mustafa Cankut KURT
Pages
713–732
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Ministry of Family And Social Policies analyzed for determining the Ministry’s use of language in public relations activities.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, the features, elements and the various approaches to the language in public relations activities are examined.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this direction, it is aimed to identify the general characteristics of the use of language in public relation.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Ministry of Family And Social Policies analyzed for determining the Ministry’s use of language in public relations activities.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, the features, elements and the various approaches to the language in public relations activities are examined. In this direction, it is aimed to identify the general characteristics of the use of language in public relation. For this purpose and the answering research questions; use of language in public relations activities investigated in the aspect of rhetoric, semiotics, discourse and the argumentation theory. And in the research different public relations text of T.C. Ministry of Family And Social Policies analyzed for determining the Ministry’s use of language in public relations activities.

Özet

Bu çalışmada halkla ilişkiler faaliyetlerinde kullanılan dilin özellikleri ve unsurlarınınortaya konulması, bu dilin çeşitli yaklaşımlar açısından incelenmesi ve bu doğrultudahalkla ilişkiler faaliyetlerde kullanılan dilin genel karakteristiğinin tespit edilmesiamaçlanmıştır. Çalışmanın amacına ulaşabilmesi ve sorulara cevap verilebilmesiiçin halkla ilişkiler faaliyetlerinde kullanılan dil; retorik, söylem ve argümantasyonkuramı yaklaşımları bağlamında ele alınmıştır. Araştırma bölümünde ise literatürışığında halkla ilişkilerde dil kullanımının incelenmesi için örnek olarak seçilenT.C. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı’na ait farklı halkla ilişkiler metninin analiziyapılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

SONCU, A. G., KURT, M. C. (2022). The Use of Language in Public Relations Activities: The Example of T.C. Ministry of Family and Social Policies. Erciyes İletişim Dergisi, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 4, 713–732. https://ajindex.com/articles/501937

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Anık, C. (2010). Logos Olarak İletişimi Tartışmak. İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi, 30, VII-XXIII. Aristoteles (2015). Retorik. (Mehmet H. Doğan Çev.) İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
  2. Brockriede W. ve Ehninger D. (1960) Toulmin on argument: An interpretation and application, Quarterly Journal of Speech, 46 (1), 44-53,
  3. Cheney, G., Christensen, L. T., Conrad, C., ve Lair, D. J. (2004). Corporate rhetoric as organizational discourse. D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, L. Putnam (Ed.) The Sage Handbook of Organizational Discourse. (s. 79-103). London: Sage Haase, F. A. (2009). Towards a theory for professional communications. Discourse and communication elements in contemporary marketing and PR strategies. Punto Cero, 14, 75-89.
  4. Heath, R. L. (2001). Handbook of public relations. London: Sage. Heath, R. L. (2009). The rhetorical tradition: Wrange in the Marketplace. Heath R. L., Toth E. L., Waymer D. (Ed.) Rhetorical and critical approaches to public relations II. (s. 17-47). New York: Routledge Heath, R. L. ve Frandsen, F. (2008). Rhetorical perspective and public relations: Meaning matters. Zerfass A., van Ruler B., Sriramesh K. (ed) Public relations research (s.349-364). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften Heller M. (2016)
  5. Foucault, Discourse, and the Birth of British Public Relations. Enterprise & Society, 17(03), 651-677).
  6. Hill, J. W. (1958). Corporate public relations: Arm of modern management. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers.
  7. Karbach, J. (1987). Using Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation. Journal of Teaching Writing. 6(1), 81-91.
  8. Kneupper, C. W. (1978). Teaching argument: An introduction to the Toulmin model. College Composition and Communication, 29(3), 237-241. L’Etang, J. (2008). Public relations, persuasion and propaganda: Truth, knowledge, spirituality and mystique. Zerfass A., van Ruler B., Sriramesh K. (ed) Public relations research (s. 251-269). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften L’Etang, J.ve Pieczka, M. (1996). Critical perspectives in public relations. London: International Thomson Business Press Locker, K. O. ve Keene, M. L. (1983). Using Toulmin Logic in Business and Technical Writing Classes. Sparrow W. K., Pickett N. A. (Ed)., Technical and Business Communication in Two-Year Programs (s. 103-110) Mackey, (2013). A sophistic rhetorical approach to public relations. PRism, 10(1), 1-14.
  9. Peter G. ve Wilson C. R. (2013) The Toulmin Model of Argumetation http://www. navigatingaccounting.com/exercise/exercises-critical-thin