Abstract
Orwell’s (1945/2013) Animal Farm is a rich source of manipulative discourses, especially as embodied in the character Squealer, who masterfully exploits the peripheral entities. Despite its critical and widespread acclaim, the systematic exploration of specific pragma-stylistic strategies that Orwell uses to depict manipulation and propaganda are understudied in the literature. Utilizing an eclectic theoretical framework incorporating Johnson’s (2000) manifest rationality theory and the deceptive principle posited by Merzah and Abbas (2020), this study performs a qualitative intra-analysis to unearth the distinct employment of a myriad of fallacies, such as scapegoating, ad nauseam, false dilemma, domino fallacy, historical negationism, and ad ignorantiam. This research aims to explore manipulative rhetoric from the viewpoint of pragma-stylistics. The significance of this research lies in its potential to deepen our understanding of rhetorical strategies in allegorical literature, offering insights into how language can be used to manipulate and influence. This study addresses the central question: How do specific pragma-stylistic strategies enable characters in Animal Farm to manipulate and propagate fallacies, and what implications does this have for understanding similar manipulative techniques in political discourse? The findings suggest a contrast between Squealer’s and Napoleon’s manipulative strategies: Napoleon, akin to the uncharismatic communication style of Stalin, leverages scapegoating to undermine his adversaries, while Squealer, Napoleon’s rhetorical extension, focuses on distorting historical events, exaggerating consequences, and perpetuating falsehoods