contradictions in ideological based attitudes. Disclaimers might prove to be useful ideological clues, particularly in a system that has a pattern matching component.
2. Propositional Structures
The internal structure of the propositions should be examined, which is taken together to constitute the meaning of the discourse. Recalling that propositions
are things that may be true or false, or which intuitively speaking express one complete thought. Sentences consist of one or more propositions. Of interest in
ideological analysis is that the predicates of propositions may be more or less positive or negative, depending on the underlying opinions as represented in mental models.
The arguments of a propositions may be about actors in various roles, namely as agents, patients, or beneficiaries of an action. Since ideological discourse is
typically about us and them, the further analysis of actors is very important. Ideologically based actor descriptions semantically reflect the social distance implied
by ideologies. Modalities such as It is necessary that, It is possible that or It is known
that, may modify propositions. Modalities may involve implication or presuppositions and may give clues to the way we represent the world and its events.
Speakers are often expected to provide evidence to back up what they say. The standards of evidence vary greatly depending on the discourse genre. The choice
of evidence used and the source of the evidence may both reflect ideological bias.
The management of clarity and vagueness is a powerful political and ideological tool, as evidenced in diplomatic language. Vagueness may imply
mitigation, euphemism and indirectly denial. Hedging is useful when precise statements may be contextually inappropriate.
Halfway between semantics and rhetoric, there is one that well-known topoi. They are like topics as earlier defined, but they have become standardized and
publicized, so that they are typically used as ready-mades in argumentation. Topoi often serve as basic criteria in argumentation, since as standard arguments, they need
not be defended.
3. Formal Structures
