Search

The proliferation of politically motivated hate speech towards rival politicians has been rapidly increasing in Pakistan. However, the literature on political hate speech and its association with extreme ideologies is under‐theorized in the Pakistani context. We have utilized van Dijk's manipulative discourse and Walther's social approval theory to structure political hate speech and its consequences. The data was based on two Pakistani mainstream politicians' public speeches and partisans' comments available on YouTube. Findings reveal that politicians commonly exploit discursive categories, such as name‐calling, offensive metaphors and sarcasm, in their hate speech to dehumanize, ridicule and threaten their rivals. Their hateful slurs showcase extreme ideologies, such as polarization, intolerance, threat and violence. They use the hateful epithets to manipulate partisans, to sell fear of being betrayed and enslaved to the military and foreign powers, and to obtain, in exchange, audience and consent. The study theorizes that Pakistani mainstream politicians deliberately sensationalize hatred in their public speeches to harangue their rivals and foment extreme ideologies for the purpose of increasing their audience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study grows out of the absence of literature on an in‐depth understanding of dissertation‐writing challenges, facilitating strategies, and causes to develop a more profound understanding of Pakistani doctoral students. This is primarily qualitative research. One of the largest private universities was selected as a case to collect the data. The data were based on 12 Pakistani doctoral dissertations, 49 evaluation reports from 13 countries, mainly from the state‐run universities, and a survey questionnaire responded to by 12 PhD graduates. The data were codified for commonly emerging categories and themes based on the methodological approach of Clarke and Braun (2017). The data revealed that the doctoral students faced challenges concerning mechanics of writing, developing an argument in a coherent whole, and structural organization of the dissertation. The examiners recommended the doctoral students to copyedit/proofread the dissertation to overcome mechanics of writing problems, build the argument logically, use formal language, write transition sentences to knit the texts coherently, embed citations to support the claims, and uniform the structure of the dissertation. Five causes of writing difficulties emerged from the survey questions. Despite a mismatch between the academic resources and research support provided to Pakistani doctoral students, their research work is deemed par with foreign universities, which encourage native‐like English. It is hoped that this study will help doctoral students improve their dissertation‐writing quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]