This study examines how Shakespeare’s use of metaphor, naming conventions, modality, imperatives, and sentence structure in Othello and The Tempest shapes the beliefs about race, faith, and power. The study employs the Comparative Linguistic–Discursive Mapping Matrix (CLDMM) to synthesise scene-based findings from both plays, in addition to the integrated framework of five core theories. The analysis reveals that both plays use similar strategies of Othering but apply them differently. In Othello, Islamophobic schemas are slowly absorbed through sexualised animal metaphors and constant hints, pushing towards self-Othering. Meanwhile, in The Tempest, colonial authority is asserted through commands, definitions, and constant surveillance. Caliban is fixed into an identity described as essentially what he is said to be. Both plays seem to offer reconciliation at the end. Although recognition is offered, dignity and justice (’adl) remain structurally unrestored. By grounding postcolonial critique in clear linguistic evidence and by extending it through MusCrit, the study offers a transparent matrix-based procedure that makes interpretative moves traceable. More importantly, it shows how these texts both reinforce and quietly expose the making of racial-religious hierarchy through language itself.
This study examines how Shakespeare’s use of metaphor, naming conventions, modality, imperatives, and sentence structure in Othello and The Tempest shapes the beliefs about race, faith, and power. The study employs the Comparative Linguistic–Discursive Mapping Matrix (CLDMM) to synthesise scene-based findings from both plays, in addition to the integrated framework of five core theories. The analysis reveals that both plays use similar strategies of Othering but apply them differently. In Othello, Islamophobic schemas are slowly absorbed through sexualised animal metaphors and constant hints, pushing towards self-Othering. Meanwhile, in The Tempest, colonial authority is asserted through commands, definitions, and constant surveillance. Caliban is fixed into an identity described as essentially what he is said to be. Both plays seem to offer reconciliation at the end. Although recognition is offered, dignity and justice (’adl) remain structurally unrestored. By grounding postcolonial critique in clear linguistic evidence and by extending it through MusCrit, the study offers a transparent matrix-based procedure that makes interpretative moves traceable. More importantly, it shows how these texts both reinforce and quietly expose the making of racial-religious hierarchy through language itself.
