Abstract:        
Critical discourse analysis is one of the types of discourse analyses that takes a critical stance on the way language is used. It tends to analyze all types of discourse with the aim of identifying the ideology and values inherent in those discourses.Khalil Hassan Khalil’s novels monitor the conditions of Egyption society,which is controlled by the English feudal lords,with the slavery and humiliation they imposed on the peasants.Since critical discourse analysis as articulated by Van Dijk examines the attacks of dominant social power and exposes social inequalities,Van Dijk’s style is an appropriate standard for addressing the issues of these narratives.This study attempted to clarify the ideology or ideologies of the novelist Khalil Hassan Khalil,relying on the descripitive analytical method and Van Dijk’s theory of critical discourse analysis.The results of the research reached that the discourse in the discourse producer’s narratives in presenting the positive image of members of the inside group i.e. workers and farmers, and presenting the negative image of members of the outside group,i.e. capitalists and colonialists,agree with Van Dijk’s ideological square.To achive this goal,the novelist employed several strategies and techniques,such as Description of the social function,creation of distance,extension, amplification,number game, and metaphor.
 
Extended Summary
The term discourse has been popular in its current sense since the 1980s and often refers to any speech activity or speech event.
Discourse analysis is a theory based on a set of principles and foundations. It is a field or cognitive area in which various procedures are involved, starting from linguistics to structuralism and beyond, semiotics and hermeneutics.
The importance of this research is in studying the text based on Van Dijk’s theory, which does not take a neutral position on issues, but rather defends the interests of marginalized groups and minorities in society and attempts to expose inequality and spread equality and justice among peoples in order to help minorities, the oppressed, and the marginalized. The approach of this study is descriptive-analytical, based on the theory of Van Dijk, who is considered one of the theorists of critical discourse analysis. He presented his theory in analyzing the linguistic system of the text by presenting the “ideological square” as follows: Highlighting the positive points of our group and the negative points of their group and marginalizing the negative points of our group and the positive points of their group. The "ideological square" is studied within the framework of the levels of meaning, rhetoric, argumentation, style, speech act and grammatical structure.
Critical discourse studies based on Toyn van Dijk's theory focus on "the characteristics of discourse that are closely related to the expression of social power, reproducing or challenging social power for the speaker or speakers and the writer or writers. The ideological square applies to the polarization between the out-group and the in-group in social practices, discourse, and social thought. Van Dijk's "ideological square" as a macro level contains sublevels of discourse. Each of these can be directly or indirectly involved in discrimination against members of minority groups or in biased discourse against them. These sublevels are: sounds, lexical items, positional meaning (of the sentence), schema (the conventional patterns of overall discourse organization), rhetorical devices, speech acts, and interaction. The analysis of the data of this research has shown that the method of processing Khalil Hassan Khalil’s discourse is consistent with Van Dijk’s (ideological square). The novelist has tried, through employing ideological strategies at the levels of meaning, argumentation, style and rhetoric, to represent the members of the internal group positively and to represent the members of the external group negatively. The dominant ideology of this discourse is the focus on the distance between our individuals and their individuals. The novelist's ideology is completely contradictory to the ideology of outgroup, i.e. the capitalists and colonists; because his ideology was to spread justice, equality, preserve human dignity, fight injustice and poverty, and resist the exploitation of the members of the ingroup, i.e. the lower classes of society and minorities. So this discourse does not support Authorities, but rather, according to Van Dijk's theory, defends people who have been oppressed and exploited by Authorities. In this discourse, according to Van Dijk's theory, the novelist highlights the positive points of our group members, such as honesty, loyalty, and fighting the bitterness of life, and the negative points of their group members, such as theft, luxury, exploitation of the lower classes in society, their injustice, and marginalization of minorities in the world. The producer of the discourse employed many linguistic and rhetorical strategies to represent the prevailing inequality in Egypt In the period in which the events of the novels took place. The novelist in his discourse uses techniques such as the number game and the presentation of documents to gain the trust of the recipients regarding his claims, to convince them, and to prove his truthfulness to them. The novelist was interested in choosing vocabulary that carries his ideology and shows his point of view towards the outgroup and ingroup. One of the strategies used in this discourse is the description of the social actor, through which the negative representation of the outgroup and the positive representation of ingroup to emphasize the opposition between them. The producer of the discourse makes the accusations against members of their group more effective by using the strategy of irony in your discourse, and divides people into members of the ingroup and members of the outgroup to depict the two opposite poles to the recipient based on the technique of "polarization".He attempts to delegitimize certain norms and wrong actions of authorities by adopting the technique of “counterfactualism” which points out the consequences of these norms, He also  uses metaphor to influence the audience.