This study explores the intricate relationship between language and ideology in Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus, focusing on how language serves as a vehicle for ideological expression and resistance within the narrative. The novel, set against the backdrop of political turmoil in Nigeria, reflects the complexities of familial and societal structures through its characters’ use of language. By employing a critical discourse analysis framework, this research examines the linguistic choices made by the protagonist, Kambili, and other characters, revealing how language shapes their identities, power dynamics, and perceptions of authority. The study highlights the dual role of language as both a tool for oppression and a means of liberation, illustrating how Kambili’s evolving relationship with language mirrors her journey toward self-assertion and empowerment. Furthermore, the analysis delves into the interplay between colonial language, indigenous dialects, and the implications of this linguistic diversity for the characters’ ideologies and cultural identities. Ultimately, this research contributes to the broader discourse on language politics, emphasizing its significance in understanding the ideological constructs within Purple Hibiscus and their relevance to contemporary Nigerian society. Through this examination, the study underscores the transformative potential of language in challenging oppressive structures and fostering resilience among marginalized voices.     

Politics, Language, Purple Hibiscus

Tannen, D.1987. That‟s not what I meant. London: Dent Reiss (eds) Contemporary theories about the family. Vol. 1:295-316 New York: the Frex press

Lakoff, R. 1975, Language and woman‟s place. Harper and Row publishers.

Croates, J.1986. Women, men and language London, Longman.

Van Dijk, T. A. 1995. Discourse, Semantics and Ideology. In Discourse Society. Sage. Vol. 6. (2) 243-289.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.

Sol saporta, “The Application of Linguistics to the Study of Poetic Language” Style In Language (Cambridge: the M.I.T press, 1960) p.86.

Nils Erik Enkist, “On Defining Style”, Linguistics and Style (London, 1965), p. 12.

Bmidele, L.O. 2008, „Literature and Sociology‟.Ibadan,Sterlinng-Horden publishers(Nig).

Anyokwu, C.2009,Postmordern Gothic and Chimanda Adichie‟s „Purple Hibiscus‟. In Papers in English and Linguistics Vol.10, 2009.Ile-Ife, Nigeria.

Fairclough, N. 2001a. Language And Power (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

Fairclough, N. 2001b. “The Dialectics Of Discourse”. In Textus XIV.2 2001a pp.231-242. Retrieved from the electronics mail on 21st January 2008, from/http:ww.google/n.faircloughatlancaster.ac.uk./

Fairclough, N. 2005. “Critical Discourse Analysis in Tran-Disciplinary Research On Social Change: Transition, Re-Scaling, Poverty, And Social Inclusion”. In Lodz Papers In Pragmatics 1,2005 pp. 37-58. Retrieved from the electronics mail on 21st January 2008, from http:www.google/n.faircloughatlancaster. ac.uk./

Maalej,Z.2007,Doing critical discourse analysis with the contemporary theory metaphor; Towards a discourse model of etaphor.In C.Hart and D.Lukes „ed‟ „Cognitive Linguistics in critical discourse analysis application and theory‟. Cambridge; Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Le^, T. and Le^ , Q. 2009. Critical discourse analysis: an overview. In Thao Le^; Quynh Le^ and Megan Short (edited) Critical Discourse Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. New York: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.