Metadiscourse markers play an important role in academic, media, and political discourse. Political leaders use discourse markers to express their ideas and thoughts persuasively and compellingly. The paper identifies the interactive meta-discourse markers in Benazir Bhutto's speech and explains how the use of meta-discourse markers, such as boosters and hedges, can strengthen or weaken the impact of political discourse. The data used for compiling the corpus consists of thirteen randomly selected speeches by Benazir Bhutto delivered between 1989 and 1997 and explained using Hyland's (1996) concept of metadiscourse. The findings show that hedges have been used more frequently than boosters. The findings contribute to a better understanding of the interactional meta-discourse markers used by politicians to shape their messages to enhance the impact of their political narratives. It also helps to understand how rhetorical devices are used by speakers to express doubts or certainty in their speeches.

Journey Metaphors are among the most pervasive source domains used both in daily life and in political discourse as they follow a clearcut source-path-goal schema where the direction is a fundamental element. The crossdomain mapping between source and target domains is a means of gaining insight into the cognitive activity of the speaker. Metaphors of the journey are widely used in the political discourse generated by Imran Khan with special emphasis upon direction. Metaphorical expressions identified from speeches of Imran in both English and Urdu language have been analyzed using the Critical Metaphor Analysis approach given by Charteris-Black (2005) where linguistic metaphors have been interpreted semantically, pragmatically and in cognition to generate conceptual metaphors. Khan’s obsession with direction activates the PAKISTAN IS OFF TRACK conceptual metaphor necessitating a journey of change under his leadership. He highlights the failures of others to evoke images of a destructive past from which freedom becomes essential.

Political discourse is inarguably deemed an essential tool, impercetably influencing people’s perception within a socio-political zone. The present research revolve around the critical discourse analysis of manifestos of Pakistani political parties, pertaining to the general election of 2013. The theoretical framework for the study triangulates VanDijks (1998) Socio-Cognitive Model, along with the support of Turner and Tajfels (1979) Social identity approach and Budge and Farlies Salience theory (1983). The research revealed that all the political parties under study used the discursive strategies in their party manifestos in order to enhance the positive self-image of party to in-group people, by focusing the negative aspects of the out-group, thereby (re)constructing peoples political identities and ideologies and achieving the desired hegemony for itself.

This article documented the presence of politically motivated hate content in online political discourses and also explored major themes against political opponents in Pakistan. A total of 744 posts were collected from Facebook pages affiliated with two major political parties. The amount indicates the significant amount of politically motivated hate content presented in online political discourses. The data were thematically analyzed from which 3 major themes emerged. The data revealed that political discourses were filed with denigration of opposites through abusive and disgusted language followed by the dehumanization of opposites such as naming and comparing with different animals like dogs, pigs etc. It was also found that character assassination was done by framing opposites as morally and socially characterless, by accusing them as sexually corrupt, drug addictive, and as well homosexual etc. Lastly, the opposites were framed as "anti-state", "traitors" and "foreign agents who have become "threats" to national peace, cohesion and integrity of the state and as well to destabilize the country.