The particular dialect or language that a person chooses to use on any occasion is called a code 2141 Copyright © 2024 The Author IDEAS is licensed under CC-BY-SA 4.0 License Issued by English study program of IAIN Palopo IDEAS Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) Volume 12, Number 2, December 2024 pp. 2141 - 2156 Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach Ucha Mutiara Anggela1, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah2, Cipto Wardoyo3 uchamutiara@gmail.com1, erlanaditiya@uinsgd.ac.id2, cipto_w@yahoo.com3 1English Literature, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati, Bandung, West Java 2English Literature, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati, Bandung, West Java 3 English Literature, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati, Bandung, West Java Received: 2024-10-28 Accepted:2024-12-31 DOI: 10.2456/ideas. v12i2.5754 Abstract Language is an invisible yet highly effective weapon in psychological and social harassment, as its influence often works subtly and unconsciously. Through word choice, manipulation, or propaganda, language can infiltrate a person's mind, shaping how people think and influencing emotions and behaviors without even realizing it. This study analyzes the psychological impact of language manipulation in the novel using van Dijk’s (2017) CDA, through a sociocognitive approach. By analyzing language manipulation strategies at the micro, meso, and macrolevels, this study reveals how language is used to strengthen social control and subdue the psychology of characters. At the microlevel, the use of presupposition and implicature through word choice and sentence structure subtly instills fear, justifies inequality, and inhibits critical thinking. At the mesolevel, repeated social interactions and collective narratives, such as speeches and slogans, shape group behavior and reinforce social hierarchies. At the macrolevel, ideological change and manipulation of social structures through propaganda create chronic fear and compliance, while legitimizing corrupt power. This research highlights how the manipulation of language not only creates control in literary narratives but also reflects patterns often found in authoritarian systems in the real world. The results of this study provide important insights into the role of language as a tool of psychological and social control, while offering a foundation for further study of language manipulation in linguistic, literature and societal contexts. Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis; power dynamics; compliance; sociocognitive approach; Animal Farm http://u.lipi.go.id/1457703302 mailto:uchamutiara@gmail.com mailto:erlanaditiya@uinsgd.ac.id2 mailto:cipto_w@yahoo.com3 Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2142 Introduction Language is the subtlest, yet deadliest weapon. This statement illustrates the power of language as a communication tool that can connect people, but also has great potential to manipulate thoughts and actions. According to Sapir (1921), language is the primary tool for conveying ideas, emotions and desires through a system of voluntarily generated symbols. In addition, Chomsky (1979) argues that language ability is a human characteristic that allows them to think abstractly and achieve social and individual goals through communication. However, as states by Semeraro (2022), language is also often misused to manipulate others through techniques such as distortion of facts, omission of information, or use of emotional words. Rodrigo-Gine s et al. (2024) argues that this misuse often occurs in various contexts, such as politics, media, and interpersonal relationships, with the main goal of achieving power or certain advantages. This phenomenon shows how powerful the influence of language is in shaping one's perception and reality. Language manipulation, according to Sh (2024), refers to the strategic use of language to influence thoughts, beliefs, or actions in ways that serve particular interests, often without the awareness of those being influenced. This language manipulation, as states by Al-Hindawi & Kamil (2017) involves techniques such as framing, euphemism, and presupposition to subtly shape perceptions and control narratives. The effects of language manipulation are not only limited to changes in an individual's mindset, but can also deeply affect psychological aspects. When language is used for manipulative purposes, such as distorting facts or capitalizing on emotions, according to Chaer (2003) it can lead to psychological impacts such as loss of self-confidence or inability to think critically. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a multidisciplinary approach that uncovers the relationship between language, power, and ideology, focusing on the ways discourse is used to create, reinforce, or maintain social domination. The sociocognitive approach by van Dijk (2017) is particularly relevant as it focuses on how power, domination and inequality are created and maintained through text or speech, and how this affects the mind or psychological side of the character. Using micro, meso and macrolevel analysis, this research examines how the manipulation of language shapes the mindset and emotions of the characters in the story, while reflecting social dominance in society. This approach is relevant because it focuses on how power and inequality are maintained through text or speech, as shown in the novel Animal Farm. The novel Animal Farm was chosen as the object of research because it is rich in linguistic studies and has been widely analyzed from political, psychological and social perspectives. As states by Mohammad (2024) the novel is an allegory of the Russian Revolution and its aftermath, representing the rise of totalitarian regimes IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2143 and the corruption of revolutionary ideals. Furthermore, Shafiq (2022) explained that the novel uses the rebellion of the farm animals as a symbolic representation of the Russian revolution, with characters and events mirroring key figures, ideologies, and betrayals that led to the rise of oppressive regimes and the disillusionment of the initial revolutionary hopes. Through its allegorical narrative, Orwell demonstrates how language is weaponized to distort truth and establish an oppressive social order. The novel exemplifies various forms of manipulative language, according to (Boumaza, 2017) it includes repetition, and false dichotomies, which are used to maintain power structures and suppress dissent. This phenomenon is not only politically relevant, but also psychologically, as it shows how language manipulation affects the way characters understand and accept constructed reality. Recent studies have investigated the psychological impact on language use and the role of language as a tool for power dynamics and ideological influence in Animal Farm. Previous research, such as Dinakhel et al. (2020) examines how language manipulation is used in George Orwell's Animal Farm and its Pashto translation by Rasul Amin. The focus is on the use of language as a propaganda tool to cover up facts and influence readers. The research utilizes discourse analysis (DA) theory based on linguistic and political studies by highlighting the elements of language manipulation, symbolism, and propaganda. The research found that both Orwell and Amin used language effectively to reflect social inequality and political power. Addresses the psychological aspects of language use, study by Pennebaker et al. (2003) highlighted the relationship between word choice and the psychological state of language users. However, these studies have not specifically analyzed the psychological impact of language manipulation on the characters in the novel. Research by Pardede et al. (2023) also explores the role of language as a political instrument, but lacks the psychological effects on fictional characters. The study reinforces Orwell's satirical critique of Stalinist socialism, showing how language can be used to change ideologies and reinforce power. This study attempts to fill the gap in previous research that has not examined the psychological effects of language manipulation on the characters in Animal Farm. Using Van Dijk's (2017) critical discourse analysis approach, this research reveals how language manipulation shapes the characters' patterns of thinking, feeling, and perception, reflecting broader social domination. Through analysis at the micro, meso and macrolevels, this research aims to provide a deeper understanding of the relationship between language and psychology. And ultimately to raise readers' critical awareness of the manipulation of language in the context of communication and society. Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2144 According to the above difference gaps, the main questions raised are: (1) How does the manipulation of language at micro, meso and macrolevels affect the psychology of the characters in Animal Farm? and (2) How is the manipulation of language through linguistic structure, social interaction and collective ideology used as a tool of power to create hierarchy and conformity? To answer this, this study aims to (1) Analyze the impact of language manipulation at the micro, meso, and macrolevels on the mindset and emotions of the characters in the novel Animal Farm. (2) Identify how language manipulation through word choice, social interaction, and ideological structure is used to build legitimacy of power and shape characters' collective mindset. By using the CDA sociocognitive approach, this research is expected to broaden the understanding of the power of language in building impact on characters, especially in the aspect of character psychology. An aspect that has received less attention in previous studies is the unique contribution of this research. The contribution lies in the in-depth exploration of how language manipulation has a psychological impact, which is reflected by fictional characters. Method By employing van Dijk’s (2017) sociocognitive theory, this research deepens its critical discourse analysis through a descriptive qualitative design. As Murray (2017) explains, a qualitative method emphasizes understanding phenomena through in-depth exploration, making it well-suited for examining the intricate dynamics of language manipulation. Similarly, Yuliani & Supriatna (2023) note that qualitative research facilitates detailed analysis of how language shapes character psychology and functions as a tool of power, aligning perfectly with the themes in Animal Farm. Van Dijk's sociocognitive approach is particularly relevant as it bridges the relationship between language, individual cognition and social structure, which is central to Orwell's narrative of power and social control. This approach allows for an in-depth analysis of the elements of language manipulation, with data collected through careful reading of the narrative text, dialog, and seven commands in Animal Farm. According to Tymbay (2022), these elements of language manipulation include implicature, omission of information, use of emotional words, and presupposition, which serve to shape perceptions and subtly control important narratives. This research then analyzes these manipulation patterns on three levels, namely, micro, meso, and macro. At the Microlevel, the focus is on linguistic features such as word choice and sentence structure, revealing how language influences individual perceptions. The Mesolevel examines social interactions to uncover how these manipulations IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2145 construct and reinforce social hierarchies. At the macrolevel, the analysis investigates ideological structures, demonstrating how manipulation shapes collective mindsets and sustains power relations. Supporting this framework, Gee (2014) highlights the importance of analyzing language at multiple levels to uncover hidden power dynamics embedded in discourse. Despite the absence of text analysis software, a structured manual process ensures methodological rigor. However, the study acknowledges certain limitations, such as the potential for subjective interpretation of the narrative context and challenges in identifying complex patterns. Nevertheless, this research makes a significant contribution by shedding light on the psychological effects of language manipulation in literature, an area that remains underexplored in discourse studies. Results and Discussion Language shows social hierarchy, reveals Wahidi (2015). Likewise, the results of this study are not only relevant in the context of the novel Animal Farm, but also reflect broader patterns of manipulation and power dynamics in society. Psychologically, as explained by Jowett & O’donnell (2018) the manipulation of language used to establish hierarchy, instill fear, and shape compliance in the story can be found in a variety of real-life situations. These situations can be seen in political propaganda, media manipulation, and unhealthy interpersonal relationships. These findings show how language can be used as a tool to reinforce domination, create unjust social structures, and undermine individuals' ability to think critically. As such, this research provides important insights into the role of language in shaping collective mindsets and power structures in the real world. To provide a more proportional representation of the dominance of language manipulation across the three levels of analysis (micro, meso and macro), the following pie chart is presented in table 1. This visualization is useful to emphasize how big the portion of language manipulation is at each level, so that readers can easily see which area is the most dominant in the manipulative hierarchical structure in Animal Farm. Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2146 Table 1. Data Distribution Across 3 Levels of Analysis From the chart, it appears that ideological manipulation (macro) has the most significant impact on the formation of power hierarchies through language manipulation in Animal Farm. It is clear that the macrolevel dominates with the largest portion, which is around 56% of the overall data. This shows that Orwell emphasizes more on how language manipulation is used to change ideology, collective norms, and overall social structure. Meanwhile, the micro and mesolevels have a smaller portion but are still important, as they serve as the foundation in building manipulative narratives at the macrolevel. a) Microlevel Analysis At the microlevel, the analysis concentrates on the language components in the text, such as internal structure that influence the way the characters think and understand the text as it unfolds by van Dijk (2017). The data selected in the micro- level analysis includes the presence of word choice, the use of certain phrases, and sentence structure. This selection shows how the characters convey their ideas, especially in the context of manipulating language and influencing the psychological side of the characters to strengthen their power. Here's some suitable data: 22% 22% 56% Microlevel Mesolevel Macrolevel IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2147 1) “The pigs did not actually work, but directed and supervised the others” ⃒Page 24 2) “Surely there is no one among you who wants to see Jones come back?” ⃒ Squealer (Page 30) 3) “Napoleon is always right,”⃒ Boxer (Page 51) 4) “All Animals Are Equal, But Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others” ⃒Page 103 As outlined earlier, micro-level analysis focuses on linguistic elements such as word choice and sentence structure that influence the characters' way of thinking and understanding in Animal Farm. One of the dominant manipulation techniques is the use of presupposition, where hidden meanings are conveyed through implicit assumptions. For example, datum 1 shows that physical work is a common animal task, while the role of supervision is considered more important and exclusive to pigs. This creates a subtle justification for inequality, where other characters are encouraged to accept the hierarchy without resistance, states Polyzou (2015). Similarly, the statement of datum 2, “Surely there is no one among you who wants to see Jones come back?” uses presupposition to build fear of the threat of Jones' return. The presupposition is that Jones is a frightening threat, and his return is a bad thing, forcing the other animals to obey the current leader in order to avoid that possibility. Manipulation at the microlevel is also seen through the effective use of implicature in creating dominance, argues Geurts (2015). Statements a motto that Boxer has always adhered to, such as “Napoleon is always right” not only imply that Napoleon is infallible, but also implicitly forbid other characters to question or challenge his authority. By saying that Napoleon was “always right,” this statement silenced the possibility of dissent, as it indirectly prohibited other characters from challenging his authority or doubting his decisions. This message creates a psychological condition where doubting the leader is considered a wrong act, thus limiting critical thinking and encouraging total obedience. According to Anshori (2014), this sentence pragmatically justifies unequal work roles, encouraging passive acceptance of inequality. In datum 4, “All Animals Are Equal, But Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others” demonstrate the manipulation of the concept of equality through confusing contradictions. This statement undermines the original unifying principle of the community that all animals should be equal, replacing it with a hierarchy that is difficult to disprove because it is wrapped in a misguided narrative of equality. This strategy reinforces the pig character's dominance as a ruler and frames injustice as acceptable. This kind of manipulation creates a strong ideological basis to support the larger power structure. Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2148 Language manipulation at the microlevel becomes the foundation for broader control as it can embed ideas that reinforce domination without the characters even realizing it. Seemingly simple word choices and sentence structures can create legitimacy for inequality while suppressing critical thinking. This strategy not only shapes individual compliance, but also creates a collective narrative that supports social hierarchy, opening the way for more complex manipulations at the meso and macrolevels. b) Mesolevel Analysis At the mesolevel, the analysis concentrates on how the characters' interactions shape the discourse patterns of manipulation in the social structure of Animal Farm. This discourse reflects an effective strategy of social manipulation, where communication between characters is not only used to influence individual minds, but also to form social patterns that reinforce the pigs' position as rulers in the hierarchy in Animal Farm, argue Faist (2021). See the following data: 5) ” It is for YOUR sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples.” ⃒ Squealer (Page 30) 6) “Do you know what would happen if we pig failed in our duty? Jones would come back!” ⃒Squealer (Page 30) 7) “I will work harder” ⃒ Boxer (Page 51) 8) “The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally.” ⃒ Napoleon (Page 99) More specifically, at the mesolevel, language manipulation is used in social interactions to capitalize on inter-character connections and collective fears, effectively reinforcing social hierarchies. Squealer's speeches are prime examples of how such interactions manipulate group perceptions. For example, in his statement “It is for YOUR sake that we drink that milk and eat those apples” (p. 30), Squealer claims that their actions are a sacrifice for the common good. This statement effectively exploits the trustworthiness of the other animals, creating a narrative that justifies the pigs' privilege while ignoring the obvious injustice. Similarly, the statement “Do you know what would happen if we pigs failed in our duty? Jones would come back!” (p. 30) frames the pigs as the sole protectors against external threats, thus manipulating the other animals to remain obedient to avoid catastrophe. Repeated interactions are also used to shape compliant group behavior and support systemic exploitation. An example is Boxer's motto, “I will work harder” (p. 51), which reflects his individual determination to work. However, through social IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2149 interaction, this motto evolves into a collective norm that pressures other animals to work hard without questioning the purpose of their labor. This is reinforced by Napoleon's statement, “The truest happiness, he said, lay in working hard and living frugally” (p. 99), which instills the belief that true happiness can only be achieved through self-sacrifice. This statement manipulates other characters into accepting harsh living conditions as natural and unchangeable, while masking the systemic exploitation practiced by the pigs. This manipulation strategy psychologically directs individual and group behavior to support an unjust hierarchy. This kind of interaction is not only a form of communication, but also a tool to create social legitimacy for the power structure. By reinforcing narratives of fear, responsibility and sacrifice, manipulation at the mesolevel becomes a bridge that reinforces micro and macro control, creating a hierarchy that appears natural and unbreakable. c) Macrolevel Analysis At the macrolevel, van Wijk et al. (2019) said that the analysis focuses on the broader social and ideological context of the Animal Farm narrative. This level examines how social structures, ideological values, and hidden power relations shape and maintain hierarchies in the society depicted in the story. In Animal Farm, according to Arifin & Antonius (2022). This social structure gradually transforms from the original principle of equality established in the slogan “All animals are equal” to a manipulative dictatorship. This paper explores how narratives are used to create and reinforce distorted ideologies for the benefit of dominant groups. 9) “…the plan which Snowball had drawn on the floor of the incubator shed had actually been stolen from among Napoleon’s papers. The windmill was, in fact, Napoleon’s own creation.” ⃒Squealer (Page 47) 10) “...in August Napoleon announced that there would be work on Sunday afternoons as well. This work was strictly voluntary, but any animal who absented himself from it would have his rations reduced by half.” ⃒Page 50 11) “No animal shall kill any other animal WITHOUT CAUSE.” ⃒ (Page 72) 12) It had become usual to give Napoleon the credit for every successful achievement and every stroke of good fortune. ⃒ (Page 73) 13) “Thanks to the leadership of Comrade Napoleon, how excellent this water tastes!” ⃒ Cows (Page 73) 14) “No animal shall drink alcohol TO EXCESS.” ⃒Page 84 15) (Squealer always spoke of it as a “readjustment,” never as a “reduction”) ⃒ (Page 87) 16) “Four legs good, two legs BETTER!” ⃒Page 102 17) “Animal Farm” had been abolished. Henceforward the farm was to be Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2150 known as “The Manor Farm “All the sheep (Page 106) 18) “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which” ⃒ Napoleon (Page 107) Truth is the most vulnerable weapon in the hands of authoritarian leaders, which can be reshaped to suit the interests of power. A sentence that is suitable to describe the reality depicted in the data in macrolevel analysis. Squealer's speech in datum 9 deliberately constructs a false narrative that reinforces Napoleon's image as an irreplaceable visionary leader. By eliminating Snowball's role, Napoleon seems to eliminate all forms of competition and rivalry. This was to ensure that he was seen as the sole source of ideas and innovation in the eyes of the other animals. This narrative clearly tarnishes Snowball's credibility by portraying him as a usurper and traitor, when the opposite is true. From this narrative, Napoleon, represented by Squealer, tries to destroy the potential for alternative leaders to emerge. Psychologically, this manipulation forces the other characters to accept a narrative that contradicts their own memories, creating cognitive dissonance that pressures them to comply with the official narrative. This reinforced Napoleon's control, as the characters lost faith in their own perceptions and eventually succumbed to the leader's authority, making Napoleon's dominance even unwavering. As if he was never satisfied, Napoleon announced “voluntary” work policy: “...in August Napoleon announced that there would be work on Sunday afternoons as well. This work was strictly voluntary, but any animal who absented himself from it would have his rations reduced by half.” (p. 50). Although called “voluntary,” the threat of losing food rations effectively made this policy mandatory. This strategy reflects actual practice in authoritarian regimes, where nominal freedoms are often accompanied by consequences that force individuals to obey the leader's orders without question. This veiled threat builds a deep sense of fear, encouraging collective compliance without explicitly breaking the original agreed-upon rules. The change in ideology is also seen in the revised commandments, such as “no animal shall kill any other animal WITHOUT CAUSE.” (p. 72). The addition of the phrase “without cause” blurs the moral boundaries in the rule, giving the leader free rein to justify acts of violence. This instills a sense of insecurity among other animals, who can no longer feel protected by laws that were previously considered inviolable. This uncertainty creates chronic psychological trauma, where animals live in fear of violence that could be considered “justified.” IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2151 Another strategy of manipulation is through narratives that glorify the leader. Statements such as “It had become usual to give Napoleon the credit for every successful achievement and every stroke of good fortune” (p. 73) and the words of praise by the cow characters, “Thanks to the leadership of Comrade Napoleon, how excellent this water tastes!” (p. 73), show how propaganda systematically builds an image of Napoleon as an irreplaceable figure. This kind of narrative not only erases the contributions of other animals, but also creates a psychological dependence on Napoleon. In this context, Napoleon not only becomes a revered leader, but is also seen as the sole source of success and well-being, thus eliminating any room for criticism or opposition. Manipulation at the macrolevel in Animal Farm is further evident through ideological changes that reinforce social hierarchies and manipulate the collective perception of animals. Rule changes such as “No animal shall drink alcohol TO EXCESS” (p. 84) illustrate how an initially absolute law is subtly modified to suit the interests of the elite, namely the pig characters. By adding the phrase “to excess,” the law no longer prohibits alcohol consumption entirely, but rather provides a loophole for pigs to justify their behavior. This modification not only reflects the hypocrisy of the leader but also instills confusion among the other animal characters, making it difficult for them to distinguish between the original rules they believed in and the new, ever-changing reality. This uncertainty created psychological dependency, as the animals could no longer trust the laws or principles they had embraced. Language manipulation is also used to disguise systemic exploitation, as in the statement "(Squealer always spoke of it as a ‘readjustment,’ never as a ‘reduction’) ” (p. 87). Replacing the term “reduction” with “readjustment” intentionally diminishes the negative impact of the ration reduction, creating the perception that the change is part of necessary management rather than a form of oppression. Semantic strategies like this are used extensively in real-world propaganda to mask harmful actions, creating a false narrative that keeps followers complacent or apathetic. The slogan "Four legs good, two legs BETTER! ” (p. 102) reflects an extreme ideological transformation. The slogan that originally united animals against humans is transformed into a justification for the dominance of the pig character who now adopts human behavior. This change shows how propaganda can drastically reshape collective ideology, making animals accept the injustice they initially rejected. The repetition of this slogan by the foolish sheep characters, who symbolize blind followership, emphasizes how ideological manipulation at the macrolevel can create compliance without critical thinking. The change in collective identity is also reflected in the decision to rename the original Animal Farm to "The Manor Farm " (p. 106). This renaming is not only a symbol of structural change and renaming, but also the erasure of the history of Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2152 the initial struggle against human subjugation. By renaming the farm, the pig characters effectively erase the original identity of the animal characters and impose a new system that supports their vested interests. This strategy is similar to that of authoritarian regimes in the real world, where history is manipulated to strengthen the legitimacy of the current power. The culmination of this manipulation is seen in the narrative "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which ” (p. 107). This sentence illustrates the loss of distinction between the pigs and the humans, who were originally the main enemies. This transformation shows that the hierarchy that was originally fought to be destroyed has recurred, but with different actors. This clarifies that the manipulation of language and ideology at the macrolevel not only changes the social structure, but also blurs moral and identity boundaries, creating a system of power that is completely detached from its original values. Through these changes, Animal Farm illustrates how the manipulation of language and ideology is systematically used to create unjust hierarchies, instill fear, and maintain obedience. The transformation of the animals from equality to a state of oppression shows how the powerful twist language to control perceptions and actions. Slogans and narratives, which initially serve as unifying tools, are utilized to maintain dominance, erase resistance, and change history. These tactics mirror the practices of authoritarian regimes in the real world, where truth-changing propaganda and historical revisionism are used to erase opposition and ensure an unjust system continues. As the manipulation increases, the characters begin to question their reality. However, this doubt only exacerbates the psychological confusion they experience. Gradually, they lose sight of the principles of justice they once held dear, no longer able to distinguish between freedom and oppression as moral boundaries are deliberately blurred. This confusion triggers feelings of inferiority and helplessness, ultimately paralyzing their will to rebel. According to Pardede et al. (2023), this erosion of critical thinking skills ultimately traps the characters in a state of apathy, forcing them to surrender their rights and freedoms without a fight. In a more tangible context, language manipulation not only serves to mold compliance, but also erodes individual and collective critical thinking skills. The fear and confusion created repeatedly makes the characters in Animal Farm physically and mentally submissive, accepting the system of oppression as something that cannot be changed. This is in line with Ardiansyah (2020) findings, where discourse built by authority is able to enforce compliance through language manipulation, even when individuals or groups begin to question the truth presented. Ultimately, both in the novel Animal Farm and in reality, language IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2153 manipulation becomes an effective weapon to instill psychological confusion, silence resistance, and ensure the dominance of power continues. Conclusion This research shows that language manipulation in Animal Farm effectively creates psychological control through three levels of analysis: micro, meso, and macro. At the microlevel, simple word choices and sentence structures, such as presuppositions and implicatures, are used to build fear, justify inequality, and instill unquestioning compliance. These strategies not only limit individuals' critical thinking abilities, but also create collective narratives that reinforce social hierarchies. At the mesolevel, manipulation is seen in the social interactions between characters who utilize collective fear and social relationships to build the leader's legitimacy. Squealer's speech and Boxer's motto become tools to reinforce systemic exploitation, transforming individual behavior into group norms that support the power of the pigs. These repeated interactions not only oppress individuals, but also shape a collective mindset that accepts hierarchy without resistance. At the macrolevel, the manipulation of ideology and social structure becomes increasingly apparent. Subtle changes to orders, the use of propaganda to glorify the leader, and historical revisions such as the renaming of Animal Farm to The Manor Farm create a totalitarian system that appears legitimate. These manipulations blur moral boundaries, instill chronic fear, and encourage psychological dependence on the leader. Ideological manipulation serves as the primary basis for maintaining power, utilizing language to create a sense of dependency that leads to a decrease in critical consciousness within the individual. These findings reflect a pattern of control evident in authoritarian systems, where language and ideological revision are used to maintain power. At the macrolevel, it can be concluded that language manipulation plays the most dominant role as it influences the collective ideology underlying the entire social and power structure. Manipulation at the micro and mesolevels focuses more on strengthening individuals' dependence on that power. The findings show how structured ideological change can shape broader mindsets, ultimately leading to the abandonment of freedom of thought and acceptance of injustice. This study does, however, have some limitations. The focus of the analysis is more on the characters in the narrative without involving the reader's perception or interpretation, so the results cannot be generalized to the level of reader acceptance. The qualitative approach used, although in-depth, risks being subjective in data interpretation. In addition, the use of manual analysis without the aid of software could potentially miss more complex linguistic patterns. Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2154 For future research, it is recommended to explore how the language manipulation in Animal Farm is received by readers from different social and cultural backgrounds. Such research could provide deeper insights into the psychological impact of narrative on modern audiences. Comparative studies with other literary works with similar themes, such as language manipulation in political or social contexts, can broaden the understanding of how language is used as a tool of control in various settings. The use of text analysis software can also help identify linguistic patterns that may have been missed in this study. References Al-Hindawi, F. H. H., & Kamil, S. I. (2017). The pragmatic nature of manipulation. Adab Al-Kufa, 33, 9–54. Anshori, D. S. (2014). Wacana Keagamaan Syiah-Sunni dalam Majalah Tempo dan Suara Hidayatullah. LITERA, 13(1). Ardiansyah, E. (2020). Critical Discourse Analysis on a Text “Friday Prayer At Home for Most But Some Risk Infection At Mosques” By the Al Jazeera English. Jurnal Ilmiah Peradaban Islam, 17(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.15575/al- Tsaqafa.v17i1.8345 Arifin, S. A., & Antonius, R. A. (2022). HEGEMONI KEKUASAAN DALAM SEBUAH NOVEL ANIMAL FARM KARYA GEORGE ORWELL. Metalanguage: Jurnal Ilmu Bahasa dan Sastra Indonesia, 2(01). Boumaza, S. (2017). Totalitarianism and Corruption in George Orwell’ s Animal Farm (Issue June 2017). Chaer, A. (2003). Psikolinguistik: kajian teoretik. Rineka Cipta. https://books.google.co.id/books?id=3EyXAAAACAAJ Chomsky, N. (1979). Human language and other semiotic systems. Dinakhel, M. A., Amin, N. U., & Shafi, M. (2020). Manipulation and Language in the English and Pashto versions of novel Animal Farm. JHSS, 28(1), 31–46. Dewi, P., & Sari, D. E. (2022). Perception of Digital Storytelling in Overcoming Fear for Speaking English through Interdisciplinary Project of Gender Issues. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(2), 1635-1642. Faist, T. (2021). Selected Studies in International Migration and Immigrant Incorporation. In M. Martiniello & J. Rath (Eds.), IMISCOE Textbooks. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.5117/9789089641601 Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (Third). routledge. Geurts, B. (2015). MPLICATURE AS A DISCOURSE PHENOMENON ∗ Bart Geurts, University of Nijmegen. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 11(1), 261– https://doi.org/10.15575/al-Tsaqafa.v17i1.8345 https://doi.org/10.15575/al-Tsaqafa.v17i1.8345 https://books.google.co.id/books?id=3EyXAAAACAAJ https://doi.org/10.5117/9789089641601 IDEAS, Vol. 12, No. 2, December 2024 ISSN 2338-4778 (Print) ISSN 2548-4192 (Online) 2155 275. Ismayanti, D., Said, Y. R., Usman, N., & Nur, M. I. (2024). The Students Ability in Translating Newspaper Headlines into English A Case Study. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 12(1), 108-131. Jowett, G. S., & O’donnell, V. (2018). Propaganda & persuasion. Sage publications. Mohammad, M. J. (2024). The Allegorical Imagery in George Orwell’s “Animal Farm.” Ministry of Higher Education. Murray, J. (2017). Qualitative methods. International Review of Psychiatry, 10(4), 312–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540269874664 Masruddin, Hartina, S., Arifin, M. A., & Langaji, A. (2024). Flipped learning: facilitating student engagement through repeated instruction and direct feedback. Cogent Education, 11(1), 2412500. Madehang, M., Masruddin, M., & Iksan, M. Reflecting on the Implementation of Online English Learning in Islamic Higher Education. International Journal of Asian Education, 5(3). Pardede, P., Rasyid, Y., Anwar, M., & Indonesia, U. K. (2023). Linguistic manipulation as a political instrument in Animal Farm : a critical discourse analysis. DIGLOSIA (Jurnal Kajian Bahasa, Sastra Dan Pengajarannya), 6(2), 449–466. Pennebaker, J. W., Mehl, M. R., & Niederhoffer, K. G. (2003). Psychological Aspects of Natural Language Use: Our Words, Our Selves. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 547–577. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041 Polyzou, A. (2015). Presupposition in discourse: Theoretical and methodological issues. Critical Discourse Studies, 12(2), 123-138. Rodrigo-Gine s, F.-J., Carrillo-de-Albornoz, J., & Plaza, L. (2024). A systematic review on media bias detection: What is media bias, how it is expressed, and how to detect it. Expert Systems with Applications, 237, 121641. rado, S., de Bakker, F. G. A., & Martí , I. (2019). Social Innovation: Integrating Micro, Meso, and Macro Level Insights from Institutional Theory. Business and Society, 58(5), 887–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650318789104 Sapir, E. (1921). An introduction to the study of speech. Language, 1, 15. Semeraro, A. (2022). Networks, Language and Psychological Biases: how online social media can be manipulated to spread false and partisan information. Sh, T. S. (2024). LINGUISTIC MANIPULATION: STRATEGIES AND EFFECTS. Science and Innovation, 3(Special Issue 28), 1080–1083. Shafiq, M. (2022). Abuse of Power as a Significant Factor for the Demise of the Ideals of Animalism in Animal Farm and the Corresponding Demise of Communism in Russia. Tymbay, A. A. (2022). Manipulative use of political headlines in western and Russian online sources. Discourse & Communication, 16(3), 346–363. Van Dijk, T. A. (2017). Socio-cognitive discourse studies. In the Routledge handbook https://doi.org/10.1080/09540269874664 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041 Ucha Mutiara Anggela, Erlan Aditya Ardiansyah, Cipto Wardoyo Psychological Effects of Language Manipulation in George Orwell’s Animal Farm: A Critical Discourse Analysis Approach 2156 of critical discourse studies (pp. 26-43). Routledge. van Wijk, J., Zietsma, C., Do Tyas, N. K. (2022). Students' Perception on Self-Directed Learning (SDL) in Learning English by Using Youtube Video. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(2), 1307-1314. Violita, V., & Cholsy, H. (2022). Speech Acts Equivalence of Audiovisual Translation on Enola Holmes Netflix Movie Subtitle. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(1), 209-225. Wahidi, R. (2015). Hierarki bahasa dalam tafsir al-Ibriz. Suhuf, 8(01), 141–159. Yuliani, W., & Supriatna, E. (2023). Metode Penelitian Bagi Pemula (P. Utomo, Ed.; Pertama). Penerbit Widina Bhakti Persada.