The concepts of slogans, sloganeering, and otherness

Sloganeering is an expression which shows the identities, norms, and ideologies of a group of people. Sloganeering is always expressed in a catchy word, which captivates and attracts attention of in-group members. It is used to provoke and evoke patriotic feelings. Slogans are catchy words and attention getters. They are deployed to publicise the identities and norm of “in-group”. Slogans are used in the expression of thought. They are a vehicle for social identity and a marker of in-group membership. The in-groupness can be a profession such as medicine, military, university students, a generation of speaker and so on. According to Ademola- Adeoye, slogans are associated with a particular generation of speaker whose sub-cultures originated from the large culture of a particular society. They help to identity the existence of subcultures whose members are a microcosm of a macrocosm society Varanakov [1], and Odebunmi [2]. They help to solicit support and loyalty among in-group members and create social cum group cohesion. In Nigeria, sloganeering is employed by universities to differentiate themselves from others. 

Kaul [3] posits that slogans are ways by which human beings dialogue with one another. They reflect vision and mission statements, aims, aspirations, objectives, norms, and values of a certain group. Slogans are capable of forcing change in certain contexts. Slogans express goals, raise consciousness, and organize certain cultural attitudes Denton, [4]; McGee, [5]. This suggests that slogans are capable of changing the minds and attitudes of people. Slogans therefore play a significant role in the act of mobilising. According to Lu [6], slogans help to raise people’s awareness on issues that required collective actions. They generate emotional responses, perform persuasive functions, and help in mobilising members of a certain group.

The concept of otherness, on the other hand, was initially within the purviews of feminist and radical geographers. The current scholarly works have moved the theory of otherness (otherwise called othering or otherity) to socio-discursive construction. Otherness is a social discursive concept, which constructs one group as dominant, normal, and acceptable, and others as out-dominant, abnormal, unacceptable such that the in-group stigmatises the out-group. This suggests that otherity is a socio construction of “weness” and “otherness”. One major feature of the theory of otherness evinces the asymmetrical power relations such that the dominant group (in-group) is used to evaluate (dominated) discriminatory group (out-group). The out-groups are “the others”, while the in-groups are “the we”. This is implicitly evident in van Dijk positive self-representation and negative other-representation. The polarity between positive self-representation and negative-other representation is the focal point of van Dijk research. van Dijk is of the opinion that every society is polarised. The polarity is evidently shown in the rich versus the poor, the privilege versus the less privileged, the ruler versus the ruled, the advantage versus the less advantage and so on. Each group within van Dijk categorisation is guided by specific ideologies. Thus, there is legitimation of the ideology of the in-group over the out-group. Legitimation, according to Hart, is a macro-function through which speakers seek social approval of the “Self”, where the Self is either the individual speaker or an institution or social group the speaker identifies with, or accreditation for social actions and relations. van Dijk  defines legitimation as “the speech act of defending, the preparatory conditions for which require that the speaker be responding to or pre-empting potential criticisms”, while “delegitimation is the effective counterpart and challenges the negative face of others and involves speech acts of blaming, accusing, insulting and so on.” What can be inferred from this is that the discourse of otherity is concerned with the legitimation of in-group, which automatically delegitimates out-group. Thus, the study of slogans legitimates one’s university and delegitimates other universities. It is apposite to examine how the legitimation of in-group university and delegitimation of out-group university is represented in the discourse of slogans of selected Nigerian universities.         This study investigates slogans of Nigerian universities not only as a means of constructing one identity but also of the “significant others” as well as implicit ideologies inherent in the slogans. By significant others, this study refers to the universities whose their presence constitutes a threat to the existence of a particular university because of the consumerist tendencies of the Nigerian space. For instance, the first generation of Nigerian university saw the emergence of private universities in early 1990s as a threat because of the emphasis on technological innovations and smooth running of the academic calendar. The aim of this study is to investigate the discourse structure in the slogans of selected Nigerian universities. In order to achieve this aim, the following objectives are 

• to explore the thematic concerns in the slogans of Nigeria universities, 

• to identify and examine discourse forms and functions of unsaid said in the slogans of Nigerian universities, and 

• investigate ideologies behind “unsaid said” in the slogans of Nigerian universities. 

Review of literature on slogans and sloganeering

Extant studies on slogans have investigated the concept from deviationist (Paltridge 1950, and Mawadza, 2000) and variationist (Longe 2005, Varanakov 2002, Ijaiya 2010, Alo 2010, Aboh 2010, Oni and Oke 2010) perspectives. Studies that have investigated the language of slogans and sloganisings have identified ephemerality, informality, creativity, and functionality as their basic characteristics, while a number of studies have examined slangs in a university-based setting. Such a few studies in the Nigerian universitieshave focused on Kengites slangs, slangs in short messages, internet fraud slangs and so on (Babatunde and Folurunsho, Oni and Oke, Chuka and Aboh, Aremu, Osunbade and Adeniji 2010). Mainly, slogans have been examined from media and advertising discourses. Slogans are mostly used by organisations, association, institutions and so on. In this section, attention is geared to review relevant works related to the subject matter.

Situated within tertiary-western region in Nigeria, Aremu (2010)’s work investigated linguistic forms and types of slangs among undergraduate students. The study revealed that slangs among undergraduate students are characterized by metaphors, semantic extension and restriction, coinages and euphemisms. The similitude between this work and ours is that both are carried out in a tertiary institution. However, ours examines the slogans of universities in Nigeria, while Aremu focuses on slang among undergraduate students of Nigerian universities.

Also, Osunbade and Adeniji (2010) examine the use of slangs among Kengites in a Nigerian university (Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife.). The study focuses on the linguistic, socio-cultural, and physical features of Kengites’ slangs. It observes that Kegite’s slang reflect shared value systems, socio-cultural backgrounds of the members and cultural heritage of Yoruba society. The study is similar to ours in a number of ways. Both studies focuses on the Nigerian universities context and expressions whether slogans or slangs used by universities students. However, ours focuses on linguistic form and functions of slogans, while theirs is on slangs. Also, ours is used by majority of Nigerian students of an institution, theirs is used by members of an in-group. 

From the reviews above, it is evident that studies devoted to slogans have emerged basically from political and advertising discourses. Slogans in the universities have not been given adequate scholarly attention in the Nigerian context, while slangs have been given enormous pre-occupations. In view of the above, this study therefore fill this gap by examining slogans in the Nigerian universities with the view of revealing the thematic issues, discourse forms and functions, and ideological inclinations of the unsaid said inherent in the slogans used by Nigerian Universities’ students. 

Theoretical framework

Critical Discourse Analysis (henceforth CDA) and Systemic Functional Linguistics (henceforth SFL) are the theories adopted for this study. Critical Discourse Analysis (henceforth CDA) is an offshoot of critical linguistics. CDA is concerned with social practice Fairclough, [7]; Fairclough, [8]; Martin and White, [9]; Blommaert. It investigates social issues such as hegemony, power, dominance, race, inequality, ideology, belief and so on. It examines the discursive sources of power, inequality, dominance, hegemony and ideology and the maintenance, reproduction, sustenance, modification, and transformation of these discursive sources within specific social, political, religious and historical contexts. 

CDA examines social issues such as hegemony, inequality, dominance, discrimination, power, ideology, belief, philosophy, history and race. CDA is concerned with how these issues are reflected in talks and texts. Fairclough and Wodak summarize the tenets of CDA as follows

• CDA addresses social problems, 

• power relations are discursive, 

• discourse constitutes society and culture, 

• discourse does ideological work,

• Discourse is historical, 

• the link between text and society is mediated. 

• Discourse analysis is interpretative and explanatory. 

• Discourse is a form of social action.

 The main concern of CDA focusses on the interface between language, discourse and power. It studies the relationship between discourse and power and examines the bilateral relationship between discourse and social conventions (Fairclough, [11].  According to Kress and van Leeuwen, CDA is an effective tool  that shed lights on unequal power relations in public discourse capable of showing how public discourse often serves as the interests of the powerful forces over those of the less privileged. 

CDA examines the ideologies in discourse. These ideologies are implicit. Ideology is “a structure of thought and consciousness in which we all think, act and experience the world and ourselves”. CDA uses texts and its methodology is eclectic.

There are a number of approaches to CDA. Among all are three popular namely: Fairclough’s socio-semiotics, van Dikj’s socio-cognition, and Wodak’s Discourse Historical Approach. Our attention here is focused on van-Dikj socio-cognition because it accounts for mental representation of social issues. It gives a clear-cut distinction between “us” versus “them”. The “us” versus “them” discourse is explicated in positive self-representation and negative other-representation. In this paper, our emphasis focuses on the linguistic and ideological representation of “significant others” in the slogans of selected Nigerian universities. This paper is a paradigm shift in critical discourse analysis because it examines the interface of “over-representing” self and “de-representing” others. Also, the model accounts for “otherness” in discourse of the slogans of universities in Nigeria. The idea of “otherness” in the slogans of Nigerian universities is the focal attention in this study. 

On the other hand, Michael Kirkwood Alexander Halliday spearheads SFL. Hallidayan model is actional and is based on system and context. By system is a structured network of choices whereby the selection of one deselects others. Unlike logico-positivists of Russell, Frege and other scholars who de-emphasised functional perspectives of language, Halliday opines that social interactions determine the choice of words. SFL is concerned with meaning. According to Bloor and Bloor.

Language is a system of meaning. That is to say that, when people use language, their language acts are the expression of meaning. From the point of view, the grammar becomes a study of how meanings are built up through the use of words and their linguistic forms such as tone and emphasis. This may seem fairly obvious to most people since it accords with a common sense view of language; but not all linguists have been concerned with meaning in such a direct way.

This means that SFL views language as a social or semiotic resource, which people use to accomplish their purposes by expressing meanings in context. Halliday opines that the value of SFL “lies in the use that can be made of it, and I have considered a theory of language to be essentially consumer oriented. Mathiessem and Halliday posit that Systemic Functional Grammar came as a response to the deficiencies in Traditional Grammar and transformational Generative Grammars. According to Young and Harrison, SFL is a functional theory and examines the functions that language plays in society. Such a view involves the examination of 'real' language events to understand the purposes language serves in a variety of contexts, and to understand the way language itself functions. Systemic functional linguists, then, study how meanings are explicated in different contexts; they have also focused on the teaching of English as a first and second language as well as on discourse analysis of a wide range of discursive events.

Context plays a significant role in SFL. It is the meeting point between meaning and language use. In SFL, context bifurcates into “context of culture” and “context of situation”. Context of situation is the immediate use of language which trifurcates into field, mode and tenor of discourse. 

Also, Halliday and Matthiessen mention three strata which organise the system of language in SFL. The strata are semantics, lexico-grammar and phonology. The semantic stratum is concerned with the explication of meanings which are realised in metafunctions (ideational, interpersonal and textual). Lexico-grammar stratum covers lexical and grammatical components which account for meanings. The stratum of phonology (graphology) examines the sounds by which lexico-grammar stratum is realised. The choice of SFL as a theoretical framework is conditioned by its functional approach. By functional approach is the fact that the relationship between language and social contexts are adequately accounted for.

The source of data is the slogans of Nigerian universities. Out of one hundred and sixty (160) Nigerian universities, fifteen (15) universities were purposively selected because their slogans are ideology-laden and the universities separate slogans and mottos respectively. 

Table 1: A table showing the years of establishment, and slogans of Nigerian                   universities

The slogans are got from social media, friends who are alumni of these institutions. Personal contacts and visitations were made to some of these universities. Also, the websites of the universities were visited to ascertain the authenticity and originality of their slogans. Selected universities were the one that clearly differentiated slogans from mottos. Mottos are short expression usually phrases or clauses that guide people’s behaviors and activities, while slogans, however, are short expressions that are catchy and reveal the identity of a group and are easy to remember. Selected universities’ slogans are ideology-laden and they are fit to achieve the specific objectives of this study. The table below shows the list of the 15 Nigerian universities selected, their slogans, years of establishment, and mottos.

In the methodology, two levels of data analyses are used namely formal and functional aspects. The formal aspect includes phonology, lexis, morphology, and syntax. The functional aspects refers to the what language is used for. The analysis is based on discourse issues, contextualization cues as well as discourse functions of the slogans. This study uses top-down analysis. Top-down analysis discusses the issues, followed by linguistic form and function and ideological inclinations of the unsaid said in selected slogans. 

Data Analysis and Discussion of findings

The data analysis and discussion of findings take the following order. The paper begins by analysis thematic concerns of slogans, followed by discourse structure and functions and finally, the ideologies of “unsaid said” in the slogans.

• To explore the thematic functions of selected slogans of Nigeria universities

• Persuasive  and emotive function

Persuasion is one of the basic functions of slogans of Nigerian universities. Persuasion changes people’s views and beliefs by (re)directing their attitudes to an issue in order to carry out an action. Kenechukwu posit that persuasion aims “to induce people to take a desired action.” Persuasion can be said to be the ability to induce, motivate, convince, and dissuade people to (not) carry out an action. This is because, through slogans, people emotions are controlled. This suggests that there is a controller and the controlled. The controller is the slogans and the controlled are the universities’ students, staff, and alumni and so on. Thus, slogans have the emotional wills and potentials to persuade in-group members to carry out actions such as participating in protests, demonstration, singing of “aluta” songs, and so on. Let us consider some of these slogans of Nigerian universities in conversations among students, lecturers and non-academic staff of a university community:

• UNILAG-Great Akokites; 

• UI-The First and the Best: 

• UNIBEN-UniBest;

• LASU-“We are proud”;

• UNILORIN-Better by far; 

• FUTA-Great Futarian

• OAU-Great Ife (Oba Awon Universities)

What can be said is that some Nigerian universities’ slogans show the spatial locale of Nigerian universities. The slogans glorify the host communities and appreciate their efforts for providing enabling environment for academic activities. It must be noted that host communities play a significant role in the academic activities of a university. They help a university to achieve an excellent teaching, learning, and community service. These universities are very appreciating of the communities. They boost socio-economic activities in their various communities. The toponymic functions of slogans are used to praise the place names of these universities. These slogans are used to persuade listeners to take actions. The full meaning of OAU is Obafemi Awolowo University. However, the students of OAU, because of the beautiful environment of the university with its antecedents, called the University “Oba Awon University” or “The Most Beautiful University in Nigeria”.   

This suggests that persuasive functions of slogans are within the purview of Aristotelian pathos. Aristotle posits that pathos help to move people to do something. This suggests that pathos appeals to people’s emotions and feelings. This is the basic functions of slogans in the Nigerian universities. For instance, let us examine the use of slogans among Nigerian universities students during protest:

Leader: great Nigerian students

Response: Great oooooooooo

Leader: I want to speak…..

Response: speak….

Leader: Aluta continua

Response: Victoria ascerta

From the conversation above, it is evident that slogans are used to express ones feeling. They help to mobilise in-group members against supposed enemies. The supposed enemies might be leaders described as tyrant, despot, autocratic and epitome of evil. During protests, the leaders of Nigerian students see themselves as the defenders of members’ freedom of speech, religion, association, and democratic rights. The slogan of Victoria ascerta reveals that the struggle will not be an effort in futility but will definitely accomplish its goals. The goal is victory at the end of the struggle. It also shows that members should not be discouraged by the present condition as the struggle will lead to victory. The imminence of victory clearly and loudly chorused during the protests performs emotive and motivating functions for other members to participant in the protests. Thus, members are certain that victory is imminent. What can be surmised is that slogans are very powerful and they perform two basic functions namely persuasive and emotional [10]. The persuasive and emotional functions serve as a rallying point for people to take action on any public issues. 

Solidarity Function

Another function in the slogans of Nigerian universities is solidarity. Solidarity helps to show support to a group because one shares similar or the same feelings, opinions, aims, values, norms and ideologies. Solidarity is the act of expressing supports to a group whose one shares similar norms, values and ideologies. Instances of slogans expressing solidarity are shown below:

Leader: GREAT Nigerian students. 

Response: Great oo

From the excerpt above, it can be said that the response is always “great ooo”.The idea of great Nigerian students mostly occurs when students of two different institutions meet and there is a need to cohere and show solidarity. In this context, slogans of the institutions of each student are backgrounded rather the slogan of the umbrella term of Nigerian students is used to show solidarity. 

This is done among not only students but also lecturers of these institutions. The idea of “o” is to express alacrity of the respondents. In some instances:

Leaders: Greatest and of the greatest Nigerian students

Response: Great.

The response “great” is shown to solicit cooperation and supports from other members. Solicitation is achieved by the use of call and response strategy. Call and response is the basic feature of the slogans of Nigerian universities. The leader’s call of the greatest and of the greatest is used to show a strong desire of the leaders to solicit support and attention from other group members.

In Nigerian, slogans are a means of invoking solidarity and loyalty.  Solidarity helps  to support one’s university and malign rival universities.  In the slogans of Nigerian universities, solidarity is explicated below:

Leaders: EUI (Edo University Iyahmo)

Response: World class

Leaders: Great Ife

Response: Great.

Leaders: UNILORIN

Response: Better by FAR 

From the leaders and responses above, it can be observed that solidarity is elicited from followers who are students of the University mostly during protests, demonstration or inter universities games and competitions. Solidarity in the slogans is evoked in the responses such that followers (students) are persuaded to take actions even actions that are antithetical to their studentships. The reason is not far-fetched. It is because leaders of the students know how to sting words to not only to evoke feelings and support but persuade students to carry out actions also. According to Austin [11], “every utterance a person makes performs” a few acts. One of such acts includes solidarity function. Also, Stubbs opines that words are powerful. Words, therefore, perform solidarity functions. During protests, for instance, solicitation for patriotic acts is lexically evoked through slogans.

Expressing Excellence

Another thematic function performed by slogans of Nigerian universities is excellence. Excellence denotes the quality of being good, exceptional, blameless, and the best. They further aver that, in the Nigerian universities’ context, the meanings of excellence include the following: 

• the quality of Nigerian universities’ graduates

• the state of art of facilities in the Nigerian universities

• the qualities and strengths of staff 

The above qualities facilitate quick and easy acquisition of knowledge and enhancement of teaching, learning and research.  It can be said that many Nigerian universities use the word “great” and “best”. These words are used to express the notion of excellence. Some universities’ slogans in Nigeria express the notion of excellence through the use of “great” and “best”. This is explicated in the lexical items “great” and “best”. While the lexical item “great” has the semantic feature of +famous, +illustrious, +distinguished, + eminent, +remarkable, +best, +excellent, +notable, -ordinary, -common, and -unattractive, “best”, on the other hand, has the following semantic features: +world-class, +first-class, +greatest, +superlative, +preeminent, -worst, -poorest, and -unpleasant. This suggests that the notion of excellence is explicated in the slogans of Nigerian universities. Excellence is best epitomised in the quality of staff, infrastructure, enabling and conducive environment and the number of students. For instance, Great Akokites, Great Ife, Great UniMad, Great UniPort, Great UniCal and so on are slogans that express standard practices. These slogans are not only words but also a reminder of golden era in Nigeria where Nigerian graduates were regarded as the best in the world.

Identity Conveyor

Another function of slogans is identity conveyor. Slogans also convey the identity of the users. Deng  opines that identity is used to “describe the way individuals and groups define themselves and are defined by others on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion, language and culture”. This means that identity conveys the group beliefs, norms, ideology, mores and tradition. For instance, some universities are known for a particular area. University of Ibadan for instance is known for producing the best postgraduate students. Postgraduates from the University are lecturers in other tertiary universities in Nigeria. “Obafemi Awolowo University” is known for its high academic excellence and “academic unrest”. The unrest has led to the disruption of academic calendar in the institution. UniLag has the best law school in Nigeria. University of Ilorin is known for its normal academic calendar. These universities have specific identities which they were known for and they tried to convey their identities through such identities.

Slogans of Hope and Aspiration

The slogans of Nigerian universities show expressions of hope and aspiration. By hope, we mean expression of better tomorrow or better days ahead. By aspiration is the imminent expectation of the students, staff, and the entire management. By hope and aspirations, slogans show the expectations and desire of the members of university group. For instance, better by far shows that others are good but University of Ilorin is incomparable to these universities in the areas of research, teaching, and community service. This shows that the university is the best among the best in Nigeria. For instance, 

Uniben has Unibest, 

ABU Zaria-naturally ahead of others

Buk-A star in the north

From the UniBest’s slogan, it can be seen that the institution aspire and perspire to be the best in Nigeria. It is not surprising that for so many years the institution has been rated as the best in the country and currently it is among the first ten best universities in Nigeria. In addition, ABU Zaria depicts the fact that running and managing a university whether federal, state or private is a race. What this suggests that university is compared to a game of sport. Sport metaphor suggests that establishing university needs a lot of preparation and is energy and time consuming. “The others” refers to universities in Nigeria. This is traceable to aphorism that there are only two universities in Nigeria-Abu and others.        

The Discourse of Unsaid said in the Slogans of Nigerian Universities

From the thirty slogans considered, it can be observed that slogans of Nigerian universities are linguistically composed in phrases. This suggests that phrases are words without finite verbs. They are useful in the composition of slogans. Slogans are a conventional expressions used by students and staff of an institution used to identity members of a university or an organization. Unlike motto that points to the vision, mission, and value of an institution, slogans of Nigerian universities are written in catchy phrases. What can be deduced from the phrasal configuration is that slogans written in phrases reflect minor sentences if it is place within the right context. For instance, better by far could be “we are better by far”, authentic could be “we are authentic”, the first and the best could be “we are the First and the Best” and so on. This suggests that slogans written in phrases can be realized at a deep linguistic level. Slogans in phrases express a complete thought and they can never lose their meanings. It can be concluded that slogans of Nigerian universities are written in phrases to attract the attention of prospective readers, students, parents, and guardians.

The discourse of unsaid said is the implied meaning in a text. It is the hidden meaning in a text. This means that one has to read within the lines to understand what is said and unsaid. Context as the spine of meaning is important in explicating unsaid said. In the slogans of Nigerian universities, the following “unsaid said” are tabulated in table 2.

The table 2 reveals the “unsaid said” of significant others in the slogans of Nigerian universities. Nigerian universities try to positively represent themselves and negatively represent others. The others here are the universities whose existence constitutes threats to a university. The others are backgrounded and negatively represented. They are regarded as substandard, inferior, unqualified, insignificant, and below par. The reasons for this are not farfetched. 

Table 2: The discourse of “unsaid said” is tabulated below:

This is because the Nigerian university space is highly competitive. One would think that Nigeria as the most populous black nation in Africa will make the Nigerian space to be favourable. However, this is not so because many of the private universities suffer attendance because of hike school fees. The private universities in Nigeria are meant for the sons and daughters of the political office holders, the rich, business mogul and other. Such people include politicians, directors general, professors, military men and women, business mogul and so on.

The Ideological Inclinations of “Unsaid Said” in the Slogans of Nigerian Universities

According to Eagleton [12], ideologies are “ideas and beliefs”, which condition the attitudes, interests and orientations an in-group member. Such attitudes and emotions create opposing interest with out-group members. Ideologies are implicit in a text. The ideologies denote conducts, manners and qualities that meet the best practices in the world. This means that knowledge is acquired according to the international standards. In the Nigerian context, slogans among universities’ students bind members of a university community together as well as create bias and prejudice against other universities. In the slogans of Nigerian universities are the following ideologies namely: patriotism, oppositionist, schist, and so on.

This oppositionist ideology is concerned with the fact that every slogan of Nigerian universities is hinged on principles and practices that are acceptable worldwide. The principle is positive self-representation and negative other-representation.  However, other universities malign and deride the slogan of a university. This is because the ideologies in the slogans do not reflect their beliefs and basic tenets, vision and mission statements and philosophy. For instance, University of Ibadan’s slogan-The First and The Best is described by the students of other universities as The Best and The Last, Obafemi Awolowo University’s slogan The Most Beautiful University is tagged The Most Frustrating University, University of Benin UniBest as UniWorse, and University of Ilorin’s Better by Far as Worse by Far. What this suggested is that Nigerian tertiary institutions’ space is largely loaded with universities of all kinds. There are many faith-based universities and non-faith based universities in Nigeria. 

Another ideological inclination is schism. Schist ideology is an ideology that upholds a different view from a group where members have similitude ideas and views. This could serve as an alternative to national issues. In the slogans of Nigerian universities, slogans are used to express a view different from the generality of Nigerian populace. For instance, each university slogan considers its ideology as superior while, others are deviants because they are backgrounded. While some universities consider themselves as the greatest, others see themselves as the Best, King of all universities, Better in all ramifications and so on. This suggests that within Nigerian university space, there are divergent views and each university community tries to propagate the basic ideology of their slogans. The slogans serve as a conveyor of identities and ideologies.  

This study has investigated the discourse structure in the slogans of selected Nigerian universities. Slogans as a veritable medium of communication express the beliefs, ideologies, philosophies, and communicative intentions of people. The study has vividly demonstrated that slogans are ideology-loaded, perform mainly persuasive, solidarity, and emotive functions. Slogans express excellence and are conveyors of identities. Slogan of a Nigerian university positively represents itself and negatively represents others. The ideological inclinations in the slogans show that oppossionist and schist are implicitly and explicitly expressed. The ideologies show that Nigerian universities’ slogans are consumerisitc charged such that they become the survival of the fittest and strongest. While one positive image is foregrounded and one negative image is background, other negative images are foregrounded and their positive backgrounded. Like political and religious discourses, the discourse of slogans is heavily charged with persuasions and is a way of mobilising students to carry out an action as well as evoking patriotic feelings. Through the analysis of the slogans of Nigerian universities, the socio-economic and political situations in Nigerian universities are revealed.

1.  

2. Varanakov, A. “Slang and rock (on the material of lyrics of rock groups of different times).” Conn-Brio, retrieved 14 September 2018, from http://conn-brio.narod.ni/slang.doc.

3. Alo, M. A. “Slogan and sloganizing in Nigerian political and religious discourses.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2010.

4. Kaul, D. “Continuing place discourse – Place identity and slogans.” Retrieved from http://panunkashmir.org/blog/ecoculture/continuing-place-discourse-place-identityandslogans. Accessed 2 August 2011.

5. Denton, R. “The rhetorical functions of slogans: classifications and characteristics.” Communication Quarterly, vol. 28, 1980, pp. 10–18.

6. McGee, M. “The Ideograph: A Link between Rhetoric and Ideology.” Quarterly Journal of Speech, vol. 66, 1980, pp. 1–16.

7. Lu, X. “An ideological/cultural analysis of political slogans in communist China.” Discourse and Society, vol. 10, no. 4, 1999, pp. 487–508.

8. Fairclough, N. Language and Power. London and New York: Longman, 1989.

9. Fairclough, N. Critical Discourse Analysis: the Critical Study of Language. New York: Longman Publishers, 1995.

10. Martin, J., and White, P. Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause. London and New York: Continuum, 2003.

11. Sharp, H. Advertising Slogans of America. Metuchen, NJ: The Scarecrow Press, 1984.

12. Bakhtin, M. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Edited by Michael Holquist, Austin: University of Texas Press, 1985.

13. Eagleton, T. Ideology: An Introduction. London and New York: Verso, 1991.

14. Aremu, M. A. “Slang among Nigerian university students: forms and types.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2010.

15. Babatunde, S., and Folurunsho, A. “Students’ slangs in the university.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2010.

16. Chuka, O., and Aboh, R. “Slang in text messaging amongst Nigerian university students.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2010.

17. Druckman, D. “Nationalism, patriotism, and group loyalty: A social psychological perspective.” Mershon International Studies Review, vol. 38, no. 1, 2010, pp. 43–68.

18. Ekundayo, H., and Ajayi, I. “Towards effective management of university education in Nigeria.” Education, vol. 4, no. 1, 2009, pp. 342–347.

19. Fairclough, N. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1992.

20. Ibukun, W. Educational Management: Theory and Practice. Ado-Ekiti: Green Line Publishers, 1997.

21. Lahlai, E. “The discourse of Egyptian slogans: from ‘Long live sir’ to ‘Down with the dictator.’” Arab Media and Society, issue 19, 2014.

22. Odebunmi, A. Meaning in English: An Introduction. Ogbomoso: Critic Sphere, 2006.

23. Oni, W., and Oke, O. “Students’ slangs on internet fraud.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2010.

24. Osunbade, A., and Adeniji, A. “Kegites’ slangs in a Nigerian university.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2010.

25. Paltridge, B. Discourse Analysis. Cornwall: MPG Books Ltd., 2006.

26. Taiwo, R. “Language, ideology, and power relation in Nigerian newspaper headlines.” In Studies in Slangs and Slogans, edited by Babatunde, S., Odebunmi, A., Adetunji, A., and Adedimeji, M., Europe LINCOM Gmbh, 2007.