By
Nmadumelu Obi
Balogun Sarah
Department of English,
Federal University of Education, Zaria, Kaduna State, Nigeria
Corresponding author’s email & phone No: obicash@gmail.com, 08039317325
Abstract
This paper examines the evolving
role of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the linguistic stylistic analysis of
Nnamdi Kanu’s last trial speech with Justice James Omotosho, focusing on the
intersection of traditional stylistic theory and emerging digital linguistic
methodologies. Stylistics, as a linguistic discipline, aims to explain how
language constructs meaning, emotion, and ideology. In political and forensic
contexts, stylistic analysis can reveal underlying power relations, identity
constructions, and persuasive strategies. This paper provides a descriptive,
interpretive exploration of how AI can support, refine, and augment traditional
stylistic analysis without replacing human critical judgment. It, therefore,
examines the stylistic features of Kanu’s speech, focusing on diction, syntax,
cohesion, and rhetorical force. The findings show that AI-assisted stylistic
methods enhance objectivity, pattern recognition, and interpretive precision,
while also revealing the linguistic construction of defiance, resistance, and
self-representation in courtroom proceedings. The study concludes that AI does
not replace human interpretive judgment but augments stylistic inquiry by
uncovering latent textual patterns that reinforce the speaker’s ideological
stance.
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Stylistics,
and Courtroom Proceedings.
Introduction
Stylistic analysis seeks to explain
how linguistic choices generate meaning and effect in a given text. Stylistics,
as a field situated at the intersection of linguistics and literary criticism,
investigates how language choices shape meaning, aesthetic effect, and reader
response. Turner (1973) in Murana (2011:2) defines Stylistics as “that part of
linguistics which concentrates on variation in the use of language often but
exclusively, with special attention to the most conscious and complex use of
language in literature”. The implication of this definition is that writers’
consciousness in their use of language is stressed. As such, this consciousness
is targeted not only at ensuring efficacious meaning making but also to beacon
the readers’/listener’s attention to the meaning made. In forensic or political
settings, language operates not only as a means of communication but also as a
weapon of persuasion, resistance, and identity construction. Artificial
Intelligence (AI), with its ability to process and analyze language data,
offers new possibilities for systematic and empirical stylistic investigation (Jarad,
2004).
This paper explores how AI methods
can be used to analyze Nnamdi Kanu’s courtroom proceeding. Kanu, the leader of
the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), has become a symbolic figure of
resistance and political identity in Nigeria. His last trial speech before
Justice Omotosho is linguistically charged with defiance, moral appeal, and
ideological assertion. By combining traditional linguistic stylistics with
AI-assisted analysis, this study demonstrates how digital tools enhance the
accuracy, objectivity, and interpretive depth of stylistic evaluation.
Objectives of the Study
The following objectives will guide the
analysis of the extract:
i. To determine how Kanu
use language to project identity, resistance, and moral authority;
ii. To examine the
stylistic patterns (lexical, syntactic, or pragmatic) that characterize his
courtroom speech;
iii. To examine how AI
tools enhance the objectivity and precision of stylistic interpretation.
Nnnamdi Kanu’s Biography
and Why he was Incarcerated
Mazi Nnamdi Okwu Kanu,
born in the 1970s in Abia State, Nigeria. He is a Nigerian-British political
activist known for his advocacy for Biafran independence. He is a leader of the
Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), a group that campaigns for the secession of
southeastern Nigeria to form an independent state of Biafra. He holds both
Nigerian and British citizenship.
The Nigerian government
proscribed IPOB as a terrorist organization in 2017. Kanu and IPOB reject that
label and say they are seeking self-determination through referendum. The issue
remains politically and legally contested in Nigeria.
Kanu is incarcerated by
Nigerian authorities based on criminal charges filed against him. The main
reasons given by the Nigerian government are:
i. Treasonable felony
and related charges: He was first arrested in October 2015 and charged with
treasonable felony, managing an unlawful society, and publication of defamatory
matter. The charges relate to his leadership of IPOB and broadcasts on Radio Biafra
calling for the secession of southeastern Nigeria.
ii. Proscribed
organization: In 2017, the Federal Government proscribed IPOB as a terrorist
organization. Kanu, as its leader, is accused of directing activities of a
banned group.
iii. Bail violation and
re-arrest: He was granted bail in 2017 but failed to appear in court. He later
left Nigeria. In June 2021, he was arrested in Kenya and extradited to Nigeria,
after which his trial resumed. The government said he jumped bail and continued
IPOB activities from abroad.
iv. Current trial: Since
2021, he has been in DSS custody in Abuja while facing a 15-count amended
charge including terrorism, incitement, and illegal importation of broadcast
equipment. Kanu and his legal team deny the charges and argue his detention is
unlawful.
The Nigerian state incarcerates him
on terrorism and treason-related charges tied to IPOB activities.
Review of Related Literature
Theoretical Background: Stylistics
and its Evolution
Stylistics emerged as an attempt to
bring objectivity to literary criticism. Leech and Short (1981) propose that
style could be studied through categories such as lexical choice, grammatical
structure, and cohesion, linking linguistic form to literary effect. Similarly,
Halliday’s functional grammar emphasized that linguistic choices are motivated
by contextual and ideological factors. Traditional stylistic analysis thus
involves from close reading and systematic linguistic description.
With the rise of corpus linguistics
in the 1990s, stylistics incorporated quantitative methods. Scholars such as
Semino, (2002) Stubbs, (1996) and Biber, (1990) demonstrate that statistical
analysis of large text samples could reveal authorial preferences and genre
features. These corpus-based approaches prepare the ground for AI-driven
stylistics, where computational models automatically identify, classify, and
interpret stylistic features.
AI now extends these developments by
automating pattern recognition and enabling new forms of stylistic modeling.
Machine learning algorithms can “learn” from examples to classify authorship,
detect metaphors, or map sentiment trajectories. Neural networks can even
generate text in the style of specific authors, blurring the line between
stylistic analysis and creative imitation.
The literature on stylistics is
extensive, with foundational works by Leech and Short (1981), Halliday (1971),
and Wales (2014) establishing its methodological framework. These scholars
emphasize the systematic analysis of linguistic choices: lexical, grammatical,
and discourse-based, to uncover meaning and effect. More recent scholarship
expands this framework to non-literary texts, including political speeches,
media discourse, and legal communication. Courtroom discourse research often
focuses on power dynamics, the role of institutional authority, and the
linguistic construction of guilt, innocence, and credibility.
Literature on AI in stylistics is emerging within the broader field of digital
humanities. Scholars such as Underwood (2019), Rockwell and Sinclair (2016),
and Hoover (2013) argue that computational tools expand the possibilities of
stylistic analysis by identifying patterns across large corpora. This study
draws on both classical stylistic literature and contemporary AI scholarship to
demonstrate an integrative approach to courtroom discourse analysis.
Stylistics and Linguistic Stylistics
Osgood (1960) defines style as norm
and deviation. A norm is the common practice or acceptable usage in a language
(rules governing language usage). It is what is permissible within the rules
governing the use of a language. Stylistics, on the other hand, is a branch of
linguistics which studies the feature of situationally-distinctive uses of
language and tries to establish principles capable of accounting for the
particular choices made by individual and social groups in their use of
language (Crystal, 1983:337). It engages in the scientific study of style in
both spoken and written texts. Stylistics recognizes the relationship between
form, context and content by making use of language. Similarly, Dare (1991)
observes that stylistics is a discipline devoted to the study of style.
However, linguistic stylistics, according to Leech and Short (1981), examines
the relationship between linguistic form and literary or communicative effect.
Linguistic stylistics is historically rooted in the close examination of
textual form, meaning, and function, drawing on frameworks developed by
scholars such as Leech and Short, Halliday, and Crystal. To Balogun (2025),
linguistic stylistics is the study of style primarily through the tools of
linguistics. It involves identifying patterns in lexis, syntax, and discourse
that contribute to a text’s tone, purpose, and impact. Stylistic analysis
typically covers the following, according to Leech and Short (2007):
i. Lexical choices (diction,
semantic fields)
ii. Grammatical structures (sentence
type, clause complexity)
iii. Cohesion and coherence
(connectives, pronouns, thematic progression)
iv. Figures of speech (repetition,
parallelism, metaphor, irony)
Stylistics thus bridges linguistic
description and interpretation, connecting objective textual features to
social, psychological, or ideological meanings.
Artificial Intelligence and its
Relevance to Stylistic Study
AI refers to computational systems
that perform tasks typically requiring human intelligence—such as language
understanding, pattern recognition, and problem solving. Within literary
studies, AI’s relevance lies in its ability to:
i. Process linguistic data at scale:
AI tools can analyze thousands of texts to detect stylistic trends across time,
genre, or region.
ii. Identify linguistic features
automatically: NLP techniques extract lexical, syntactic, and semantic
patterns, including frequency, collocation, sentiment, and figurative language.
iii. Model authorial style and
voice: Machine learning can be trained to distinguish between authors based on
stylistic signatures—lexical density, type-token ratio, or syntactic
complexity.
iv. Support interpretive criticism:
By visualizing data (e.g., word clusters, topic models), AI offers empirical
evidence that can inform and challenge human interpretation.
v. Enable pedagogy and
accessibility: AI-assisted tools can support teaching stylistics by
illustrating stylistic concepts interactively.
Thus, AI occupies a mediating
position between linguistic description and literary interpretation, making
stylistics both more empirical and more exploratory.
Theoretical Framework
This study is anchored in two
theoretical frameworks: linguistic stylistics and AI-assisted language
analysis. This is because using two frameworks allows the researchers to
capture both the linguistic structure of Kanu’s speech and the socio-political
power dynamics in the courtroom with Justice Omotosho. Linguistic stylistics
draws heavily on the work of Leech and Short (1981), who propose a detailed
checklist covering lexical features, grammatical structures, and discourse
organization. The framework is a textual analytical framework that identifies, stratifies
and analyses linguistics data into their various components. Halliday’s
systemic functional linguistics further provides insights into how language
choices reflect ideational, interpersonal, and textual meanings. Stylistics,
therefore, allows researchers to link linguistic patterns to contextual and
ideological interpretation. AI-assisted language analysis operates within the
fields of computational linguistics and digital humanities. Rather than
replacing interpretive analysis, AI tools can support stylistic inquiry by
identifying patterns not immediately noticeable through manual reading. Such
tools include tokenization, part-of-speech tagging, semantic clustering, and
discourse segmentation. The integration of these frameworks enables a richer,
multi-layered analysis of politically-charged speech, such as Kanu’s courtroom
proceeding.
Methodology
The methodology adopted in this
study is descriptive and interpretive. The data consists of the transcript of
Nnamdi Kanu’s last trial speech with Judge Omotosho. The analysis follows Leech
and Short’s stylistic checklist, covering lexical features, grammatical
patterns, cohesion, and rhetorical devices. Although AI tools are not used in
this study to produce numerical or graphical output, their descriptive capacities
inform the approach to identifying linguistic features.
The analysis proceeds through four stages: (1) close reading and manual
stylistic identification; (2) interpretive commentary on diction, tone, and
rhetorical force; (3) discussion of how AI could support each stage of the
analysis; and (4) connecting linguistic features to broader ideological and
discursive implications.
Data Sources
The data comprises Nnamdi Kanu’s
last trial with Justice Omotosho, including exchanges between Kanu, the Judge,
and the Prosecutor. The speech contains approximately 260 words and features
direct confrontation, repetition, and declarative intensity.
Data Presentation and Analysis
Kanu’s speech is stylistically rich.
His lexical choices foreground themes of justice, identity, oppression, and
resistance. Words such as 'dignity', 'freedom', 'justice', 'mockery',
and 'Biafra' reflect emotionally loaded semantics. The frequent use of
first-person pronouns, 'I stand', 'I am Biafra', 'I demand',
constructs a self-representation based on moral authority and symbolic
leadership.
Grammatically, the speech employs a high frequency of declaratives and
imperatives. The declaratives establish factual assertions ('I have been
detained without just cause'), while the imperatives ('Strike out the
case', 'Release me') signal defiance and agency. Parallelism strengthens
rhetorical rhythm, as seen in 'Release me. Or sentence me. Either
way, Biafra will rise'. The repetition of these structural patterns
reinforces thematic unity.
Cohesion is achieved through lexical repetition, contrastive markers, and
syntactic parallelism. Rhetorical devices include metaphor ('I am Biafra'),
hyperbole, and evaluative phrases. The speech’s tone is confrontational yet
principled, reflecting both personal conviction and collective identity.
Lexical Analysis of the Exchange
AI keyword extraction identifies “justice,”
“freedom,” “Biafra,” “defend,” “charge,” and “mockery” as the most
salient words. Their high semantic load constructs a narrative of opposition
and legitimacy.
Word frequency distribution: emotional
and evaluative terms (e.g., justice, freedom, dignity, mockery)
appear more frequently than procedural or factual words (e.g., case,
charge, court).
Kanu’s speech is stylistically rich.
His lexical choices foreground themes of justice, identity, oppression, and
resistance. Words such as 'dignity', 'freedom', 'justice', 'mockery',
and 'Biafra' reflect emotionally-loaded semantics. The frequent use of
first-person pronouns, 'I stand', 'I am Biafra', 'I
demand', constructs a self-representation based on moral authority and symbolic
leadership. Thus, Kanu’s diction blends grievance with self-assertion,
reflecting a discourse of moral resistance rather than submission.
Grammatical and Syntactic Style
Grammatically, the speech employs a
high frequency of declaratives and imperatives. The declaratives establish
factual assertions ('I have been detained without just cause'), while
the imperatives ('Strike out the case', 'Release me') signal defiance
and agency. Parallelism strengthens rhetorical rhythm, as seen in 'Release
me. Or sentence me. Either way, Biafra will rise.' The repetition of
structural patterns reinforces thematic unity.
Sentence Type Distribution:
The sentence types found in the text
are:
1. Declarative: My Lord, Justice
Omotosho, I stand before you not as a defendant seeking mercy, but as a man
defending his dignity. This sentence makes a statement about the speaker’s
stance. Thus, asserting dignity rather than guilt.
2. Declarative: For five years,
I’ve been detained without just cause. This is a factual statement about
his detention period and perceived injustice.
3. Declarative: The charges
against me are rooted in a repealed law, an illegality the Supreme Court
acknowledged but failed to rectify. This sentence provides an assertion
supported by reasoning and it is informative and factual.
4. Declarative: I did not incite
violence; I spoke for my people’s right to exist. This is a statement of
denial and justification.
6. Declarative: My words were
freedom, not terror. This is a statement of assertion. That is, it
contrasts truth and states perception.
7. Declarative: I will not
participate in this mockery. This is a firm statement of refusal and
resistance.
8. Declarative: I demand justice,
not a scripted surrender. This is partly imperative in tone but
grammatically declarative, but functions pragmatically as a demand or command,
expressing insistence.
9. Declarative: I am Biafra.
This is a direct and self-identification declaration, and it is a symbolic
declaration that asserts identity and purpose.
10. Declarative: I am not guilty.
This is a formal statement of innocence
11. Interrogative: But defend
what? This is a rhetorical question challenging the legitimacy of the
charges.
12. Interrogative (fragmentary): A
charge that doesn’t exist? This is another rhetorical question that implies
disbelief and protest.
The dominance of declarative
sentences underscores assertiveness, confidence, and moral conviction and the
rhetorical interrogatives convey defiance and challenge. Thus, questioning the
legitimacy of the trial. Thus, the absence of imperatives or exclamations
signals restraint and composure, giving the speech judicial decorum rather than
emotional outburst.
Kanu’s frequent use of first-person
singular pronouns (I stand, I will not participate, I am
Biafra) merges personal and collective identity. The phrase “I am Biafra”
exemplifies metaphorical identification, a stylistic device that fuses speaker
and movement into one symbolic entity.
Cohesion and Discourse Features
AI discourse analysis detects high
cohesion through repeated reference and parallelism.Cohesion is achieved
through lexical repetition, contrastive markers, and syntactic parallelism. The
rhetorical devices include; metaphor ('I am Biafra'), hyperbole, and
evaluative phrases. The speech’s tone is confrontational yet principled,
reflecting both personal conviction and collective identity.
The term “Justice” appears
four times; “defend/defense” thrice; “Biafra” twice.
Parallel structures like “Release
me. Or sentence me. Either way, Biafra will rise” illustrate syntactic
symmetry and rhetorical balance, producing rhythm and emphasis.
Discourse markers such as “but,”
“either way,” “not as,” and “for” indicate contrastive cohesion,
structuring opposition between the speaker and the judicial authority.
AI-Assisted Stylistic Analysis
The research relies mainly on
qualitative research which is explanatory based. This is so because qualitative
design allows for proper explanation and analysis of data. The design focuses
on textual analysis of exchange, thereby shedding valuable insights into its
linguistic and literary features. In analyzing courtroom proceedings, AI can
also help identify shifts in tone, detect politeness strategies, evaluate
stance-taking, and map semantic networks across utterances. While AI cannot
replace the contextual sensitivity of human interpretation, it can strengthen a
methodological rigor by ensuring consistency and transparency in linguistic
analysis.
Pragmatic and Rhetorical Strategies
AI sentiment and discourse modeling
reveal three dominant pragmatic functions:
1. Resistance and
defiance: Assertive verbs (stand, demand, refuse, await) convey refusal to
submit.
2. Moral appeal: Terms
like dignity, freedom, and justice construct ethical legitimacy.
3. Identity
proclamation: The climax “I am Biafra” performs declarative
self-identification, transforming individual protest into collective symbolism.
Discussion of Findings
The integration of AI with
traditional stylistics reveals important insights about courtroom discourse.
Kanu’s speech constructs a narrative of resistance through linguistic choices
that foreground injustice and identity. The potential role of AI is to
illuminate the systematic nature of these patterns. By supporting observation
with structured linguistic identification, AI strengthens the reliability of
stylistic claims. Similarly, the study suggests that stylistic features in
courtroom proceeding function not only as communicative tools but as
instruments of political identity construction and ideological resistance.
The combination of human stylistic
insight and AI analytics reveals how Kanu’s speech is linguistically structured
to perform defiant heroism. His stylistic strategy is performative. This
showcases language as an action, not merely a tool for description. The
consistent use of high-modality verbs and parallel syntax constructs authority
despite the asymmetry of courtroom power. In the same vein, so, AI’s ability to
visualize word associations such as, “justice–freedom–Biafra” highlights
semantic networks that anchor Kanu’s ideological stance. Thus, computational
tools extend stylistic analysis beyond intuition, offering measurable evidence
of ideological construction.
Conclusion
The stylistic analysis of Nnamdi
Kanu’s last trial speech demonstrates the transformative potential of
Artificial Intelligence in linguistic stylistics. AI enhances the precision of
linguistic description by quantifying features such as tone, repetition, and
sentence type, revealing hidden layers of meaning. Yet, interpretation,
especially of political and emotive discourse, remains a human art.Kanu’s
speech, as revealed through AI-assisted stylistics, embodies linguistic
resistance: a defiant assertion of moral agency in the face of institutional
power. The study affirms that AI and human analysis together can illuminate the
interplay between language, identity, and ideology, reinforcing stylistics as
both a scientific and humanistic enterprise.
References
Balogun,
S. (2025) Understanding Stylistics for Tertiary Institutions. Dolphin
Press.
Biber,
D. (1998). Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge University
Press.
Crystal,
D. (1969).Investigating English Style. Longman.
Halliday,
M. A. K. (1971). Linguistic Function and Literary Style. In S. Chatman
(Ed.), Literary Style: A Symposium (pp. 330–368). Oxford University
Press.
Jarad,
N. (2004) Language: A powerful Weapon of Mass Deception. English Language
and Literature Studies. Vol (II): 121-142.
Leech,
G., & Short, M. (1981). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to
English Fictional Prose. Longman.
Leech,
G. & Short, M. (2007). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to
English Fictional Prose (2nd ed).Pearson Education Ltd.
McIntyre,
D., & Walker, B. (2019). Corpus Stylistics: Theory and Practice.
Edinburgh University Press.
Oladayo, M.M.(2011) An
Introduction to Stylistics.Nasif Press and Publishers
Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus,
Concordance, Collocation. Oxford University Press.
Underwood,
T. (2019). Distant Horizons: Digital Evidence and Literary Change.
University of Chicago Press.
Zhang,
Y., & Leech, G. (2022). Computational Stylistics and the Digital
Humanities. Routledge.
Appendix
Nnamdi Kanu (standing in the dock):
"My Lord, Justice Omotosho, I
stand before you not as a defendant seeking mercy, but as a man defending his
dignity. For five years, I’ve been detained without just cause. The charges
against me are rooted in a repealed law, an illegality the Supreme Court
acknowledged but failed to rectify. I did not incite violence; I spoke for my
people’s right to exist. The Nigerian state has criminalized dissent, and I
refuse to legitimize this travesty.
My words were freedom, not terror.
You, my Lord, have given me a ‘last chance’ to defend myself. But defend what?
A charge that doesn’t exist? I will not participate in this mockery. I demand
justice, not a scripted surrender.
"I am Biafra. I am not
guilty."
Judge James Omotosho:
"Mr. Kanu, you’ve been warned.
This is your final opportunity. Will you present a defense, or forfeit
it?"
Nnamdi Kanu:
"I forfeit nothing. Strike out
the case. Release me. Or sentence me. Either way, Biafra will rise."
Prosecutor Adegboyega Awomolo (SAN):
"My Lord, this defiance
obstructs justice. We pray the court to"
Nnamdi Kanu (interrupting):
"Obstruct justice? You brought
a sham trial. I await the verdict. November 20th."
Judge Omotosho:
"Case adjourned to November
20th for judgment. Counsel, ensure decorum."
This article is published in ALQALAM: A Journal of Language and Literary Studies, FUGUS, Volume 1, Issue 2 - June 2026
0 Comments