Luận văn thạc sĩ VNU ULIS the discursive construction of identity of a presidential candidate a case study

Critical Discourse Analysis

At first sight, Critical Linguistics was developed by a group of linguists and literary theorists at the University of East Anglia in the late 1970s(Fowler, Hodge, Kress, & Trew, 1979) This approach was based on Halliday‟s Systemic Functional Linguistics Years after years, Critical Linguistics was developed and broadened to what we call Critical Discourse Analysis today(Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999)

The first concern brought about was the consideration of the role of audiences and their interpretations of discourse compared to that of the discourse analysts The second concern went for the scope of analysis, extending the analysis process to the intertextualanalysis.Fairclough raised the issue of the intertextual analysis of texts:

„the linguistic analysis is very much focused upon clauses, with little attention to higher-level organization properties of who texts‟(Fairclough, 1995b, p 28)

However, at that time, Fairclough‟s approach led to a single theoretical framework

Instead, van Dijk (2001)viewed CDA as a shared perspective encompassing different approaches rather than as just „one school‟ and CDA cannot be regarded as a discrete discipline Instead, CDA is now seen as a problem-oriented interdisciplinary research program(Wodak, 2013)

According to van Dijk(2008), critical discourse analysis is a field that is concerned with studying and analyzing written and spoken texts to reveal the discursive reproduction of power abuse, social inequality and injustice

Fairclough(1995a, p 113)defines CDA as „discourse analysis which aims to systematically explore often opaque relationships of causality and determination between (a) discursive practices, events and texts, and (b) wider social and cultural structures, relations and processes; to investigate how such practices, events and texts arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power and struggles over power; and to explore how the opacity of these relationships between discourse and society is itself a factor securing power and hegemony.‟ In sum, CDA aims at analyzing the relationship between discourse and society, text and context, and between language and power

Critical Discourse Analysis is a type of discourse-analytical research that studies the way ideology, identity and inequality are (re)enacted through texts produced in social and political contexts(van Dijk, 2001) Via CDA, language is a means to construct and sustain ideologies, establish and maintain social identities and equalities(Wodak & Reisigl, 2001) Central to the view of language as a social practice proposed by Fairclough(1989) was the concepts of power and ideology He stated that language is „a site of, and stake in, struggles for power‟(Fairclough,

1989, p.2) It is in this sense, the use of power in language that has been investigated in different directions West and Zimmerman (1985)first formulate the concept of participant identities with three types of power: master identities, situated identities, and discourse identities Master identities conveys permanent factors such as age, sex, and social class Situated identities refer to power related to social settings and discourse identities are the power formed by the verbal activities of the participants

In another sense, power is related to ideology as meaning in the service of power Ideology is a process (that) articulates together particular representations of reality, and particular constructions of identity, especially of the collective identities of group and communities(Fairclough & Wodak, 1997) So, in each text, covert and hidden meanings lie in and are manipulated Meanings, ideology, power and identities are in an interrelationship

Last but not least, CDA shed light on the methodological tools on the analysis of identity van Dijk(1998, p 111) posits that language has to be analyzed with „other semiotic systems‟, that is discourses where the construction of identity is presented, power is abused and relations are revealed Thus, discourse is a place of identifying and analyzing identity culturally, ethically, religiously and politically through discursive practices Meyer (2001, p 14) notes that approaches to the study of social transformations „can be understood as a certain set of explicitly or implicitly defined theoretical assumptions which are specifically linked with empirical data, permit specific ways of interpretation and thus reconnect the empirical with the theoretical field.‟ Furthermore, CDA gives tool to the analysis of social context „All discourses are historical and can therefore only be understood with reference to their context … such extralinguistic factors as culture, society, and ideology‟(Meyer, 2001, p 166).

Identity

Identity

The term identity itself is extremely complicated Many scholars have tried to give definitions to the term Identity is an ever changing concept and it is constantly being shaped and conditioned by the environment and culture one is born into, which means that identity is not fixed at any time in any circumstances Hall and Gieben(1992, p 274) say that identity is „too complex, too under-developed, and too little understood in contemporary social science to be definitely tested.‟However, identity can be understood as a self-construal device, in which one tries to construe and reflex oneself as well as to discursively construct the self- construal to others Thus, identity sticks to the background, the society and the situations one is in McCarthey and Moje (2002, p 228)assert that „identity matters because whatever shape it is, it is an aspect of how humans make sense of the world and their experiences in it, including their experience with text.‟

Identities often change (Deaux, 2007) It is pivotal to remember that one always goes through constant cultural socialization This socialization process helps us respond to and cope with various types of stress we encounter It is collective identity that is shaped in the process Collective identity appears when individuals feel a sense of belonging to a group where they participate in social activities, it internalizes the qualities of „we-ness‟ and being united within the boundaries of shared attributes For example, there is a difference between in individual and collective identities When we talk with a colleague or a family member, we will be negotiating our own identity as individuals (a colleague to a colleague or a family member to a family member), at the same time, we are responsible for the images we create On the contrary, when we are in a meeting, for example, we might be talking as a group member, such as a political party or a university, at least part of our discursive constructions will promote the identity of the community we are on behalf of

Also in the list of kinds of identities, besides individual and collective identity, there are social and personal identities Social identities hold large categories of sub-types such as: national or religious identities; race, gender and political affiliation On the other hand, personal identities involve not only sets of membership categories, but also moral and physical personalities that differ one from another and vice versa (strong and decisive, having a vision or right temptation, honest, and so forth) Last but not least, situational identities which can be seen as a role in a particular context of social interaction but not always such as husband/wife or professor/student or nurse/patient (Zimmerman, 1998).

Identity Research

Research on language and identity has increased enormously in the last decades The time when scholars in the field attempted to advocate for the centrality of language in the study of identity as diverse as anthropology, linguistics, phycology, social theory or among others It is a mission impossible to give a comprehensive view of the theoretical framework that shaped identity studies The section embraces a much modest aim of briefly discussing some of the approaches and concepts of identity and identity construction

The construction of identity has become a central concern amongst researchers across a wide range of academic disciplines within the humanities and social sciences Along with that, there has been a number of different, conflicting analytic approaches to theorize and analyze identity The most prominent work focuses on a specific identity category such as racism (van Dijk, 1996; Wodak &

Reisigl, 2001), gender and sexism (del-Teso-Craviotto, 2006; Machin &

Thornborrow, 2003), war and political strategies (Butt, Lukin, & Matthiessen, 2004;

Chouliaraki, 2004; Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999; Fairclough, 2000) or national identity (Jones, 1997; Lechner, 2012; Miller, 2005; Smith, 1991), or in some other cases, a broader discussion of how identity is theorized in discourse such as Hatch and Schultz (2002) studied organizational identity, Zembylas (2003) studied on emotions and teacher identity

Scholars have used a variety of analytical methods and theoretical perspectives to analyze identity, such as Conversation Analysis (Auer, 2013),

Membership Categorization Analysis (Antaki & Widdicombe, 1998), Discursive Psychology (Dixon & Durrheim, 2000; Potter, 2003; Wetherell, 2007), Narrative Analysis (Bamberg, De Fina, & Schiffrin, 2011) and Critical Discourse Analysis

Researchers have used different discursive contexts to analyze the processes of identity construction from everyday conversation to institutional talk

The most recent approach used to analyze different identity categories is

Computer-Mediated Communication(Benwell & Stokoe, 2006) In their book,

Benwell and Stokoe use Computer-Mediated Communication to analyze identity communicated in online chatrooms, and bring about the concept of „virtual‟ identity, as defined in opposition to „authentic‟ or „real‟ identity

De Fina, Schiffrin, and Bamberg (2006, p 236) commented: „Recent trends in the study of identity within discourse bring together theorizations on the self, the role of interaction in the creation of personal and social worlds and the contribution of language to socio-cultural processes.‟ These different trends result in the emergence of a new paradigm that can be characterized as social constructionist and oriented towards practice and interaction (Bamberg et al., 2011; De Fina et al.,

2006), social theory (Giddens, 1991), feminist theory about identity (Butler, 2011), symbolic interactionism(Mead, 1934) and ethnomethodology (Garfinkel, 2005)

Social Constructivism, which gives a very basic way of perceiving identity, holds the assumption that identity is neither a given nor a product (Hall & Du Gay, 1996; Kroskrity, 1993) Rather, identity is a process that takes place in concrete and specific interactional occasions, yields constellations of identities instead of individual, monolithic constructs, and does not simply emanate from the individual, but results from processes of negotiation, and entextualization The processes are social and entails „discursive work‟ (Zimmerman & Wieder, 1970) Social constructivists have conducted a great deal of research on the use of linguistic strategies in discursive work to analyze and construct identities with the combination of different versions of the self Therefore, Kroskrity(1993) stated that there are „repertoires of identities‟ or the majority of scientists are in the agreement of multiplicity of identity or multiple identities (Davies & Harré, 1990; Duszak, 2002; Geschiere & Meyer, 1998; Pavlenko & Blackledge, 2004)

From Critical Discourse Analysis, Hall (1997) shows the discursive formations emerging different historical periods to form various kinds of identities

From the view that discourse creates identities when individuals use discourse to make sense of who they are and individuals subject themselves to its disciplinary effects (Howarth, 2000) Many scholars (Covaleski, Dirsmith, Heian, & Samuel, 1998; Du Gay, 1996) conducted research on power-knowledge relations within discourse in which subjects are positioned and identities are formed and bodies are disciplined Fairclough worked on discourses which are strategically controlled by identifiable actors within a historical and institutional context (Fairclough, 1992b;

Reed, 1998) In the same work, Fairclough worked on actors embedded in multiple discourses and that actors can occupy a discursive space to play between or among discourses (Fairclough, 1992b, 1995b; Hardy & Phillips, 2004) He wrote:

Discourse as a political practice establishes, sustains and changes power relations, and the collective entities between which power relations obtain Discourse as an ideological practice constitutes, naturalizes, sustains and changes significations of the world from diverse positions in power relations (Fairclough, 1992b, p 67)

In the light of CDA, Mumby(2001, p 614) worked on „how communication practices construct identities, experiences and ways of knowing that serve some interests over others.‟

De Fina et al (2006) also proposed three perspectives in which identity is looked at The first domain is the reflection on the nature of the self, the self as an isolated, self-constrained entity, the second includes conceptions on the role of interpersonal communication in the construction, enactment and negotiation of identities The third one is the theorization of the relationships between identity and language

Self and identity are complementary terms which share much in common and in uncommon James (1890, p 330) warned us that selfhood (including identity) is

„the most puzzling puzzle with which psychology has to deal‟ The central quality that differs the two terms is that the self is a process and organization born of self- reflection whereas identity is a tool in which individuals or groups present and construct themselves to the world (Owens, 2006) Then, Owens (2006, p 206) went on to define the self as „an organized and interactive system of thoughts, feelings, identities, and motives that (1) is born of self-reflexivity and language, (2) people attribute to themselves, and characterize specific human beings.‟ The questions of the self have gone so far: Who am I? Why am I here? What does my life mean?

Where did I come from? etc It is here to say the self allows people to view themselves from an external or internal point of view (Mead, 1934) From Owens‟s

(2006, p 206) point of view, identity is subsumed within the broader concept of self Owens (2006, p 207) define identity as: „categories people use to specify who they are and to locate themselves relative to other people.‟ It is here to say identity is both distinctiveness (I am not like them) and a sameness as others (I am like them) (James, 1890)

In the interpersonal communication in the construction of identity, Butler

(2011) emphasizes that identity is not something that one „has‟, but more of something that one „does‟ or „performs‟ In this sense, projecting or rejecting an identity is considered as acting and speaking in a way or the other in communicative contexts For example, on June 7, 2008, at the National Building Museum in Washington, DC., after one year and seven months actively campaigning, Hillary Clinton read her Concession Speech before her gathered supporters Clinton said:

This is painful and it will be for a long time, but I want you to remember this Our campaign was never about one person or even one election It was about the country we love and about building an America that's hopeful, inclusive and big-hearted We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought, but I still believe in America and I always will

This verbal communication represents identity work Right from the beginning, she admitted the pain she and her supporters were bearing and it is there for a long time, which denotes her personal identity as „honest‟ and „direct‟

Meanwhile, she was sharing the pain with her supporter, which can be regarded as

Identity as a Discursive Work

Focusing on the domain of socialinguistic theories so as to provide a description of identity construction, the term „discursive work‟ was introduced(Zimmerman & Wieder, 1970)

„Discursive strategy‟ means more or less intentional plan of discursive practices, influenced by a habitus and internalized dispositions (Bourdieu, 1977), which were employed to achieve a particular social, political, psychological, or linguistics outcome (Martin & Wodak, 2005, pp 44-45) Strategies in this context are goal-directed behaviors used to leverage knowledge and communicate persuasively (Wodak, 2007) Discursive work is also viewed as „A single reference that gave information about an entity in a textual world thus contributed to a complex of discursive acts that gave off information about „who‟ in the social world was speaking to „whom‟‟ (Schiffrin, 2006, p 124) and „thus joining the reference in the construction of identity is turn-by-turn sequential contingencies and performance styles, both of which create local activity-based identities and indexed broad social identities‟ (Schiffrin, 2006, p 124) It is here to say „individuals have multiple identities‟ (Verschueren, 2008, p 26) because their evolving and contextually bound nature Identities are therefore unstable over time, often influenced by a number of factors including the now and possible persona, a triggering event such as a change in status or aspirations, growth, religious decisions and other life based choices that are undertaken at any point in time (Yurchisin, Watchravesringkan, & McCabe, 2005) Thus, individuals have a possibility to adapt to changes in society thereby leading to the „coexistence of different identities‟ (Rimskii, 2011) To conclude this, Kroskrity (1999) considers identity as the „linguistic construction‟ and it is language that identity is constructed and reshaped in as a social product

Identity as a social construction has been examined by several scholars (Bloom, 1993; Booth, 1999; Brubaker & Cooper, 2000; Laitin, 1998) This social theory rests on the fact that in-group associations lead to a feeling of belonging and contribute to the creation of social identity, which means that identity is seen as a socially distinguishing feature that people are proud of Stone and Strauss (2017) hypothesize that the social development of identity is influenced by relevant and chronicled precursors Thus, however there might be singular contrasts, group identity gives people a critical feeling of having a place and representation The social construction of identity is established in sociological theories, for example, symbolic interactionism propounded by researchers, for example, Mead (1934) and Goffman (1959) who state that the way individuals see of themselves or act depends on group activities, connection and their concomitant interpretations Along these lines, identity is seen as much as an individual's statement of his self-sameness as the inter-process between this individual and an assortment of outer interactions, between inter-personal relationships and communal engagements According to Rimskii (2011, pp 79-80), „Identity is the state of the individual‟s consciousness in which, on the basis of the aggregate set of personal characteristics, one knows oneself, one recognizes the stability of one‟s own personality, one separates oneself from the surrounding reality, and one determines one‟s membership in a particular social group and, conversely, acknowledges the impossibility of belonging to other social groups.‟ This perspective is shared by Yanow who sees identity is a „group‟s collective story, but it also becomes the story of individual members of the group or the story against which they measure their own stories, fitting it or not‟ (Yanow,

2015, p 7) The social construction of identity in this research has to do with is how Hillary Clinton constructs her shared values

Castells (2011, p 6) states that „identity is the people‟s source of meaning and experience‟ or the way in which an individual or public actors „understand the process of construction of meaning on the basis of a cultural attribute or set of related attributes that is/are given priority over other sources of meaning.‟

McAdams (2003) looks at identity as a self-regulatory mechanism that filters information and manages both internal and external presentations through impression management and behavioral selections Marcia (1980, p 159) defines the term as structural presence of awareness composed of „an internal, self- constructed, dynamic organization of drives, abilities, beliefs, and individual history.‟ Erikson (1980, p 109) perceives „identity…connotes both a persistent sameness within oneself and a persistent sharing of some kind of essential character with others.‟ These speculations of personality lay on the idea that identity is self- attested and driven by recognition of the individual's agency Markus and Nurius

(1986), in a sense, posit that identities are created though self-conceptions; that is, how an individual sees or thinks of themselves From all the above points of view, we see that the idea of a personal life story created by self-definitions and self- characterizations is central to understanding of one‟s identity

In political contests like Presidential Election 2016, group belongings are both the Democratic and the audience perceptions We can say that an individual's identity and identity construction process are essential in distinguishing Clinton‟s representational space inside the political system While this helps us comprehend an individual's identity, it is also reflective of the eccentricities in the political or social system in which Clinton as a presidential candidate behaves In this manner, identity enlightens both individual and social traits

From all the literature we have gone into so far, we can see that identities are also fluid, dynamic and constantly changing and prepared to play in the particular environment

All in all, identity plays a central role because it enables an individual cohesion of self even in different situations (Cerulo, 1997; Hogg & Abrams, 1999;

Rimskii, 2011) But what discursively constructs identity? Castells (2011) views the identity construction as the utilization of „raw materials‟ from (a) history, (b) geography, (c) biology, (d) productive and reproductive institutions, (e) collective memory, (f) personal fantasies, (g) power apparatuses and (h) religious revelations

And he also perceives individuals and groups „process all these materials and rearrange their meaning, according to social determinations and cultural projects that are rooted in their social structure and in their space/time framework‟ (Castells,

2011, p 7) Later on, he states that „identity takes place in a space marked by power relations‟ and the construction of identity goes through three structural markers which he names the „forms and origins‟ which include (a) legitimizing identity, (b) resistance identity, and (c) project identity Legitimizing identity is in connection with the maintenance of a dominant power in society where the major social group wants to preserve its primacy over others and thus deciding which individual is in or out of the mainstream Resistance identity is „generated by those actors that are in positions/conditions devalued and/or stigmatized by the logic of domination…‟

(Castells, 2011, p 8) This helps to remains the positions on issues in political contest Lastly, project identity refers to when individual and social actors redefine their identity and „by so doing seek the transformation of the overall social structure‟ (Castells, 2011, p 8) Project identity therefore involves the individual and the collective and builds up a decisive and strong identity

Identity is a focal personality to the field of politics Identity forms the basis of identification between candidates and their constituents Candidates seek to maximize their voter appeal on the basis of in-groups and out-groups while voters either seek to identify with a specific cause or candidate (Callero, 1985;

McDermott, 1998) The implicit in these relationships is a shared sense or political activity and alliances with the quid pro quo goal of candidates getting elected and citizens ensuring that someone who identifies with them on different levels gains power (Cerulo, 1997; Plutzer & Zipp, 1996) In this sense, identity provides a means of understanding and shaping a presidential candidate as well as audience evaluation of that candidate When talking about politics and identity, Hall and Du Gay put them that:

Politics, without the arbitrary interposition of power in language, the cut of ideology, the positioning, the crossing of lines, the rupture, is impossible All the social movements which have tried to transform society and have required the constitution of new subjectivities, have had to accept the necessarily fictional, but also the fictional necessity, of the arbitrary closure which is not the end, but which makes both politics and identity possible [This is] a politics of difference, the politics of self-reflexivity, a politics that is open to contingency but still able to act there has to be a politics of articulation – politics of hegemonic project (Hall & Du Gay,

As going so far, we see that there is not a single definition of identity Identity is about belonging, about what you share with the others and what differentiates you from them In its basic form, identity gives us a sense of personal location, the stable core to our individuality

The Context of the Study

Hillary Diane Rodham was born on October 26, 1947 to Dorothy and Hugh Rodham, the parents with two brothers, Hugh and Tony Hillary lived up her childhood in Park Ridge, Illinois happily and in a disciplined way She loved sports and her church, and was a member of the National Honor Society Blumenthal

(2016) reminds us that she carries a Bible wherever she goes and seeks solace in it in times of stress Her mother once said „Hillary always valued herself highly I liked that about her.‟ Hillary was voted „most likely succeed‟ among her classmates

In another book, „Hillary Rodham Clinton: On the Couch,‟ Bond (2015) tells us that Hillary was nicknamed as Owl Face on account of her enormous thick glasses by her high school mates As an undergraduate at Wellesley College, she was endowed with excellence and school government On graduation day, she said „The challenge now is to practice politics as the art of making what appears to be impossible, possible.‟

The young Hillary stayed in place, roughly unchanged from her birth in 1947 up until Bill Clinton lost his job as governor of Arkansas in 1981 (Wakefield,

2016) Until then, Hillary had no idea of what a wife should be She still kept her maiden name and refused any kind of makeover „I think she thought make-up superficial,‟ her mother said (Blumenthal, 2016) Because of Bill Clinton‟s defeat, she dyed her hair, ditched the glasses and became a Clinton She wrote: „I failed to appreciate how important in political terms an elected person‟s spouse is to voters‟

Interestingly, Hillary was once a staunch Right winger in 1964 and she even campaigned for Barry Goldwater, Republican senator of Arizona She once said: „I was also an active Young Republican and, later, a Goldwater girl, right down to my cowgirl outfit and straw cowboy hat emblazoned with the slogan "AuH20." … I liked Senator Goldwater because he was a rugged individualist who swam against the political tide,‟ (Blumenthal, 2016) She also attended the 1968 republican convention to campaign for New York Gove Nelson Rockefeller However, at Yale Law School, she fulfilled her transformation from Republican to Democrat when she met Marian Wright Edelman, and then Bill Clinton Wakefield (2016) stated that there has been much speculation over the years about Hillary‟s hawkishness and her reluctance to admit she was wrong about the war in Iraq

In the book The First Ladies of the United States of America by Black

(2013), He wrote that Hillary served as Arkansas‟s First Lady for 12 years; balancing family with Bill Clinton, married in 1975, and their daughter, Chelsea, born in 1980; balancing law at the Legal Services Corporation, the Rose Law Firm; and balancing public service

As the nation‟s First Lady, Hillary kept on balancing public service with her family life She actively joined public service in 1993 when Bill Clinton, the president, asked her to chair the Task Force on National Health Care Reform working health insurance coverage, ensuring children are properly immunized, and raising public awareness of health issues

On November, 2000, Hillary was elected United States Senator from New York, the first First Lady elected to the United States Senate and the first woman elected statewide in New York (Black, 2013)

Hillary served as the 67 th United States Secretary under President Barack Obama administration from 2009 to 2013, she is also the only former First Lady of the United States to serve as a member of the United States Cabinet As secretary, she travelled to and worked with countries from Asia, Africa, Europe to South America Clinton attended various meetings and summits from international organizations including the NATO, the UN and cross countries meetings

In 2010, Clinton gained a good relationship with Obama administration and himself Obama was in turn accommodating to her political viewpoints and at some points, he adopted some of Clinton‟s more hawkish approaches (Mark & Helene,

2010) At the end of 2012 Clinton was her tenth win consecutively and sixteenth overall in Gallup‟s most admired man and woman poll as the woman around the world they most admired Also in 2012, a poll was taken in Iowa, the first state in the nomination process showed that Clinton would have 58 percent support to be the Democratic nominee in the 2016 presidential election (Burns, 2012) However, at the end of the year, Clinton was diagnosed with a stomach virus and became dehydrated, then fainted suffering from a mild concussion, which prevented her from trips, meetings and work She was also met with huge criticism from the Congress, mostly due to the Benghazi matter The illness put an end to her traveling job as a secretary She was marked with 112 countries visited, nearly one million- mile-air travel

In his early famous book: Language and Power, Fairclough (1989, p 82) has stated that „it will generally make sense to investigate language practices by reference to specific social institutions.‟ That is the why an analysis of the social context of the study is needed The United States presidential election 2016 was the fifty-eighth quadrennial American presidential election A series of presidential primary elections and caucuses took place between February and June 2016 to find out the nominees of two main parties The nominating process was indirect election, where voters cast ballots for their representatives to a political party‟s nominating convention, who in turn vote their party‟s presidential nominee

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who was served in the US Senate and was the First Lady of the United States, became the first woman to formally launch a major candidacy for the presidency She announced to run for the Oval

Office on April 12, 2015 via a video message In the run for nomination, she faced challenges from Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, who was the second major candidate when he formally announced on April 30, 2015 Until March 2016, Hillary Clinton won 504 pledged delegates while Bernie Sander won

340 delegates In May, 2016, Bernie Sander won Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon on all 5 campaign states.

The Data

The data consist of a single case, Hillary Clinton's speech in San Diego on Thursday, 2 June 2016, which lived up to its billing as a spirited frontal assault on presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump The speech marked a milestone in her campaign The speech lasts 37 minutes 40 seconds and consists of 4150 words

The speech is also regarded as a turning point and a key to her run for the presidency The speech named „Hillary Clinton Destroys Trump, Defends American Values‟ on YouTube (at https://youtu.be/CQt4KxUmnzw) uploaded by Hillary Clinton Speeches and Events Channel on June 3, 2016 is chosen to analyze

The US presidential election runs in two phases: The Party Presidential primaries and the general election In the run for the Party‟s nomination, the candidate to be selected has to win a majority of all delegate votes at the Party National Convention The delegates are the people who determine whom to be the nominee If Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders wants to earn the nomination of the Democratic Party, he or she need to win 2,117 votes at the Democratic National Convention, or a same majority pledged delegates before the Convention to secure his or her nomination

At the time of the data collection, Hillary Clinton was against two rivals:

Bernie Sanders for the first phase of becoming the Democratic Presidential nominee, and Donald Trump, the Republican presumptive presidential nominee

In another line, at the Republican primaries, From August 2015, Donald Trump had a clear sign of leading poll from RealClearPolitics and he started to campaigned against Hillary Clinton Between March and May 2016, there were only three candidates left actively campaigning in the race in GOP primaries

However, Donald Trump had a decisive win in Indiana on May 3, 2016, securing his nomination and he was declared the presumptive Republican nominee after the two other candidates suspended or dropped out of the race(Kaplan, 2016) As can be seen in the following diagram

According to RealClearPolitics Poll in the following diagram in six months from January to June 2016 Hillary Clinton met her hard time in May when the poll went down to go in parallel with Donald Trump However, at the end of May and the beginning of June, there was a rise in the poll for Hillary Clinton and a go-down for Donald Trump It is here to say that Hillary Clinton‟s speech at the beginning of June was a key point in her campaign

Political speeches in general are rich materials to explore, especially electoral speeches are an interesting site to analyze identity formation When there are always struggles of power so as to convey specific ideas and interests, to manifest a political will and transform it into social action When „any political action is prepared, accompanied, controlled and influenced by language‟(Schaffner,

Analytical Framework

Representing social actors

First and foremost, Hall thinks of representation as the making of meaning from different orders of things:

„The process by which members of a culture use signifying systems to produce meaning … Objects, people, events in the world do not have in themselves any fixed, final or true meaning It is us, in society, within human cultures, who make things mean, who signify Meanings, consequently will always change, from one culture or period to another Representation involves making meaning by forging links between three different orders of things: what we might broadly call the world of things, people, events and experience; the conceptual world – the mental concepts we carry in our heads; and the signs arranged into languages (and other modes), which stand for or communicate these concepts.‟ (Hall, 1997, p 61)

Baker(2014, p 73) regards representation as „the creation of a mental image of something using signifying practices and symbolic systems‟ Meanwhile, van

RQ2: How are identities linguistically realized?

RQ1: What identities does Hillary Clinton discursively construct?

RQ3: Why does she choose to project different identities?

Dijk (2005) takes representation as the mechanism to control symbolic elites or reproduce prevalent ideologies in society

At the heart of this research, van Leeuwen (1996, p 32) asserts that „agency, as a sociological concept, is of major and classic importance in Critical Discourse Analysis: in which contexts are which social actors represented as „agents‟ He goes on to say that participants or social actors are represented in a discursive practice In this sense, social actors can be analyzed „within their concordance- based collocation environments, with a special analytic focus on their „contested representations‟ in a given discourse‟ (Salama, 2012, p 15)

The representation of social actors is what groups and individuals are referred to and how van Leeuwen (1996, p 38) himself refers this to as „exclusion‟ and that

„exclusion as rightly been an important aspect of Critical Discourse Analysis.‟ He adds „representations include or exclude social actors to suit their interests and purposes in relation to the readers for whom they are intended.‟ This study fits perfectly in van Leeuwen‟s framework of social actors representation to analyze, at the text level, the lexical and grammatical choices Hillary Clinton made in her campaign speech to represent herself in a certain way Suppressed exclusion can be recognized through passive agent deletion, non-finite clauses, nominalizations and process nouns, meanwhile, backgrounding can be recognized by ellipses in non- finite clauses or in paratactic clauses For example,serious cases of child abuse in Vietnam werereported in 2017 This example tells us something were reported, but not who reported it This is a case of passive agent deletion

What roles are social actors allocated to? The roles which social actors play in representations or in an aspect of representation have been a significant part under research of many critical linguists(Fairclough, 1989, 2003; Fowler, 2013;

Hodge & Kress, 1993; Koller, 2012; van Dijk, 2015): in which actor is represented as „agent‟ in response to a certain action van Leeuwen (1996, p 43) himself comments that „representations can reallocate roles, rearrange the social relations between the participants.‟ It is in this sense, social actors can be analyzed in which institutional and social contexts to see what or whose interests are served and what purposes are achieved by them (van Leeuwen, 1996) Further discussing on role allocation, Koller (2012) and Fairclough (2003) employ process types to analyze particular actions, norms and values that social actors are ascribed to In so doing, the systemic functional framework (Halliday et al., 2014) is employed to see how particular domains of experience are constructed in discourse This framework is displayed in the following figure (Halliday et al., 2014, p 172):

Figure 3: The grammar of experience: Types of processes in English

In this framework, the material process describes concrete and tangible actions This process expresses the notion that the social actor „does‟ something (e.g She resigned) The mental process accounts for the act of sensing or phenomena (e.g I think she is an efficient company) The relational process serves to establish a relation between two separate entities (e.g She is an efficient company) The behavioral process describes human physiological and psychological behavior (e.g He glanced at her) The verbal process is the process of saying (e.g He said he would grade his father an A) The existential process represents existence or happening through a process and a participant that is said to exist (e.g There may have been many cases of child abuse unreported in 2017 in Vietnam)

The representations of social actors can then be endowed with active or passive roles and can be analyzed by transitivity structures Halliday et al (2014) explains these structures in which activated social actors are represented as Actor in material processes, Behaver in behavioral processes, Senser in mental processes, Sayer in verbal processes or Assigner in relational processes as demonstrated in figure 3(Halliday et al., 2014, p 172) The passivation is categorized into two distinct differences: subjection and beneficialization (van Leeuwen, 1996)

Subjected social actors are recognized as objects in the representation

Beneficialized social actors, meanwhile, are recognized from „a third party which, positively or negatively, benefits from it‟ (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 44) Subjection can be analyzed by „participation‟ when passivated social actor is Goal in a material process, Phenomenon in a mental process, or Carrier in an effective attribute process (Halliday et al., 2014) Prepositional phrase with „of‟ as „possessivation‟,

„adjectival premodification can also be realized as passivation Beneficialization can be recognized by participation in which social actor or participant is Recipient or Client in material process, or Receiver in a verbal process (Halliday et al., 2014)

This is showed in the following figure:

Figure 4: The representation of social actors: Activation and Passivation

Are social actors genericized and specified? van Leeuwen (1996, p 46) comments that „the choice between generic and specific reference is another important factor in the representation of social actors; they can be represented as classes or as specific, identifiable individuals.‟ The genericization can be analyzed by the plural without article (e.g Children need love from their parents), the singular with a definite or indefinite article (e.g Maybe a child learns from his mother most) On the other hand, specification can be realized by numeratives (e.g

Representation of social actors Activation

The forth question so far is are social actors referred to as individuals or as groups? van Leeuwen (1996) names these representations as „individualization‟ and

„assimilation‟ respectively He emphasizes that when „Given the great value which is placed on individuality in many spheres of our society (and the value placed on conformity in others) these categories would have to be of primary significance in Critical Discourse Analysis‟ (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 48).Individualization can be recognized by singularity (e.g He was not here), and assimilation by plurality like a mass noun, or a noun denoting a group (e.g America will be great again)

Are social actors represented as groups associated or disassociated? The former refers to „groups formed by social actors and/or groups of social actors (either generically or specifically referred to) which are never labelled in the text (although the actors or groups who make up the association may of course themselves be named and/or categorized‟ (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 50) Association can be realized by parataxis (making a list) (e.g Thank you Sam, Nga and Nam),

„circumstances of accompaniment‟ (Halliday et al., 2014, p 170) (e.g They played

„higher and higher‟ with the other children (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 51))

Disassociation is realized by the process of association unforming, the breakdown of association or no association is detected

Are social actors indetermined or differentiated? Indetermination takes place when social actors are „represented as unspecified,„anonymous‟ individuals or groups, determination when their identity is, one way or another, specified‟ (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 52) Indetermination is recognized by indefinite pronouns (e.g some, any, someone, anyone…) which are used in nominal function

Indetermination is used when the writer projects his or her identity as irrelevant or similar to the reader/hearer Thus, it can be achieved by generalized exophoric reference and social actors are endowed „with a kind of impersonal authority, a sense of unseen, yet powerfully felt coercive force‟ (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 52) (e.g Someone has taken my phone) On the contrary, differentiation „explicitly differentiates an individual social actor or group of social actors from a similar actor or group, creating the difference between the „self‟ and the „other‟, or between „us‟ and „them‟ (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 52) (e.g Mummy, did you know there is another Marry in my class? (van Leeuwen, 1996, p 52))

Are social actors nominated or categorized? The representation of social actors can be divided in terms of nomination when social actors project their

„unique identity‟ or categorization when social actors share their identities and functions with others Nomination is often recognized by proper nouns, which can be formal, semi-formal or informal or by „only one social actor occupies a certain rank or fulfils a certain function (e.g Yan, at the age of 28, fell in love with Jie)

Categorization can be realized in the use of plural pronouns (e.g we, us, they, them) or plurality (e.g racists, predators)

Modality

What is modality?Fairclough (1992b, p 158) posits that modality can be used to define the „dimension of the grammar of the clause which corresponds to the

„interpersonal‟ function of language.‟ Modality can be achieved linguistically to reveal the writer‟s attitude which varies from certainty to uncertainty, advice to obligation, commitments to uncommitments, permissions to obligation Zdenek and Babara(2008, p 29) later reassured that ‟modality, naming, nominalization, and tense and aspect, as these resources are deployed to shape depictions of agency, responsibility, time, identity, and, most generally, political and rhetorical legitimacy.‟

According to Dunmire(2008) differentiates two types of modality: Deontic and epistemic modality:

Deontic modality is concerned with future actions and policies Through modal auxiliaries such as “ought,” “should,” and “must,” deontic modality expresses notions of obligation, conviction, and permission Epistemic modality is concerned with knowledge and belief concerning “reality.”

Through modal auxiliaries such as “will,” “might,” and “would,” epistemic modality expresses judgments about the status and/or certainty of that knowledge and belief (Dunmire, 2008, p 85)

As Fairclough (1992b, p 142) takes it: „modality concerns the extent to which producers commit themselves to, or conversely distance themselves from, proposition their degree of 'affinity' with the proposition.‟ Fairclough actually borrows the term „affinity‟ from Hodge and Kress (1988) In this sense, modality and social actors representation of inclusion and exclusion can fit perfectly into the study of collective identity As in Koller‟s model of analyzing collective identity using modality, he questions:

What does the author perceive a social group to be like in the past, present and future? What possible developments are constructed for them (epistemic)? How would the text producer like them to be (deontic)? Such an analysis of likelihood and desirability helps text producers communicate their beliefs about a group of social actors and define goals for them As goals are motivated by values - social actors striving to attain what they believe good and/or important and hence desirable, the analysis of modality is implicitly linked to the norms and values ascertained by analyzing evaluation (Koller,

Referring back to the term „affinity‟ Fairclough (1992b, p 159) posits that

„subjective‟ modality, „in a sense that the subjective basis for the selected degree of affinity, with a proposition may be made explicit‟ when the speaker or writer is clear of their own degree of affinity Or „objective‟ modality may be made where

„subjective basis is left implicit.‟ For example, it may rain tomorrow it may be unclear that whose perspective is being expressed

Fairclough (2003, p 168) concludes that the view of modality goes beyond the explicitness of modalization (can, will, may, must, would, should, etc.) there are in fact many other ways of marking modality: the case of Statements (e.g

Conflict is seen as creative or Conflict is not seen as creative) without the occurrence of modal verbs or other modal markers, other cases include Questions (Isn‟t the window open?), Demand (Open the window!), Offer (I‟ll open the window.), or Grammatical Mood (declarative, interrogative, imperative).

Intertextuality and Interdiscursivity

This subsection presents the framework of analyzing intertextuality and interdiscursivity The term „intertextuality‟along with its kin term

„interdiscursivity‟, have been dominant and widely theoretical concepts in cultural studies, linguistics and sociolinguistics Yet the term still exists in more of a diversity of interpretations Fairclough (1992b, p 84) defines intertextuality as „the property texts have of being full of snatches of other texts, which may be explicitly demarcated or merged in, and which the text may assimilate, contradict, ironically echo, and so forth.‟ To make it clearer, Bartesaghi(2015, p 1) takes it as

„intertextuality reveals the ways in which texts depend on other texts by recycling and linking to former utterances‟ To put the two terms together, Bartesaghi and Noy(2015, p 1) formally state that „interdiscursivity builds on the notion of intertextuality, precisely in the way that a discourse may be understood as a complex assemblage of simultaneous and chained linguistic acts, designating larger field – and an interrelationship across fields action – than does a text.‟ According to Silverstein (1976, p 17), intertextuality and intertexts „are generated in events of communication through techniques of interdiscursivity‟

Fairclough (1995b, p 61) states that„intertextual analysis focuses on the borderline between text and discourse practice in the analytical framework

Intertextual analysis is looking at text from the perspective of discourse practice, looking at the traces of the discourse practice in the text.‟ He goes on to add

„linguistic analysis is descriptive in nature, whereas intertextual analysis is more interpretative‟ (Fairclough, 1995b, p 16) In another work, he definesintertextuality as, „basically the property texts have of being full of snatches of other texts, which may be explicitly demarcated or merged in, and which the text may assimilate, contradict, ironically echo, and so forth‟ (Fairclough, 1992b, p 84) In this work, he identifies two types of intertextuality: „manifest intertextuality‟ and „constitutive intertextuality‟ (Fairclough, 1992b, p 85) Manifest intertextuality can be understood as the heterogeneous constitution of texts by specific other texts This kind of intertextuality is manifested by visible signs such as quotation marks or/and any form of citations The later term goes for the „heterogeneous constitution of texts out of elements (types of convention) of orders of discourse (interdiscursivity)‟ (Fairclough, 1992b, p 104), which refers to the structure of discourse conventions Fairclough also claimed that intertextual properties can be analyzed in its linguistic features He stated „linguistic features of texts provide evidence which can be used in intertextual analysis, and intertextual analysis is a particular sort of interpretation of that evidence‟ (Fairclough, 1995b, p 61)

The analysis of interdiscursivity as the relationship between texts, genres and discourses „not only ascertains inter-group relations but also reflects on collective identity by showing what features the author borrows to construct that identity‟

(Koller, 2012, p 25) In this sense, intertextuality and interdiscursivity can demonstrate the power struggle between the text producer with the producers of other text and discourses and can express norms and values of social actors In other words, Fairclough (2003, p 41) puts it that interdiscursivity „accentuates the dialogicality of a text, the dialogue between the voice of the author of a text and other voices,‟ and he names the voice as a part of the term style, which means ways of being or identities

The analysis parameter of interdiscursivity „may not be possible to identify these sets with great precision, and they may be rather extensive and complex‟

(Fairclough, 2003, p 47) However, the analytical process can begin with the question: „which texts and voices are included, which are excluded, and what significant absences are there?‟ (Fairclough, 2003, p 47) When two texts, genres or discourses are linked together, two different perspectives, objectives and interests and so forth are brought into the new text, these links can be recognized by four kinds of reporting:

 Direct reporting: Quotation, purported the actual words used, in quotation marks, with reporting clause (e.g She said: „He‟ll be there by now‟)

 Indirect reporting: Summary, the content of what was said or written, not the actual words used, no quotation marks, with a reporting clause (e.g she said he‟d be there by then) Shifts in the tense („he‟ll‟ becomes „he‟d‟) and deixis („now‟ becomes „then‟) of direct reports

 Free indirect reporting: Intermediate between direct and indirect – it has some of the tense and deixis shifts typical of indirect speech, but without a reporting clause It is mainly significant in literary language (e.g Mary gazed out of the window He would be there by now She smiled to herself.)

 Narrative report of speech act: Reports the sort of speech act without reporting its content (e.g She made a prediction) (Fairclough, 2003, p 49)

Fairclough (2003, p 35) posits that „genre can be seen as a form of prospective interdiscursivity.‟ It is in this sense, genre mixing or hybridity is a property of interdiscursivity of texts and Fairclough (2003) elsewhere in the book states that irony can also be a property of interdiscursivity.

Analyzing Identity

This subsection discusses the parameters to analyze the constructon of identity as a discursive work, which focuses mainly on Bucholtz and Hall‟s (2005) and De Fina (2011) frameworks of identity analysis

Identity has attracted much attention and exploration from analysts in myriad disciplines Bucholtz and Hall (2005) state that a focus on the analytical approach has been the center of identity studies rather than the theoretical framework itself

Thus, they propose principles to analyze identity as follow:

(1) Identity is the product rather than the source of linguistic and other semiotic practices and therefore is a social and cultural rather than primarily internal psychological phenomenon; (2) identities encompass macro-level demographic categories, temporary and interactionally specific stances and participant roles, and local, ethnographically emergent cultural positions; (3) identities may be linguistically indexed through labels, implicatures, stances, styles, or linguistic structures and systems; (4) identities are relationally constructed through several, often overlapping, aspects of the relationship between self and other, including similarity/difference, genuineness/artifice and authority/delegitimacy; and (5) identity may be in part intentional, in part habitual and less than fully conscious, in part an outcome of interactional negotiation, in part a construct of others‟ perceptions and representations, and in part an outcome of larger ideological processes and structures (Bucholtz and Hall, 2005, p 585)

Identity, as a product, is social and cultural Antaki and Widdicombe (1998, p 3) take the term and the principle of local occasioning as a way to pay close attention to the details of local talk or understandings to reveal how identities are constructed and negotiated In their study, they argued that „for a person to hold an identity is to cast into a category with associated characteristics or features,‟ and that such casting is framed by local occasioning From the concept of local occasioning beholds the idea that people project or ascribe their identities to others not is only dependent on the context but also shapes that context, then makes the identities relevant and consequential According to Hall‟s (1997) and Chun‟s (2001) studies, macro categories of different types of identities may have an ideological impact on each other Therefore, the same social identity may be used to analyze an individual but this identity will have different meanings based on different aspects of the context

Bucholtz and Hall (2005, p 591) argue, discursive identity basically emerges

„through the temporary roles and orientations assumed by participants, such as evaluator, joke teller, or engaged listener.‟ In other words, the question who we and the others are can be answered in terms of who we are not or the others are similar to or vice versa (Fairclough, 2003) It is here to say that when communicating, individuals and collectivities construct and negotiate identities by occupying the whole social and verbal spaces Take the construction of an „us‟ versus a „them‟, they are used as a central mechanism for expressing political identities (De Fina, 1995; van Dijk, 2010; Wilson, 1990), which are used as a strategy to gain more support and fight back rivals Now come back to the term positioning, it was used to describe the process through which discourse constrains identities (Fairclough, 1992b) Davie and Harre(1990, p 47) defined the term as „the discursive production of a diversity of selves.‟ In their definition, identities are plural as a result of the kinds of social situations and discursive practices in which they are constructed

However, in a monological talk, De Fina (2011, p 273) argued that „not all identities can be easily negotiated as social agents are involved in power relations that may allow some to have a voice while denying this basic right to others.‟ She went on to conclude that in the case people and groups will be positioned into roles that they cannot easily refute or in some ways, they are willing to behold Her conclusion goes in line with Briggs‟s (2007) study that These ideological associations, in their turn, may affect the roles and the actions of the people involved

Identities are socially constructed, negotiated in many different ways When a person claims to be a „politician‟, „a good student‟, or „a fan of Elton John‟, that person is directly embracing an identity Thus, identities can be directly or indirectly discussed, focused upon or symbolically conveyed Take back the claim above as a „good father‟, that person lays out and negotiates the criteria for a member of a „good father‟ category As in the example of Hillary Clinton‟s Concession Speech, a great deal of identity work can be done through meaning associations Sounds, words, expressions of a language and styles are continuously associated with qualities, ideas, situations, social presentations, and entire ideological systems (2011) The process of meaning and symbol creation within accepted social meanings, which, vice versa, modify them, are called indexicality

The term indexicality owes its introduction to Silverstein (1976), who argued that the term comes into use referring to the establishment of semiotic links between linguistic deployments and social meanings As Buchotlz and Hall (2005, p 594) state that indexicality can be processed and located in all linguistics levels:

Identity relations emerge in interaction through several related indexical processes, including: (a) overt mention of identity categories and labels; (b) implicatures and presuppositions regarding one„s own or others„ identity position; (c) displayed evaluative and epistemic orientations to ongoing talk, as well as interactional footings and participant roles; and (d) the use of linguistic structures and systems that are ideologically associated with specific personas and groups (Buchotlz and Hall, 2005, p 594)

Take the use of „guy‟ by one person to address another may index a close relationship between them Looking at a bigger picture, wording, accents and expressions using may be associated with a group with certain traits, ideas, activities and properties to construct social identities Take a local example of the pronunciation of „l‟ instead of „n‟ by some Hanoians, it is associated with a stiff persona or with regional identity Hall (1997) found out in his study that the use of premodifier and adjectives are used to construct the identity of hijra in India Liang (Liang) revealed that gays and lesbians use implicature to avoid letting hostile reactions from listeners

This principle lies in the relation between social meaning and available identity positions and social actors and in the idea that identity relations need to be solely investigated in terms of sameness and difference Bucholtz and Hall (2004,

2005) propose three pairs of identity relations in the construction of identity; however, they suggest that the distinction between the concepts is done for the purposes of exposition and not intended to frame a view of identity processes as mutually exclusive, on the other hand, two or three of them may overlap or emerge with each other The first pair: adequation and distinction are provided as a means of marking the divergence from the traditional view of identity as similar or different They add the term adequation „emphasizes the fact that in order for groups or individuals to be positioned as alike, they need not – and in any case cannot – be identical, but must merely be understood as sufficiently similar for current interactional purposes‟ (Bucholtz& Hall, 2005, p 599) It is here to say

„differences irrelevant or damaging to ongoing efforts to adequate two people or groups will be downplayed, and similarities viewed as salient to and supportive of the immediate project of identity work will be foregrounded‟ (Bucholtz& Hall,

2005, p 599) The idea of distinction originates from Bourdieu (1984), who viewed it as the reference to the result of difference based on social class by bourgeoisie member However, Bucholtz and Hall (2005) introduce it with more broad meaning including any process of social differentiation The second pair: authentication and denaturalization as Bucholtz and Hall (2005) state are the processes by which speakers make claims to realness and artifice, respectively

The term authentication discerns the analysis of how identities are verified in discourse, meanwhile the term denaturalization emphasizes the ways in which

„assumptions regarding the seamlessness of identity can be disrupted‟ (Bucholtz&

Hall, 2005, p 603) The third and last pair of relations is authorization and illegitimation The former term means „the affirmation or imposition of an identity through structures of institutionalized power and ideology, whether local or translocal (Bucholtz& Hall, 2005, p 603), the later works with how identities are dismissed, criticized, or rejected by the aforementioned structures (Moustafa, 2015)

In this sense, the speakers can form different identities in their discourse by assuming different degrees of authorship and responsibility for what they are saying For example, in a monologic speech, the speaker will normally stay on behalf of the author to separate his or her identity from that of the out-group In some way, this speaker can erase his or her identity without being interfered and construct a new identity belonging to his or her group or he or she may want to mock the rival‟s identity as a way to deflect authorization and responsibility

The fifth tool named by Bucholtz and Hall (2005) is partialness Visweswaran

Discussion of Validity and Reliability

Reliability in this present study lies with the inclusive of the deviant cases and use of tables in the findings which were extracted from the original data On the other hand, the validity lies in the parameters used to answer the research questions

Starting from micro-level of text to analyze linguistic devices used in the data using an interdisciplinary approach; at meso-level, context and interaction are analyzed to reveal who are involved and what genre the text instantiates and what identities are discursively constructed; at the macro-level, social factors are analyzed to see the impact on the text and discourse practice This model is equivalent to Fairclough‟s framework for critical discourse analysis of communication event (see Figure 1 and Figure 2) Marchi and Taylor(2009) argue that CDA‟s qualitative approach, provides an entry into the data and offers powerful explanations, grounded in its rich theoretical framework and in its interdisciplinary nature Moreover, it contributes to the validity of research and offers a situated point of view On discussing the triangulation in research, Baker (2014, p 16) states „it facilitates validity checks of hypotheses, it anchors findings in more robust interpretations and explanations, and it allows researchers to respond flexibly to unforeseen problems and aspects of their research.‟

The validity of the findings is identified through the following steps (Saldaủa, 2015, pp 9-15):

Figure 5: Coding as a cyclical act in qualitative inquiry

Categories to theoryConcrete data

This qualitative case study is built on the speech Hillary Clinton delivered on

2 June, 2015 on her campaign to the White House In this chapter, the findings are analyzed accordingly with van Leeuwen‟s(1996) representation of social actors and language styles proposed by Fairclough(2003) In critical discourse analysis, understanding of the context of the phenomena under study is vital to the explanations of the findings Therefore, information on the bounded case, Clinton‟s speech, and the background of the Presidential General Election 2016 was integrated in Chapter 3 to help explain the findings explicitly The findings seek to answer the hypothesis proposed at the end of Chapter 2 That is to picture the identity construction in the discourse, to describe the language employed and explain the purposes of such moves through social grouping, transitivity in SFG, modality, intertextuality and interdiscursivity

This chapter represents the findings of the study qualitatively and quantitatively that are relevant to the research questions Section 4.1 explains the social group struggles and collective identity Section 4.2 represents personal identity forming in discourse This chapter also depicts the explanation of what the findings mean, represents the evidence in support of the findings and references back to details of methodology and background of the study as well as references forward to discussion of the results.

Social Group Struggles and Collective Identity

Social grouping

The analysis at micro level of the data reveals that the main social actors represented in the text are „I‟ as Hillary Clinton („I wrestled with the Chinese over climate change.‟), „he‟ as Donald Trump („he is temperamentally unfit to hold an office.‟), „we‟ as American people („we observed Memorial Day – a day that‟), specific „you‟ as the people present at the campaign ground or watching/listening to her speech („thank you so much, thank you San Diego‟), specific „you‟ as Donald Trump („you insult American Muslims or Mexican immigrants‟, „you blow up a golf-course deal‟), generic „you‟ as American people („you know what,‟ „I love this country and you do too‟), the use of anaphoric „they‟/‟them‟ mostly referring to

„American ally‟ („they‟re our closest ally in the region‟) or terrorists (ISIS) („they strike us at home‟), Russia, North Korea, China, or Iran, noticeably there are cases when „they‟ is not a social actor („they‟re not even really ideas‟), other social actors included are personalized such as President Obama, America, Pakistan and so forth

The analysis at macro level of socio-political context shows that „I‟/Hillary Clinton, „we‟, Obama and American allies belong to the in-group, on the other hand, „he‟/Donald Trump, terrorists (ISIS and al Qaeda), China, Russia, North Korea and Iran belong to out-group Let‟s recall this the struggle of us/them (De Fina, 1995; Koller, 2012; van Dijk, 2010; Wilson, 1990).

Exclusion

The analysis at micro level of text shows that the positioning of us/them categorization here is sometimes opaque This is the case of exclusion (van Leeuwen, 1996) See Appendix 1 for the full analysis of the representation of social actors at textual level Included social actors are underlined and italicized

Suppressed exclusions are bolded and italicized, meanwhile, backgrounding exclusions are bolded

The most common suppression found is processes when Hillary Clinton uses adjectives to legitimize her voices Interestingly, most of the adjectives are negative of the out-group social actors: fearful, less secure, less engaged, bizarre, wrong, nasty, and painful

She said „during the raid to kill bin Laden …‟ the context can tell that the suppressed exclusionof social actor here can be America or American military and certainly her role in the raid when she said „I remember being in the Situation Room with President Obama, debating the potential Bin Laden operation.‟ In sentence:

„Making the right calltakesa cool head and respect for facts ’, the exclusion can be the President or the commander-in-chief In another case, she said „that we want to let others determine our future for us, instead of shaping our own destiny‟,the exclusion can be American people or „she‟ In these cases, readers or listeners may be assumed to know the agents already so that more detailed reference would be overcommunicative or in this sentence: „And defeating global terrorist networks and protecting the homeland takes more than empty talk and a handful of slogans‟,

Hillary Clinton strategically used the assumptions of American strength to defeat global terrorist networks and protect the homeland to denote her role, her strength when comparing Donald Trump‟s empty talk and a handful of slogans to her plans

Backgrounding in Hillary Clinton‟s speech are cases of non-finite clauses with –ing and paratactic clauses: For example, she said „We honor the sacrifice of those who died for our country in many ways - by living our values, by making this a stronger and fairer nation, and by carrying out a smart and principled foreign policy.‟ or she stated that „I wrestled with the Chinese over a climate deal in Copenhagen, brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, negotiated the reduction of nuclear weapons with Russia, twisted arms to bring the world together in global sanctions against Iran, and stood up for the rights of women, religious minorities and LGBT people around the world

In 20 cases of backgrounding, the main backgrounded social actor is Donald Trump with 11 cases In which, she legitimized her voice that „Letting ISIS run wild Launching a nuclear attack Starting a ground wa r These are all distinct possibilities with Donald Trump in charge.‟ And she went on „Now imagine Donald Trump sitting in the Situation Room, making life-or-death decisions on behalf of the United States.‟

It is here to say Hillary Clinton made socially significant choices in the representation of social actors There may be many motivations for exclusion, such as redundancy or irrelevance, however, in this case, Hillary socially and politically use exclusion for two main reasons: first, to legitimize, de-emphasize or understate the out-group, second, to unfreeze and frame the values, beliefs, then share them among the in-group.

Activation and passivation

Figure 6: Activation and passivation of social actors

Leaving aside aspects of the representation of social actors which are excluded (e.g in „So then what? War? Telling the world, good luck…‟) and possessivation in circumstances (e.g in „Beijing dumps cheap steel in our markets‟) Social actors are categorized into in-group and out-group, in which the active role is mostly given to the in-group accounting for 32% In-group social actors actively take charge of serving the country („I had the honor of representing America abroad and …‟), keeping equality („America stands up to countries that treat women like animals…‟), protecting the country („Our troops give their all‟), and most importantly the in-group social actor is the right person to be the Commander-in-chief („We‟re choosing our next commander-in-chief.‟) The analysis also reveals that most of the in-group activation, which accounts for 31%, occurs when social actor „I‟ or „we‟ occupy as the dynamic force in the activity

Activation SubjectivationBeneficialization Linear (Activation)

Meanwhile, the in-group passivation occurs when social actors are represented as

„undergoing‟ the activity or at as being the receiving end of it („I love America‟, „I work side by side with admirals and generals …‟) Especially, there is 3% of in- group social actors who positively or negatively benefits from social activities

They are families („… and more support for our Gold Star families.‟), America („… by making this a stronger and fairer country‟), American military („… providing staging areas for our military‟), the world, immigrants, women, veterans, American workers and generic „you‟

The activation of out-group social actors accounts for 21%, in which Donald Trump, ISIS, Iran, China and Russia stand for most of the cases

Their activated role means they are represented as the active force in their activities However, they are endowed with threats (from ISIS), with temperamentally unreasoning actions by Donald Trump or harms from China and Russia The subjectivation of out-group social actors is allocated as the receiving end of in-group activity („I … offered clear strategies for how to defeat ISIS) or the link Donald Trump pursues with („he praises dictators like Vladimir Putin … Kim Yong Un…‟).

Genericization and specification

The analysis of genericizationand specification shows that there are 56 cases of generalization and there are only two cases of specification when she mentioned 1.5 billion Muslims and 112 countries she had visited Interestingly, only one out of eight cases of genericization are about the out-group, in which they were indexed as terrorists, the Chinese, dictators, tyrants, pigs, rapists, murders and supremacists

Meanwhile, the in-group was indexed as high government officers, i.e electeds, service members, National Guard and Researvists, a President, Republicans, Democrats and veterans; as disadvantaged people such as religious minorities, LGBT people, Mexican immigrants, disabled people and women

The choices between generic and specific reference is of crucial factor in the representation of social actors (van Leeuwen, 1996) It may give a sense of location and sharing(Rutherford & Angela, 1990).

Individualization and assimilation

Hillary Clinton mostly collectivized „we‟, the people of America, her supporters and her party Besides, she used other terms to denote „we‟ such as America, the American people, this country and so forth Her viral in the race, Donald Trump, on the other hand, is mostly individualized through his proper name and third person singular „he‟

Social groups with most frequently collectivized, treated as a group may signal their agreement and support Hillary Clinton mentioned and sought the endorsement in the US from governmental groups: electeds, service members, reservists, veterans, military spouses, American troops, admirals, generals, every president; also from American citizens: family members, civilians, the American people, American families; from her friends and partners, she named them; from social groups: women, religious minorities, LGBT people, disabled people, American workers; and from the world by naming: the world, allies, countries, every countries, a government, a country Especially, she collectivized Republicans and Democrats in a good manner („It would undo so much of the work that Republicans and Democrats alike have done over many decades to make America stronger and more secure.‟)

On the other hand, all the collectivized social groups attached to the out- group, to Donald Trump are negative: suspected terrorists, the Chinese, dictators, rapists, murders, tyrants, pigs, supremacists, adversary All of which are named without argumentative impressions.

Association and disassociation

There are three cases of association when electeds, service members, national guard and reservists, veterans, military spouses, family members are recognized by Hillary Clinton, the first case is when active-duty and former military and their families are associated to form a group of being honored for the sacrifice; the second case is when Hillary Clinton named her service „as Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady‟ The third case is when Hillary named high officials: our generals, our admirals, our ambassadors, and other high officials, they who Donald Trump says he doesn‟t have to listen to The fourth case is when the British prime minister, the mayor of London, the German chancellor, the president of Mexico, and the Pope are associated The two last cases of association were created to form social groups opposed to Donald Trump It is here, Hillary Clinton project the sameness and the local occasioning by means of association to maximize voter appeal on the basis of in-groups and they share the sameness among the in-group (Callero, 1985; Lipsitz, 2005)

Determination and indetermination

The analysis reveals that indetermination was used strategically when social actors are represented as unspecified, anonymous individuals or groups Hillary Clinton may treat her identity as irrelevant to the listener and reader, a kind of impersonal authority, a sense of unseen, yet powerfully felt coercive force(van Leeuwen, 1996)

1-2 This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes - because it‟s not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin

3 This is someone who has threatened to abandon our allies in NATO - the countries that work with us to root out terrorists abroad before they strike us at home

4 Those are the words my friends of someone who doesn‟t understand America or the world

5 And they‟re the words of someone who would lead us in the wrong direction

Because if you really believe America is weak - with our military, our values, our capabilities that no other country comes close to matching - then you don‟t know America

6 Do we want him making those calls - someone thin-skinned and quick to anger, who lashes out at the smallest criticism? Do we want his finger anywhere near the button?

7 Take the nuclear agreement with Iran When President Obama took office, Iran was racing toward a nuclear bomb Some called for military action But that could have ignited a broader war that could have mired our troops in another Middle Eastern conflict

8 He was wrong then, and he‟s wrong now - and you‟ve got to wonder why somebody who fundamentally has so little confidence in America, and has felt that way for at least 30 years, wants to be our President

9 … it‟s their families, their spouses, their children, and we are grateful to each and every one of them

10 He has no sense of what it takes to deal with multiple countries with competing interests and reaching a solution that everyone can get behind In fact, he is downright contemptuous of that work

Out of ten cases of indetermination, six were used to legitimize nomination of Donald Trump (1) Someone isn‟t supposed to hold the nuclear code, (2) someone threatened to abandon allies, (3) someone who doesn‟t understand America or the world (4) someone leads Americans in the wrong path, (5) someone thin-skinned and quick-tempered, (6) someone has so little confidence in America and has felt that way for decades

Differentiation is a salient strategy used in Hillary Clinton‟s speech She drew audience‟s attention to six contrastive pairs by listing them in ordinals to compare and contrast an individual social actor, Donald Trump, from Hillary Clinton and created the difference between the „self‟ and the „other‟, between the out-group and in-group.

Nominalization and categorization

The analysis of nominated social actors reveals that there are eighteen cases of semi-formal nomination with given name and surname – Donald Trump, there four cases of formal nomination – Trump or Mr Trump, and there are three cases of informal nomination with given name only – Donald Besides, there are cases when Hillary Clinton nominated Congressman Scott Peters – formal nomination, John McCain – formal nomination, President Obama (three cases)– formal nomination, Putin – formal nomination, Kim Jong Un – formal nomination, Vladimir Putin (two cases) – semi-formal nomination Of all the nominated social actors, in-group social actors are all nominated formally (5 cases - President Obama, Congressman Scot Peters, John McCain) In 29 cases of out-group nominated social actors, 23 cases of semi-formal nomination, four cases of formal nomination and three cases of informal nomination

Impersonalization

The analysis of representational choices ofimpersonalization showed that there are 30 cases of in-group spatialization and 34 cases of out-group spatialization, which are all presented in the tablebelow (See Appendix 2):

Social actors Cases Social actors Cases

America 16 ISIS 13 the world 5 Iran 5

Out-group semi-formal nomination

The cases of impersonalization were used: firstly, to background the identity and/or role of in-group social actors or to lend impersonal authority or force to an activity or quality of in-group social actors(van Leeuwen, 1996) For example, in case 1, San Diego was impersonalized to denote the officers, the at-the-ground supporters, and maybe the people Hillary Clinton met there in San Diego; secondly to add negative connotations to an activity or utterance of an out-group social actor

Take case 36, out-group social actor Beijing dumps cheap steel in the US market, which hurts American workers or Russia and Moscow has taken aggressive military action right on the doorstep of NATO.Another effect that impersonalization can have is that it promotes the similarity among Hillary Clinton‟s followers, shares identity and values with them and build a sense of completeness and assurance(Seyranian, 2014)

To sum up, this section reveals the significant differences between the in- group and the out-group through the representation of social actors These social group struggles help to form a strong collective identity for the in-group as well as form a weapon to defend itself against the out-group.

Language Styles and Personal Identity

Role allocation in process types

A total of 373 clauses were identified with the involvement of social actors, in which 220 cases of in-group involvement and 153 cases of out-group involvement and only five process types categorized by Halliday et al (2014) were found to have occurred On the whole, the material process was the most frequently used process type in Hillary Clinton‟s speech, which accounts for 40% (150 cases), followed by the mental process with the proportion of 25% (91 cases), the relational process takes 23% in total (88 cases), the verbal process takes up to 12% (42 cases), there are no cases of existential process and there are only two cases of behavioral process, which accounts for 1% The analysis of process types lets aside clauses without the representation of social actors and nominalization

Figure 9: Process frequencies with the in-group and out-group representation of social actors

The material processes were found to be the most frequently used

Li(2006)describe the material process as expressing the notion of that entity „does‟ something, including not only concrete, physical events but also abstract doing and happening The findings show that Hillary Clinton is a woman of action She tends to portray what she is doing and what she does rather than her personal reactions to what she is doing She is also the most frequent actors who possesses material process of the in-group

Also from material processes, the in-group was positioned as the defender of the United States and the world to defeat ISIS, keep America‟s security, deliver for America, wrestle with the Chinese, negotiate with Russia, deal with Iran She said:

I‟ve offered clear strategies for how to defeat ISIS, strengthen our alliances, and make sure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon

I wrestled with the Chinese over a climate deal in Copenhagen, brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, negotiated the reduction of nuclear weapons with Russia, twisted arms to bring the world together

On the contrary, the actions embedded with the out-group as something unfit or immature and even dangerous She said:

And it also matters when he makes fun of disabled people, calls women pigs, proposes banning an entire religion from our country, or plays coy with white supremacists

He is literally keeping it a secret

And it also matters when he makes fun of disabled people

Now imagine Donald Trump sitting in the Situation Room, making life-or- death decisions on behalf of the United States

The material processes were used to draw up Donald Trump as a thin-skinned child, being hopelessly unprepared and temperamentally unfit: as a child to „keep a secret,‟ „to make fun of‟ someone, „play coy with‟ someone; being unprepared and unfit as to newly „come into the scene,‟ „to bring to the table – bragging, mocking and composing nasty tweets,‟ „to have no ideas what he‟d do to stop ISIS,‟ or to have to „learn‟ something What comes to special interests here is that she used the phrase „keep it a secret‟, it is like a childish phrase in a daily conversation between people, not in a political context Or Donald Trump was positioned as a child to make fun of other people In such a move, Hillary Clinton adapted what Fairclough

(2003) called or dialogicality to construct herself as an experienced politician

Bucholtz and Hall (2005) named this as dialogism

All in all, the in-group social actors are embedded with the presence of such concrete verbs as shape, defeat, strengthen, stop, keep, choose, do, wrestle, negotiate, bring together, lead, prevail, reduce, provide, deliver, fight, respond, share, work, increase, embrace, take, begin, reach, enforce, act, deal with, stand, take out, lash up, win, send, give, put, dream, set for, face, debate, compel, meet, achieve, come, teach, protect All to act, to make American great with great foreign policy and a woman of action – a commander-in-chief to shape, to strengthen, to keep, to do, to work, to dream, to protect, to win, to lead and to prevail

Meanwhile the out-group social actors „cannot do the job,‟ are unprepared and unfit They are ascribed with concrete verbs of doing harm to the country or the world or dangerous actions against the in-group such as: take the country down, celebrate, rush, add $30 trillion to national debt, race toward a nuclear bomb, resume nuclear program, blow up a gold court, get behind, work against us, take aggressive military action, give Kim Jong Un credit, murder, recap an action movie, buy ads, play coy, learn, make life-or-death decision

Mental processes usually involve human beings‟ consciousness and thus are often viewed as somewhat subjective(Halliday et al., 2014) In Clinton‟s discourse, the mental process of wanting was utilized to raise the in-group‟s strong will and determination for a better American, in which way to behold the in-group identity:

I want to recognize and thank Congressman Scott Peters for being here, thank you very much

That‟s what I want to speak about today - the challenges we face in protecting our country, and the choice at stake in this election

That brings me to the final point I want to make today - the temperament it takes to be Commander-in-Chief

Do we want him making those calls - someone thin-skinned and quick to anger, who lashes out at the smallest criticism? Do we want his finger anywhere near the button?

Mental processeswere also utilized to share the in-group feelings and beliefs when Clinton, especially, repeatedly used the verb know and believe in her discourse, in the same sense, she raised doubt over the out-group social actors:

Because as you know so well, Americans aren‟t just electing a President in November

Because as you know so well, Americans aren‟t just electing a President in November We‟re choosing our next commander-in-chief - the person we count on to decide questions of war and peace, life and death

We all know the tools Donald Trump brings to the table - bragging, mocking, composing nasty tweets - I‟m willing to bet he‟s writing a few right now

They deserve a commander-in-chief who knows that

That‟s not the America I know and love

I love this country and I know you do too

And like many across our country and around the world, I believe the person the Republicans have nominated for President cannot do the job

He also said, „I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me.‟ You know what? I don‟t believe him

That‟s why - even if I weren‟t in this race - I‟d be doing everything I could to make sure Donald Trump never becomes President - because I believe he will take our country down a truly dangerous path

I believe in strong alliances; clarity in dealing with our rivals; and a rock- solid commitment to the values that have always made America great

And I believe with all my heart that America is an exceptional country - that we‟re still, in Lincoln‟s words, the last, best hope of earth

Let‟s resolve that we can be greater still That is what I believe in my heart

I wonder if he even realizes he‟s talking about nuclear war

I just wonder how anyone could be so wrong about who America‟s real friends are

He was wrong then, and he‟s wrong now - and you‟ve got to wonder why somebody who fundamentally has so little confidence in America, and has felt that way for at least 30 years, wants to be our President

On the contrary, mental process was employed to express the beliefs and feelings of the un-preparation and un-temperament of the out-group social actor as a danger to the US when they are ascribed to processes such as threaten, believe, treat, know, praise, jeopardize, suggest and realize, refuse, guess, insult, lash out, get American all wrong

Relational process has been found to be the third most frequently used process types Halliday et al (2014) has defined the relational process essentially as a process of Being and the relationship between two things or concepts Halliday et al (2014) also stated that in scientific writing, the relational process perhaps tended to be the most informative process Relational process is sub-categorized into attribute process and identifying relational process(Halliday et al., 2014)

A common type of relational process ascribes an attribute to an entity(Bloor

& Bloor, 2013) In this study, the relational process analysis reveals what attributes social groups are ascribed with

Hillary Clinton first activated the gratefulness of in-group social actors and American people to say:

Modality

The analysis of modality features shows that Clinton‟s discourse includes a large number of strong epistemic and deontic modalities which are realized through the use of modalizers, adverbs and verbs To have a close look at modality in the data, Wordsmith Tools 7.0 was used to generate concordance for the modalizers and words denoting levels of commitments

The first noticeable epistemic modalizer found in the text was „will‟ with N

= 19, of which 5 cases (7, 10, 13, 18, 19) were ascribed with in-group, 10 cases (1,

3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17) were ascribed with the out-group, and four cases of objective modalizers Hillary Clinton used epistemic modalizer „will‟ strategically to construct the in-group as strong, „action‟ and „hawkish‟ when she said: our militaries will run a joint drill, the United States will act decisively, I will leave it to the psychiatrist, the American people will make the right decision, and we will In the same way, she expressed judgments about the out-group as rush, chaos, trick and murder

The utilization of „would‟ was strategic with ∑N = 17 Interestingly, all of out-group, other 7 other cases indirectly describe the out-group, in which Donald Trump was ascribed with economic catastrophe, torture, wrong direction, $30 trillion of national debt, weakness, jeopardization, betrayal to ally, global crises, ISIS, historic mistake, destruction of the past, depression to the world and an ugly narrative

In all, epistemic modalities were employed strategically to construct out- group developments and to exchange information and inform the audience of the out-group ideas and project the out-group as a danger, chaos, a link to terrorism and a betrayal to American values It is here to note that the out-group was mainly ascribed with the hypothetical actions via the utilization of modalizer „would‟

The first noticeable deontic modalizer was „should‟ Clinton utilized „should‟ successfully to embed the wrong policies the out-group would behold in 8 out of 9 cases In which the out-group was convicted of the danger when she said they should not have nuclear codes, nuclear weapons, war, military withdrawal, the risk of the lives of American troops and ISIS At that points, she contrasted and made clear a high obligation of the in-group to block the path of nuclear and war (case 5)

The first thing to note here is that „must‟ was all used to express the notions of obligation of the in-group to secure America, to act, to stand the ground and be ready to war by embedding the strong obligation to the in-group, Hillary Clinton constructs the in-group as a unity and ready to be a commander-in-chief

The sort of commitment of deontic modality Clinton made here identified the out-group social actor as temperamentally unfit when he said he didn‟t have to listen to the generals; in the same way, she identified herself as a defender of an American-led world order against an insurgent who did not understand or respect the network of alliances the US constructed so far when she said „we have to be able to both stand our ground and find common ground

Figure 14: Deontic modalizer „have to‟

The analysis of deontic modality features shows that they were mainly employed to describe the in-group values and obligation on foreign policy.

Intertextuality and interdiscursivity

The analysis of intertextuality and interdiscursivity features shows interesting findings Those are the uses of different kinds of reporting and a mix of genre First, the analysis shows that Clinton used direct reporting to quote Trump‟s ideas: „a very good brain‟ – this is an irony saying to amuse Trump when he said he did not have to listen to the generals or admirals and ambassadors; in the same line, she went on to quote „I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me‟ – this second direct quotation was used to strengthen her first point above; she once again quoted „a third-world country‟ – this wording was to demote Trump and engage opposition to him; „if they do, they do Good luck, enjoy yourself, folks‟ – was quoted when Clinton referring Trump‟s ideas to nuclear weapons and a war in Japan and North Korea; „The world is laughing at us‟ – was Trump‟s idea for decades; he said „You‟ve got to give Kim Jong Un credit‟ for taking over North

Korea; and she quoted „maybe Syria should be a free zone for ISIS.‟

Second, Clinton used indirect reporting to construct Trump as temperamentally unfit to be the commander-in-chief:

He has said that he would order our military to carry out torture and murder of civilians

He says he doesn‟t have to listen to our generals or our admirals, our ambassadors and other high officials

He says climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese

He has the gall to say that prisoners of war like John McCain aren‟t heroes

He says he has foreign policy experience because he ran the Miss Universe pageant in Russia

He talks about leaving NATO, or says he‟ll stay neutral on Israel‟s security

He suggests that American should withdraw our military support for Japan

He‟s talking about nuclear war

He said it showed strength

Donald Trump says things that go against our deepest-held values

He says he‟ll order our military to murder the families of suspected terrorists

What he says would weaken our country

These lines pictured Trump as a danger, terror, torture, murder and as an unexperienced politician running a Miss Universe pageant only

Third, there were cases of free and narrative reporting in the discourse when Clinton repeatedly reported Trump‟s ideas with the verb „believe‟:

He believes we can treat the US economy like one of his casinos and default on our debts to the rest of the world

He praises dictators like Vladimir Putin and picks fights with our friends

He called our military a disaster

Rather than solving global crises, he would create new ones

He wants to start a trade war with China

He praised China for the Tiananmen Square Massacre

He has no idea what he‟d do to stop ISIS

He refused to rule out using nuclear weapons against ISIS

He makes fun of disable people, calls women pigs, proposes banning an entire religion from our country, or plays coy with white supremacists

Imagine if he had not just his Twitter account at his disposal when he‟s angry

Hilary Clinton‟s argument is that Trump has no ideas of foreign policy experience and it‟s a good reason for a conservative and American people against Trump, or a moderate, a liberal or a socialist who are against nuclear war and global crisis to vote for Hillary Clinton Her argument went for the idea that the presumptive GOP nominee for president is not to be trusted with power

The analysis of interdiscursivity shows that Hillary combines different discourses together by adding personal experience to political issues:

As a Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady, I had the honor of representing

America abroad and helping shape our foreign policy at home

Unlike him, I have some experience with the tough calls and the hard work of statecraft, I wrestled with the Chinese over a climate deal in Copenhagen, brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, negotiated the reduction of nuclear weapons with Russia, twisted arms to bring the world together in global sanctions against Iran, and stood up for the rights of women, religious minorities and LGBT people around the world

And I have, I have sat in the Situation Room and advised the President on some of the toughest choices he faced

I worked closely with our allies Japan and South Korea to respond to this threat, including by creating a missile defense system that stand ready to shoot down a North Korean warhead

I got to work leading the effort to impose crippling global sanction We brought Iran to the table We began talks And eventually, we reached an agreement that should block every path for Iran to get a nuclear weapon

The analysis indicates that Hillary Clinton used different genres in her speech First, the findings show that she used fillers, which are common feature of ordinary conversation It includes verbal fillers such as „well‟ and „you know‟ as well as pause filler such as „yes‟ For example:

What‟s Trump‟s? Well, he won‟t say

He also said, „I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me.‟ You know what? I don‟t believe him

Yes, our friends need to contribute their fair share

There is also informal or casual style in her speech This informal style is realized through lexical choices such as Clinton‟s use of idioms and phrasal verbs in her speech For example:

And to top it off, he believes America is weak

We need to lash up with our allies

The analysis has also revealed the use of ellipsis in her speech, which refer to deliberate omission of parts of speech such as subject pronouns or auxiliary verbs and verb complements For example:

So, then what? War? Telling the world, good luck, you deal with Iran?

Finally, the analysis shows that Clinton used rhetorical questions, listing and contrastive devices: For example, when talking about nuclear weapon and a future commander-in-chief, she asked:

Do we want him making those calls - someone thin-skinned and quick to anger, who lashes out at the smallest criticism? Do we want his finger anywhere near the button?

And to contrast herself with GOP presumptive nominee, she used rhetorical listing to list out six points she is different from Trump

The existence of these linguistic features indicates the intertextualproperties of the speech This mix of genre is also referred to as hybridity (Fairclough, 1995a)

This chapter provides a detailed analysis of key research findings presented in chapter 4, with reference to each of the research questions The results of the study are also discussed in relation to previous research studies The first section 5.1 discusses the discursive construction of collective identity, the linguistic devices employed and explains the purposes of such strategies Section 5.2 presents the construction of personal identity as a discursive process and traces the way language was communicated This section is a summary of the chapter.

Collective Identity

Clinton‟s discourse in the speech may be interpreted as monitored by the representation of social actors in which attitudes and ideologies of groups are polarized to form strong collective identity as a persuasive device The polarization of „us‟ versus „them‟ is clear with reference to her experience on foreign policy and Donald Trump‟s ideas It is expressed via various analytical categories including actor description, exclusion, social grouping, genericization, activation and subjection as cumulative evidence of collective identity

First, the categorization of in-group and out-group social actors was strategic in a way that attributes the in-group as positive and the out-group as negative characteristics This struggle of us/them became opaque when Hillary Clinton used suppression to legitimize her voices to ascribe the out-group with negative values as terrorism, economic crisis, nuclear war and temperamental unfitness Meanwhile the in-group was ascribed with strength, good foreign policy makers, hope and future In addition, the in-group was associated with social actors of prestige such as electeds, service member, the generals and high officials from the US government and the world such as president Obama, meanwhile, the out-group was embedded with terrorism, dictatorism and massacres What is more, the in-group was nominated more formally then the out-group, which may be interpreted as a struggle of power This is in line with Polletta and Jasper (2001) who agreed that

„unlike ideology, collective identity carries with it positive feelings for other members of the groups.‟

Second, it has been noted that the choice of how people are described in the speech is strategic The in-group was mainly collectivized as „we‟, „the US‟ or America, meanwhile the out-group was mostly individualized through proper name or third person singular „he‟ To top it off, Hillary Clinton‟s description of the out- group fell into the description of individuals or members of groups, by their actions or attributes, or by their positions and relations to other people may be interpreted as a struggle of ideology Once again, the choice was to legitimize and de- emphasize or understate the out-group This finding indicates that descriptions are never neutral and that they have semantic, rhetorical and argumentative functions in the expression of values and beliefs (van Dijk, 1998) The strategic collectivization in the speech created a sense of recognition, attachment and attachment, which form strong collective identity as Eisenstadt and Giesen (1995) defined as collective identity is shared identity

Third, the social groups were impersonalized to background the identity and lend impersonal authority or force to in-group social actors and to add negative connotations to out-group social actors (van Leeuwen, 1996) as well as to promote the similarity among the in-group in order to share identity and values with them, build a sense of completeness an assurance among them (Seyranian, 2014), which has the effect of persuading people to mobilize (Polletta & Jasper, 2001)

Fourth, the representation of in-group social actors was more active, which implied that they were the real agents of action and future As the out-group was passively represented, it could be suggested that they were not capable of keeping the American values and beliefs This finding is in line with Nejad, Shamsaddini, Pandian, and Mahfoodh (2013) when they studied the representation of George W

Bush‟s speech about Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Fifth, the analysis of process types further differentiates the model of collective identity when associating the in-group with more material processes and the out-group was embedded with more verbal processes, which may be interpreted as the in-group being qualified for the commander-in-chief, on the contrary the out- group may be interpreted as being embedded with empty talks This was made clearer with the use of modality when more deontic modalizers were used to express the in-group‟s obligations and responsibility, meanwhile the out-group was ascribed with more epistemic modalizers for information exchanging All of which may help to interpret the in-group as more politically qualified when they explicitly commit themselves to values This finding is consistent with Fairclough's (2003) conclusion about Blair‟s use of modality to identify himself „in the sort of way that politicians generally do.‟

Sixth, it has been noted that Hillary Clinton discursively used intertextuality to borrow the voice from the GOP nominee to construct the out-group as unfit for the Oval Office and let her audience infer that the out-group just says without conforming to what they do This finding is in line with that of Aisyah (2012) who agrees that Clinton uses intertextuality in her speech to deliver her thoughts without being realized by the audience

In response to the third research question of why collective identity was discursively constructed, first, Olson (2009) argued that shared interests are simply not enough to motivate individual effort in the absence of selective rewards that go only to participants However, Fireman and Garmon (1979) pointed out that „A person whose life in intertwined with the group … has a big stake in the group‟s fate When collective action is urgent, the person is likely to contribute his or her share even if the impact of that share is not noticeable.‟

Since mobilization does not always require preexisting collective identities, Seyranian (2014) proposes the model of identity framing, which goes from unfreezing, moving and freezing identities It is here to say framing is the interpretive device that activists develop to mobilize potential adherents and constituents In that sense, Polletta and Jasper (2001) confirmed that framing makes a compelling case for the injustice of the condition and the likely effectiveness of collective agency in changing that condition distinguishing „us‟ from „them‟

Beyond mobilizing, collective identity is crucial to sustaining solidarity and commitment Taylor and Whittier (1992) proves that boundary-setting rituals and institutions that separate challengers from those in power can strengthen internal solidarity It is collective identity to mobilize and sustain participation, many groups are torn between asserting a clear identity and deconstructing it (Gamson, 1995) It is here to say that Hillary Clinton used collective identity as a tactic oriented toward the supporters and strengthen the Democratic.

Personal Identity

The findings show that Clinton‟s strategic use of language allows her to control information, to position herself and others in specific relationships, and to make assumptions about realities, and to discursively construct her personal identities First, the analysis of transitivity shows that Clinton‟s speech included five processes identified by Halliday et al (2014), namely, material processes, mental processes, relational processes, verbal processes and behavioral processes

The finding indicates that the choice of material, mental and relational processes as a mechanism is strategic These processes always implied a power struggle This mechanism is evident in using material process with different kinds of speech acts related to action and decision-making of the first person singular pronoun and/or modality For example, „I wrestled with the Chinese,‟ „I got to work leading the effort to impose crippling global sanctions.‟

Many a time she used the past simple to talked about her experience as the First Lady, Senator, andthe Secretary of States This choice positions her as a woman of action This finding is in line with Abdel-Moety (2014) who asserts that Hillary Clinton‟s use of transitivity is strategic and concludes that she was a woman of action

Similarly, the choice of relational and mental processes in her speech positions her as a truthful narrator and helps to persuade her audiences of what she says For example, she said „I believe in strong alliances … and I believe with my heart that America is an exceptional country.‟

Second, the analysis of modality shows that she used a large number of strong obligational and epistemic modalities via the use of modals, adverbs and verbs Interestingly, the finding shows that these modality feature are always concerned with foreign policy and war on terrorism and nuclear weapons For example, she said „our next President must do to secure American leadership …‟ or

„we reached an agreement that should block every path for Iran to get a nuclear weapon.‟ These features of modality are significant techniques for expressing argument and opinion (Halliday et al., 2014) since they allow her to express ideas with certain degrees of certainty and to present judgement and attitudes toward what she commits herself to This finding helps to interpret that Clinton used modality as a device to constitute a strong and decisive identity This identity was discursively

„partialized‟ from her position as the First Lady, the Secretary of State and Senator

This finding is in line with (Aisyah, 2012) and (Klanicová, 2013) who also further asserts that Clinton‟s use of modality is strategic, her statements are strong, confident and emphatic Similarly, the analysis of modality indicates that modalizer

„will‟ was most frequent with 19 cases, which may be interpreted that Clinton as having a vision for the future

Third, Clinton‟s identity was discursively constructed through the use of rhetorical questions, listing and contrastive devices For example, she listed six contrastive pairs to compare and contrast between her and the GOP nominee This strategic use of linguistic devices is very effective It helps strengthens and affirms her position and argument as well as to evaluate her stance and at the same time differentiate and criticize the out-group‟s positions as unfit and thin-skinned This mechanism helps to position her as the right person to be commander-in-chief and an experienced politician as Fairclough (2003) once stated the question who we and the others are can be answered in terms of who we are not or the others are similar to or vice versa

Fourth, the analysis of interdiscursivity also reveals that Clinton combined political discourse with ordinary life In this way, she could express many of her views about issues she got concerned with such as women rights, Iranian nuclear deal, war on ISIS and economy Clinton also used similarity language as a shared interest This linguistic indetermination helps to construct her as a trustworthy and honest person This finding is consistent with Seyranian (2014) who confirms that leaders who employ similarity language will be given higher ratings of charisma, trustworthiness and persuasiveness

Fifth, the analysis of intertextuality shows that Clinton frequently referred to President Obama, Ronald Reagan and Senator John McCain as well as nominated out-group social actors This usage can be interpreted ideologically as a means of granting acceptance of what she says and categorize and „localize‟ herself as a prototypical politician

Sixth, the analysis indicates that there are various cases for the strategic use of personal pronouns Especially the use of inclusive „we‟ Most of the time „we‟ was referred to both audience and her followers as when she says „We‟re choosing our next commander – in – chief.‟ This finding is in line with Fairclough and Wodak‟s (1997) observation about Thatcher‟s employment of personal pronouns and it agrees with Melamede (1999) who states that Clinton used inclusive „we‟ strategically This choice of lexicalization helps to connect her with her audience and to make her discourse more socially accepted (Abdel-Moety, 2014) and helps to stress her similarity to followers, highlights a sense of shared experience and mutual understanding between her and her audiences, which increases liking and trust This finding is similar to that of Seyranian (2014)

This chapter has summarized the present study‟s findings, and discussed them with reference to relevant previous studies The results have answered and entwined with the research questions It is that each finding has been linked to all the three research questions

The study confirmed that Hillary Clinton discursively constructed collective identity and a series of personal identity Her use of language was strategic and it was a mechanism for the presidential campaign The study supported the claim that language can be a weapon and Hillary Clinton‟s speech was a sharp shot in the election Such mechanism can be acquired through the strategic use of social actor representation and language styles The findings seemed to have a strong influence on her campaign and at the time most of the Americans thought of her possible soon winning

To conclude, Hillary Clinton strategically represented social actors, transitivized the processes, employed modality and intertextuality in her speech

Via such mechanisms, she constructed collective and personal identity as a product to communicate in the presidential campaign Identity was first employed as a weapon for the following purposes: (1) to activate mobilization She emphasized the out-group‟s prblems and uncertainties and cultivate a perceived need for social change by the way she outlined the negative consequences that await if the out-group social actor becomes a commander-in-chief At the same time, so as to accentuate the out-group problems, she saught to build a sense of close relationship with the in-group (intimacy), legitimacy and personal quality in her followers‟ eyes;(2) to promote follower identitfication with the in-group and recruit them to support her; (3) to promote similarity, share beliefs and values among the in-groups, and insodoing, she could strengthen the in-group identity

Her discursive construction of identity is well presented in the following figure

Figure 15: Discursive construction of identity

Identity as a product  Presenting social actors

To top it off, Hillary Clinton successfully constructed her collective and personal identity in discourse She trategically deployed language machenisms of representing social actors, transitivitizing, modalizing and intertextualizing She constructed her identity as a weapon to activate the support for her, recruit more followers and strengthen the in-group identity and unity, as well as to promote her prototypicality of leadership

Summary of the Findings

Language is powerful It can be used to offend, to hurt and to threaten people Some words are like weapons, like bullets, and some others are like poison and they can go slowly or quickly into the mind, control the mind and activate a lethal semantics and pragmatics Thinking of language as a fundamental way to project and interpret reality, we see the struggle of power and ideology at all levels of it starting from the choice of language, the manipulation of language to the impact of language upon society To top it off, it is language that is central to the construction and negotiation of identity (De Fina, 2011), identity becomes a weapon

In her speech, Hillary Clinton strategically constructed identity

Collective identitywas formed to describe concrete as well as imagined communities, and to involve sharing and construction as well as the discovery of preexisting bonds, interests of the in-group She discursively constructed strong collective identity in the struggle of power and ideology between the in-group and out-group, which were discovered in the employment of transitivity, modality, intertextuality and interdiscursivity „How successfully groups frame their identities for the public thus affects their ability to recruit members and supporters, gain a public hearing, make alliances with other groups and defuse opposition‟(Polletta &

Jasper, 2001, 295).Ideological associations may affect the roles and the actions of people involved (Briggs, 2007)or when groups are positioned into roles that they cannot easily refute, they may not have a voice to deny this basic right to others(De Fina, 2011) It is in this sense, Hillary Clinton first self-referenced her personal experience to her political discourse, she used similarity language and inclusive language to unfreeze and activate social grouping Then, she talked about positive in-group identity, she used imagery visions the out-group would create and projected out-group‟s negative values to move social grouping Finally, she used inclusive language and modality to project future visions the in-group could make, she used more of material processes and she cemented positive in-group identity to freeze the social grouping to support her in the election It is here she could strengthen the in-group identity

In the same move, Hillary Clinton‟s language styles helped to discursively construct her personal identity as perceived prototypical leadership She employed transitivity as a mechanism to position herself as a woman of action – a commander – in – chief, a truthful narrator Her use of modality allowed her to construct herself as a strong and decisive, have-a-vision leader Her employment of rhetorical, listing and contrastive devices also helped to position herself as an experienced politician – a strong and determined commander Her utilization of intertextuality and interdiscursivity helps to project Hillary Clinton as a charismatic, trustworthy and persuasive politician Last but not least, her employment of inclusive language helped to construct herself as a person of liking and trust At the heart of the figure, Hillary Clinton discursively constructed her identity as a weapon to build up her credibility to increase her perceived prototypicality, help to arouse positive emotional reactions in the audience, which are associated with social change – a political device

From the view that discourse creates identity when social actors use discourse to make sense of who they are or are not (Howarth, 2000) We see the power- knowledge relations within discourse in which identity is formed and communicated This study once again confirmed that discourse as a political practice establishes, sustains and changes power relations, and the collective entities between social groups (Fairclough, 1992b, p 67); that social actors can occupy a discursive space to construct personal identity between or among discourses (Fairclough, 1992b, 1995b); that identity is a tool, a weapon in which individuals or groups present and construct themselves to the world (Owens, 2006); and that identity is a product of social interactions, which is central to social constructivism (De Fina et al., 2006), discourse as social interaction constitutes, naturalizes, sustains and changes significations of the world (Fairclough, 1992b) for political purposes from recruiting support, activating social change, to strengthening in- group identity The social interactions are interlinked in the following figure:

Figure 16: Interconnectedness of levels of identity analysis

Socio-political practice (Macro- level)

Intra-textual practice (Micro-level)

At the intra-textual level, the immediate and local impacts of linguistic choices within the same text are considered This level helps to explicate the findings of textual analysis and contributes to the understanding of the discursive strategies among texts, genres and discourses Discursive practice looks at the construction of identity in the development of the discourse and in a given society

The broadest level helps to explicate the possible interpretations and linkage between the present discourse and socio-political context or „public sphere‟

This present study has systematized the interconnectedness of various micro/macro levels in attempt to synthesize the methodologies and linguistic categories employed in various CDA studies on identity construction However, there will be a need for research to move between levels of linguistic and contextual analysis to reveal the socio-political memory of the targeted audience.

Implications of the Study

These study findings shed light on the relevant of literatures and offer a number of both theoretical and practical implications From theoretical perspective, this present study provides further understanding of identity Identity can be understood as a product of language, a self-construal device From this point of view, identity may a weapon to shape the way people create, manage social groups, to position and develop their prototypicality among others and mobilize them Therefore, identity construction is a discursive strategy Projecting or rejecting identity is a social product rather than a given entities what one has

In particular, the knowledge of identity construction in a presidential campaign may fulfil the gap of the relevant literature, in which identity is manipulated to construct reality and serve as a weapon to run for president

As such, this present study also provesto the literature that critical discourse analysis as an interdisciplinary approach can be used to analyze the discursive construction of identity Fairclough‟s (1989) critical discourse analysis is employed syntheticallyin the combination of social actors representation, process types, modality and intertextuality and interdiscursivity Identity was revealed in the manipulation of language, a strategy-led social product

From practical perspective, the results are helpful to promote the realization of communicative purposes The present research findings may provide a pedagogical move Firstly, the thesis, through the analysis of identity construction as a discursive work, helps to deepen teachers and learners‟ awareness of the linguistic strategies in an American presidential campaign speech, and helps to provide some guidance for successful communication in English language in different social relationships between text and reader, student and teacher, classroom and community, local and transregional sites

Secondly, it helps raise teachers‟ awareness of the importance of identity in communication in general and in English instruction in particular This present study may provide students and teachers with the picture of identity from personal identity to collective identity, which enable them to think of their own English It is because when we learn a new language, we turn ourselves into a new language identity Thirdly, the present study is of great benefits to speech writers and campaign speech writers.Last but not least, the findings may help readers to construct identity strategically for different purposes in discourse for successful communication.

Limitations and Further Research

The most obvious limitation in this research was that it was a case study with small sample of data, a limitation that prevented the generalization of the findings

We may never know whether the case we have investigated is representative of the wider body of similar instances The present study was further limited when the findings are based on the analysis of qualitative data, which depends on the interpretation of the author i.e the analysis of in-group and out-group social actors are not tenable and exhaustive, it is arbitrary

Further research could proceed in two directions:First, the data should be analyzed from different approaches and there should be more data to study in the light of the present approach to generalize and validate the findings Secondly, further research could examine the discursive construction of identity in Vietnamese to make a comparative study in order to deepen and enhance the findings of the research Additional research is also needed to investigate the construction of different identities in the data, especially the issue of gender and sexism

Abdel-Moety, D M (2014) American Political Discourse as Manifested in

Hillary Clinton's Interviews: A Critical Approach English Linguistics

Abrams, D., Randsley de Moura, G., Marques, J M., & Hutchison, P (2008)

Innovation credit: When can leaders oppose their group's norms?

Journal of personality and social psychology, 95(3), 662-678

Aisyah, S S (2012) Expression of Modality and Evaluation in Hillary

Cliton‟s Speech (Doctoral thesis), Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia,

Retrieved from http://repository.upi.edu/id/eprint/10136 Anderson, K V (2002) From spouses to candidates: Hillary Rodham

Clinton, Elizabeth Dole, and the gendered office of US president

Anonymous (2015, March 27th) Distrust and verify The Economist

Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and- africa/21647476-unless-iran-shows-signs-accepting-rigorous- inspection-regime-negotiators-will-find

Antaki, C., & Widdicombe, S (1998) Identities in talk London, Thousand

Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications

Auer, P (2013) Code-switching in conversation: Language, interaction and identity London, New York: Routledge

Baker, P (2014) Using corpora to analyze gender London, New Delhi, New

Bamberg, M., De Fina, A., & Schiffrin, D (2011) Discourse and identity construction In S J Schwartz, K Luyckx, & V L Vignoles (Eds.),

Handbook of identity theory and research (pp 177-199) New York,

Barker, C., & Galasiski, D (2003) Cultural Studies and Discourse Analysis:

A dialogue on Language and Identity London, Thousand Oaks, New

Bartesaghi, M (2015) Intertextuality In K Tracy, C Ilie, & T Sandel

(Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social

Interaction Oxford, Massachusetts: Wiley Blackwell

Bartesaghi, M., & Noy, C (2015) Interdiscursivity In K Tracy, C Ilie, & T

Sandel (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social

Interaction (Vol 1) Oxford, Massachusetts: Wiley Blackwell

Benwell, B., & Stokoe, E (2006) Discourse and identity Edinburgh:

Black, A M (2013) The first ladies of the United States of America

Washington DC: White House Historical Association

Bligh, M., Merolla, J., Schroedel, J R., & Gonzalez, R (2010) Finding her voice: Hillary Clinton's rhetoric in the 2008 presidential campaign

Bloom, W (1993) Personal identity, national identity and international relations (Vol 9) Cambridge, New York, Victoria: Cambridge

Bloor, T., & Bloor, M (2013) The functional analysis of English London,

Blumenthal, K (2016) Hillary Rodham Clinton: A Woman Living History

(1st ed.) New York: Feiwel & Friends

Bond, A H (2015) Hillary Rodham Clinton: On The Couch: Inside the Mind and Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton Baltimore: Bancroft Press

Booth, W J (1999) Communities of memory: On identity, memory, and debt American political science review, 93(2), 249-263

Bourdieu, P (1977) Outline of a Theory of Practice (R Nice, Trans.)

Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, Sao Paulo, New Delhi, Mexico City: Cambridge University Press

Briggs, C L (2007) Mediating infanticide: Theorizing relations between narrative and violence Cultural Anthropology, 22(3), 315-356

Brubaker, R., & Cooper, F (2000) Beyond “identity” Theory and society,

Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K (2004) Language and Identity In A Duranti (Ed.),

A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology (pp 369-394) Oxford:

Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K (2005) Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach Discourse studies, 7(4-5), 585-614

Burns, A (2012, 08 November) Exclusive: Clinton would dominate 2016

Iowa causcuses, PPP shows Politico Retrieved from http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/11/exclusive- clinton-would-dominate-2016-iowa-caucuses-ppp-shows-149064 Butler, J (2011) Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity

Butt, D G., Lukin, A., & Matthiessen, C M (2004) Grammar–the first covert operation of war Discourse & Society, 15(2-3), 267-290

Callero, P L (1985) Role-identity salience Social Psychology Quarterly,

Campbell, K K (1998) The discursive performance of femininity: Hating

Castells, M (2011) The Power of Identity: The Information Age: Economy,

Society, and Culture (2nd ed Vol 2) Massachusetts, Oxford: Wiley-

Cerulo, K A (1997) Identity construction: New issues, new directions

Chouliaraki, L (2004) Watching 11 September: the politics of pity

Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N (1999) Discourse in late modernity:

Rethinking critical discourse analysis Edinburgh: Edinburgh

Chun, E W (2001) The construction of white, black, and Korean American identities through African American Vernacular English Journal of

Coupland, N (2008) The delicate constitution of identity in face-to-face accommodation: A response to Trudgill Language in Society, 37(2), 267-270

Covaleski, M A., Dirsmith, M W., Heian, J B., & Samuel, S (1998) The calculated and the avowed: Techniques of discipline and struggles over identity in Big Six public accounting firms Administrative Science

Crotty, M (1998) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and perspective in the research process London, Thousand Oaks, New

Davies, B., & Harré, R (1990) Positioning: The discursive production of selves Journal for the theory of social behaviour, 20(1), 43-63

De Fina, A (1995) Pronominal choice, identity, and solidarity in political discourse Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse,

De Fina, A (2003) Identity in narrative: A study of immigrant discourse

(Vol 3) Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company

De Fina, A (2011) Discourse and Identity In T A van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse studies: A multidsiciplinary Introduction (2nd ed.) London, Thousand

Oaks, New Delhi, Singapore: Sage Publications

De Fina, A., Schiffrin, D., & Bamberg, M (2006) Discourse and identity:

Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics (Vol 23) Cambridge, New

York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Tơn, Singapore, Sao Paulo:

Deaux, K (2007) Social Identification In E T Higgins & A W Kruglanski

(Eds.), Social psychology: Hanbook of Basic Principles (2nd ed., pp

777-798) New York, London: The Guilford Press del-Teso-Craviotto, M (2006) Words that matter: Lexical choice and gender ideologies in women's magazines Journal of pragmatics, 38(11), 2003-

Deppermann, A (2007) Playing With the voice of the other: Stylized

Kanaksprak In P Auer (Ed.), Style and social identities: Alternative approaches to linguistic heterogeneity (Vol 18, pp 325-360) Berlin,

New York: Walter de Gruyter

Dixon, J., & Durrheim, K (2000) Displacing place‐identity: a discursive approach to locating self and other British journal of social psychology, 39(1), 27-44

Du Gay, P (1996) Consumption and identity at work London, Thousand

Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications

Dunmire, P L (2008) The rhetoric of temporality: The future as linguistic construct and rhetorical resource Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John

Duranti, A (2004) Agency in language In A Duranti (Ed.), A Companion to

Linguistic Anthropology (pp 451-473) Oxford: Blackwell

Duszak, A (2002) Us and others: Social identities across languages, discourses and cultures Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins

Eisenstadt, S N., & Giesen, B (1995) The construction of collective identity

Erikson, E H (1980) The problem of ego identity In Identity and the Life

Cycle (pp 108-176) New York, London: W W Norton & Company

Esfandiary, D., & Finaud, M (2016, April) The Iran Nuclear Deal: Distrust and Verify GCSP (Geneva Center for Security Policy) Retrieved from http://www.gcsp.ch/News-Knowledge/Publications/The-Iran-Nuclear- Deal-Distrust-and-Verify

Fairclough, N (1989) Language and power London, New York: Longman

Fairclough, N (1992a) Critical Language Awareness London, New York:

Fairclough, N (1992b) Discourse and social change Cambridge: Polity

Fairclough, N (1995a) Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language London, New York: Longman

Fairclough, N (1995b) Media discourse London: Edward Arnold

Fairclough, N (2000) New Labour, new language? London, New York:

Fairclough, N (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social

Research London; New York: Routledge

Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R (1997) Critical Discourse Analysis In T A van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (Vol 2, pp 258-284) London, New

Farhi, F (2014, November 12) Distrust and Verify: Why Iranian President

Hassan Rouhani‟s obstacles to a nuclear deal are surprisingly similar to President Obama‟s American Foreign Policy Project Retrieved from http://americanforeignpolicy.org/distrust-and-verify/

Fireman, B., & Garmon, W A (1979) Utilitarian logic in the resource mobilization perspective In M N Zald & J D McCarthy (Eds.), The

Dynamics of Social Movements: Resource Mobilization, Social Control, and Tactics (pp 8-44) Cambridge, Massachusetts: Winthrop

Fowler, R (2013) Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the

Press London, New York: Routledge

Fowler, R., Hodge, R., Kress, G., & Trew, T (1979) Language and Control

London: Routledge and Kegan Paul

Galston, W A (2015, September 9th) Hillary Clinton on the Iran nuclear deal: „Distrust and verify‟ The Brookings Institution Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/blog/markaz/2015/09/09/hillary-clinton-on- the-iran-nuclear-deal-distrust-and-verify/

Gamson, J (1995) Must identity movements self-destruct? A queer dilemma

Garfinkel, H (2005) Ethnomethodological Studies of Work: Studies in

Ethnomethology London, New York: Routledge

Garsten, C., & Grey, C (1997) How to become oneself: Discourses of subjectivity in postbureaucratic organizations Organization, 4(2), 211-

Gergen, K J (2015) An invitation to social construction (3rd ed.) Los

Gervais, S J., & Hillard, A L (2011) A role congruity perspective on prejudice toward Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin Analyses of Social

Geschiere, P., & Meyer, B (1998) Globalization and Identity: Dialectics of flow and closure Introduction Development and change, 29(4), 601-

Giddens, A (1991) Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age Cambridge: Polity Press

Goffman, E (1967) Interactional ritual New York: Ankor Books

Goffman, E (1981) Forms of talk Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania

Hall, S (1997) Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (Vol 2) London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications

Hall, S., & Du Gay, P (1996) Questions of Cultural Identity London,

Hall, S., & Gieben, B (1992) Formations of modernity Cambridge: Polity

Halliday, M., Matthiessen, C M., & Matthiessen, C (2014) An Introduction to Functional Grammar (4th ed.) London, New York: Routledge

Hardy, C., Lawrence, T B., & Grant, D (2005) Discourse and collaboration:

The role of conversations and collective identity Academy of management review, 30(1), 58-77

Hardy, C., & Phillips, N (2004) Discourse and power In D Grant, C Hardy,

C Oswick, & L Putnam (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp 299-316)

Hatch, M J., & Schultz, M (2002) The dynamics of organizational identity

Hodge, R., Hodge, R I V., & Kress, G R (1988) Social semiotics New

Hodge, R., & Kress, G (1993) Language as Ideology (2nd ed.) London,

Hogg, M A., & Abrams, D (1999) Social identity and social cognition:

Historical background and current trends Oxford, Massachusetts:

Hornsey, M J., Blackwood, L., & O‟brien, A (2005) Speaking for others:

The pros and cons of group advocates using collective language Group

Howarth, D (2000) Introducing discourse theory and political analysis

James, W (1890) The principles of psychology New York: Henry Holt and

Jones, F L (1997) Ethnic diversity and national identity The Australian and

New Zealand journal of sociology, 33(3), 285-305

Ju, L (2011) The Construction of Identity in American President‟s School

Speech: A Case Study (Master‟s thesis), Nanjing University, China

Retrieved from http://www.cxrlinguistics.com/UploadFile/201191991336211.doc Kaplan, T (2016, May 4th) John Kasich Suspends Campaign for President

New York Times Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/05/us/politics/john- kasich.html?mcubz=0

Klanicová, E (2013) Genre analysis of TV interview based on gender differences (Master‟s thesis), Masaryk University, Retrieved from https://is.muni.cz/th/210318/ff_m/DT_final_version.pdf Koller, V (2012) How to Analyse Collective Identity in Discourse-Textual and Contextual Parameters Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines, 5(2), 19-38

Kroskrity, P V (1993) Language, history, and identity: Ethnolinguistic studies of the Arizona Tewa Tucson: University of Arizona Press

Kroskrity, P V (1999) Identity Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 9(1/2),

Labov, W (1972) Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular (Vol 3) Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press

Laitin, D D (1998) Identity in formation: The Russian-speaking populations in the near abroad Ithaca: Cornell University Press

Lechner, F J (2012) The Netherlands: Globalization and national identity

Li, M X (2006) Funtional Grammar: A Course Book Beijing: Foreign

Liang, A C (1999) Conversationally Implicating Lesbian and Gay Identity

In M Bucholtz, A C Liang, & S L A (Eds.), Reinventing identities (pp 293-310) New York: Oxford University Press

Lipsitz, G (2005) The possessive investment in whiteness In R P S (Ed.),

White privilege: Essential readings on the other side of racism (pp 67-

Machin, D., & Thornborrow, J (2003) Branding and discourse: The case of

Marchi, A., & Taylor, C (2009) If on a winter‟s night two researchers…: a challenge to assumptions of soundness of interpretation CADAAD

Journal [Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines], 3(1), 1-20

Marcia, J E (1980) Identity in adolescence In J Adelson (Ed.), Handbook of adolescent psychology (pp 159-187) New York: John Wiley

Mark, L., & Helene, C (2010, March 18th) After a Bitter Campaign, Forging an Alliance The New York Times Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/19/us/politics/19policy.html Markus, H., & Nurius, P (1986) Possible selves American psychologist,

Martin, R., & Wodak, R (2005) Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of racism and anti-Semitism New York: Routledge

McAdams, D P (2003) Identity and the life story In R Fivush & C Haden

(Eds.), Autobiographical memory and the construction of a narrative self: Developmental and cultural perspectives (Vol 9, pp 187-207)

McCarthey, S J., & Moje, E B (2002) Identity matters Reading research quarterly, 37(2), 228-238

McDermott, M L (1998) Race and gender cues in low-information elections Political Research Quarterly, 51(4), 895-918

Mead, G H (1934) Mind, self and society Chicago: University of Chicago

Melamede, V (1999) Hillary Clinton: Strategies and Goals Rhetoric of

Impeachment Retrieved from http://debate.uvm.edu/impeachment/melamede.html Meyer, M (2001) Between theory, method, and politics: positioning of the approaches to CDA London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage

Miller, D (2005) Citizenship and national identity Cambridge, UK: Polity

Moustafa, B S M (2015) Linguistic gender identity construction in political discourse: a corpus-assisted analysis of the primary speeches of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton (Doctoral dissertation), Johannes

Gutenberg University of Mainz, Tanta, Egypt Retrieved from https://publications.ub.uni- mainz.de/theses/volltexte/2015/4031/pdf/4031.pdf Mumby, D K (2001) Power and politics Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Mumby, D K., & Clair, R P (1997) Organizational discourse In T A van

Dijk (Ed.), Discourse Studies: Discourse as social interaction (Vol 2, pp 181-205) London: Sage

Mumby, D K., & Stohl, C (1991) Power and discourse in organization studies: Absence and the dialectic of control Discourse & Society,

(2013) The Representation of a Presidential Speech: A Critical Discourse Analysis The Iranian EFL Journal, 9(2), 167-179

Ochs, E (1993) Constructing social identity: A language socialization perspective Research on language and social interaction, 26(3), 287-

Olson, M (2009) The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups (Vol 124) Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University

Owens, T J (2006) Self and identity In J Delameter (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp 205-232) New York: Springer

Pavlenko, A., & Blackledge, A (2004) Negotiation of identities in multilingual contexts (Vol 45) Clevedon, Sydney, Toronto, Buffalo:

Plutzer, E., & Zipp, J F (1996) Identity politics, partisanship, and voting for women candidates Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(1), 30-57

Polletta, F., & Jasper, J M (2001) Collective identity and social movements

Potter, J (2003) Discursive psychology: Between method and paradigm

Radcliffe, D (2009) Hillary Rodham Clinton: The Evolution of a First Lady

New York: Warner Books, Inc

Reed, M (1998) Organizational Analysis as Discourse Analysis London,

Thousand Oaks, CA, New Delhi: Sage

Rimskii, V (2011) The influence of the Internet on active social involvement and the formation and development of identities Russian Social

Rutherford, J., & Angela, F (1990) Identity: Community, culture, difference

Salama, A H (2012) The rhetoric of collocational, intertextual and institutional pluralization in Obama's Cairo speech: a discourse- analytical approach Critical Discourse Studies, 9(3), 211-229

Saldaủa, J (2015) The coding manual for qualitative researchers London,

Schaffner, C (1996) Political speeches and discourse analysis Current

Schiffrin, D (2006) From linguistic reference to social reality In A de Fina,

D Schiffrin, & M Bamburg (Eds.), Discourse and Identity (pp 103-

133) New York, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Seyranian, V (2014) Social identity framing communication strategies for mobilizing social change The Leadership Quarterly, 25(3), 468-486

Silverstein, M (1976) Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description

In K Basso & H Selby (Eds.), Meaning in anthropology (pp 11-55)

Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press

Smith, A D (1991) National identity Reno: University of Nevada Press

Sprague, E (2017, July 10th) Distrust and Verify: An Appropriate U.S

Government Response To Sudan Government Actions Huffingtonpost

Retrieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/distrust-and- verify-an-appropriate-us-government_us_59643394e4b0911162fc2e92 Stone, G P., & Strauss, A (2017) Mirrors and Masks: The Search for

Identity (2nd ed.) London, New York: Routledge

Tajfel, H (1974) Social identity and intergroup behaviour Information

Taylor, V., & Whittier, N (1992) Collective identity in social movement communities: Lesbian feminist mobilization In A D Morris & C M

Mueller (Eds.), Frontiers in social movement theory (pp 104-129)

New Haven, CT: Yale University Press

Templin, C (1999) Hillary Clinton as threat to gender norms: Cartoon images of the first lady Journal of Communication Inquiry, 23(1), 20-

Uscinski, J E., & Goren, L J (2011) What‟s in a name? Coverage of

Senator Hillary Clinton during the 2008 Democratic Primary Political

Research Quarterly, 64(4), 884-896 van Dijk, T A (1996) Discourse, power and access In C R Caldas-

Coulthard & M Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp 84-104) London: Routledge van Dijk, T A (1997) The study of discourse In T A van Dijk (Ed.),

Discourse as social structure Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (Vol 1) London: Sage van Dijk, T A (1998) Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach London,

Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications van Dijk, T A (2001) Multidisciplinary CDA: A plea for diversity In R

Wodak & M Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp

95-120) London: Sage van Dijk, T A (2008) Discourse and power Hampshire, New York:

Palgrave Macmillan van Dijk, T A (2010) Political Identities in Parliamentary Debates In C Ilie

(Ed.), European Parliaments under Scrutiny Discourse strategies and interaction practices (pp 29-56) Amsterdam: Benjamins van Dijk, T A (2015) Racism and the Press (Vol 5) London, New York:

Routledge van Leeuwen, T (1996) The representation of social actors In C R Caldas-

Coulthard & M Coulthard (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp 32-70) London, New York: Routledge

Verschueren, J (2008) Intercultural Communication and the Challenges of

Migration 1 Language and Intercultural Communication, 8(1), 21-35

Visweswaran, K (1994) Fictions of feminist ethnography Minneapolis,

London: University of Minnesota Press

Wakefield, M (2016, February 20th) Who is the real Hillary Clinton? The

Telegraph Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/books/what-to- read/who-is-the-real-hillary-clinton/

Weiss, G., & Wodak, R (2007) Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and interdisciplinarity Houndmills, Basignstoke, Hampshire, New York:

West, C., & Zimmerman, D H (1985) Gender, Language, and Discourse In

T A v Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Volume 4:

Discourse Analysis in Society London: Academic Press

Wetherell, M (2007) A step too far: Discursive psychology, linguistic ethnography and questions of identity Journal of Sociolinguistics,

Wilson, J (1990) Politically speaking: The pragmatic analysis of political language Oxford, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Basil Blackwell

Wodak, R (2003) Multiple Identities: The Roles of Female Parliamentarians in the EU Parliament In J Holmes & M Meyerhoff (Eds.), The handbook of language and gender (pp 618-698) London: Blackwell

Wodak, R (2007) Pragmatics and critical discourse analysis: A cross- disciplinary inquiry Pragmatics & Cognition, 15(1), 203-225

Wodak, R (2013) Critical Discourse Analysis – Challenges and Perspectives

In R Wodak (Ed.), Critical Discourse Analysis (pp XIX-XXXXiii)

Wodak, R., & Reisigl, M (2001) Discourse and racism In D Tannen, H E

Hamilton, & D Schiffrin (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp 372-397) Oxford: Blackwell

Yanow, D (2015) Constructing" race" and" ethnicity" in America:

Category-making in Public Policy and Administration London, New

Yurchisin, J., Watchravesringkan, K., & McCabe, D B (2005) An exploration of identity re-creation in the context of internet dating

Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 33(8), 735-

Zdenek, S., & Johnstone, B (2008) Studying style and legitimation In

Rhetoric in Detail: Disourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture (Vol 31, pp 25-31) Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John

Zembylas, M (2003) Emotions and teacher identity: A poststructural perspective Teachers and Teaching, 9(3), 213-238

Zhou-min, Y (2009) A Study of Clinton's Inaugural Address from the

Perspective of Identity Construction Journal of Nanjing University of

Posts and Telecommunications (Social Science), 2(60), 61-66

Zimmerman, D H (1998) Identity, context and interaction In C Antaki &

S Widdicombe (Eds.), Identities in Talk (pp 87-106) London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications

Zimmerman, D H., & Wieder, D L (1970) Ethnomethodology and the problem of order: Comment on Denzin In J D Douglas (Ed.),

Understanding Everyday Life (pp 285-295) London: Routledge &

HILLARY CLINTON: Thank you, thank you so much Thank you all very much

Thank you Thank you San Diego for that warm, warm welcome and thanks to Ellen for those moving words, her introduction, and for reminding us it‟s not only our men and women in uniform that serve our country, it‟s their families, their spouses, their children, and we are grateful to each and every one of them I want to recognize and thank Congressman Scott Peters for being here, thank you very much

And all of the other electeds and service members, active duty and retired National Guard and Reservists, veterans, military spouses, family members, all who are with us today

On Monday, we observed Memorial Day – a day that means a great deal to San Diego, home of so many active-duty and former military and their families We honor the sacrifice of those who died for our country in many ways – by living our values, by making this a stronger and fairer nation, and by carrying out a smart and principled foreign policy

That‟s what I want to speak about today – the challenges we face in protecting our country, and the choice at stake in this election

It‟s a choice between a fearful America that‟s less secure and less engaged with the world, and a strong, confident America that leads to keep our country safe and our economy growing

As Secretary of State, Senator and First Lady, I had the honor of representing America abroad and helping shape our foreign policy at home As a candidate for President, there‟s nothing I take more seriously than our national security I‟ve offered clear strategies for how to defeat ISIS, strengthen our alliances, and make sure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon And I‟m going to keep America‟s security at the heart of my campaign

Because as you know so well, Americans aren‟t just electing a President in November We‟re choosing our next commander-in-chief – the person we count on to decide questions of war and peace, life and death

And like many across our country and around the world, I believe the person the Republicans have nominated for President cannot do the job

Donald Trump‟s ideas aren‟t just different – they are dangerously incoherent

They‟re not even really ideas – just a series of bizarre rants, personal feuds, and outright lies

He is not just unprepared – he is temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability and immense responsibility

This is not someone who should ever have the nuclear codes – because it‟s not hard to imagine Donald Trump leading us into a war just because somebody got under his very thin skin

We cannot put the security of our children and grandchildren in Donald Trump‟s hands We cannot let him roll the dice with America

This is a man who said that more countries should have nuclear weapons, including Saudi Arabia

This is someone who has threatened to abandon our allies in NATO – the countries that work with us to root out terrorists abroad before they strike us at home

He believes we can treat the U.S economy like one of his casinos and default on our debts to the rest of the world, which would cause an economic catastrophe far worse than anything we experienced in 2008

He has said that he would order our military to carry out torture and the murder of civilians who are related to suspected terrorists – even though those are war crimes

He says he doesn‟t have to listen to our generals or our admirals, our ambassadors and other high officials, because he has – quote – “a very good brain.”

He also said, “I know more about ISIS than the generals do, believe me.” You know what? I don‟t believe him

He says climate change is a hoax invented by the Chinese, and he has the gall to say that prisoners of war like John McCain aren‟t heroes

He praises dictators like Vladimir Putin and picks fights with our friends – including the British prime minister, the mayor of London, the German chancellor, the president of Mexico and the Pope

He says he has foreign policy experience because he ran the Miss Universe pageant in Russia