INTRODUCTION
Rationale
Political discourse is a vital area of research due to its significant impact on political science, as highlighted by van Dijk (1997), who noted its potential to provide genuine answers to political questions Fairclough (1995) further emphasized the role of political discourse in critical discourse analysis, viewing it as a form of argumentation that influences political decisions While both argumentation and persuasion serve as non-violent linguistic tools for problem-solving (Wodak, 2018), this study focuses on the dissemination of persuasive strategies rather than argumentation alone This focus stems from the understanding that persuasion is a call to action, often appealing to emotions and feelings (Fernandez-Ulloa).
2019), which also matches the study’s focus of touching all three rhetorical pillars in persuasion (logic, credibility and emotions) (Aristotle, 1984)
This study employs Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to explore the persuasive strategies in the 2016 U.S presidential campaign, focusing on the contrasting ideologies of candidates Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Trump, a political outsider and businessman representing the Republican Party, and Clinton, a former Secretary of State for the Democratic Party, delivered speeches that revealed their hidden ideologies and power dynamics aimed at securing voter support The research utilizes CDA to uncover the underlying ideologies in their discourse, alongside Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) to analyze the metafunctions of their persuasive techniques, and Aristotle's theory of persuasion for classification While previous studies have examined the speeches of Clinton and Trump, most have focused on word choice and structure rather than comparing their rhetorical strategies and argumentation Thus, this research is crucial for understanding the persuasive elements in their political speeches during the 2016 election.
This study focuses on the metafunctions of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) by Halliday, specifically examining the textual, interpersonal, and ideational meanings in the presidential election speeches of two politicians It distinguishes itself by integrating Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and SFG, alongside Aristotle’s theory of persuasion, to explore the complexities of political discourse and the ideologies embedded within The selection of English political speeches as data sources is pivotal, as they represent authentic native English and are inherently linked to party communication, influencing audience ideology through specific persuasive strategies The research aims to uncover similarities and differences in the politicians’ ideologies and persuasive techniques, providing insights into the American political landscape at the time, where various political positions were articulated, and verbal persuasion was employed to garner voter support.
The primary goal of political discourse is to foster consensus among citizens on addressing issues like poverty, crime, social inequality, and racism Effective communication of political ideologies hinges on understanding these messages, highlighting the need for research into political persuasion through ideologies, power dynamics, and persuasive strategies Persuasion plays a crucial role in engaging audiences, bridging awareness gaps, and preventing violence in message delivery Politicians' use of distinct language features offers valuable insights into political language functions and serves as a rich resource for language learners Despite existing studies, there is a lack of comprehensive analysis on the types of persuasion strategies used by politicians and the metafunctions of political ideologies within these strategies Additionally, the absence of a three-dimensional model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in many studies presents an opportunity for further research Recognizing the significance of this study for language and communication, the researcher aims to explore Persuasive Strategies in English Political Speeches through the lens of CDA, focusing on the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 Presidential election.
Aims and Objectives of the Study
This study investigates the persuasive strategies used in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 campaign, utilizing Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) model The research aims to identify the types of persuasive strategies and their associated metafunctions present in the speeches of both candidates Additionally, it conducts a contrastive analysis to highlight the differences in persuasive techniques and metafunctions employed by Clinton and Trump Ultimately, the thesis seeks to analyze the sociocultural practices surrounding these strategies, revealing the connections between persuasion, power, ideologies, and intertextuality in their political discourse.
To achieve the aims of the study, the following objectives are intended
- to identify the persuasive strategies utilized in Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s presidential election speeches and the lexico-grammatical resources realizing the metafunctions of these strategies (Description Stage)
This article analyzes the lexico-grammatical features of the persuasive strategies employed by Clinton and Trump, focusing on their metafunctions to reveal the distinctive ideologies and power dynamics of each politician By comparing their language use, the study highlights both similarities and differences in how these leaders convey their messages and influence their audiences The interpretation of these strategies provides insights into the underlying political narratives that shape their respective campaigns.
This article explores the persuasive strategies, power dynamics, and ideologies utilized by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, analyzing how their textual constructions reflect the socio-political context By examining their communication techniques, the study highlights the interplay between rhetoric and political influence, revealing how each candidate's approach is shaped by and responds to the prevailing societal narratives.
Research Question
The study aims to answer the following research questions:
(1) What lexico-grammatical features highlighting the metafunctions are manifested in persuasive strategies in Hillary Clinton’s presidential election speeches?
(2) What lexico-grammatical features highlighting the metafunctions are manifested in persuasive strategies in Donald Trump’s presidential election speeches?
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump employ distinct persuasive strategies in their political speeches, reflecting their differing ideologies and power dynamics within political discourse While Clinton often utilizes formal lexico-grammatical features and intertextual references to establish credibility and connect with her audience, Trump favors a more informal, direct style that engages listeners through repetition and emotional appeal Both politicians strategically incorporate intertextuality to reinforce their messages, yet their approaches reveal contrasting views on social practices and discursive practices in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Ultimately, these similarities and differences highlight the unique ways each candidate seeks to influence public perception and assert their political authority.
Scope of the Study
This study analyzes the political discourse in Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential election speeches, focusing on persuasive strategies related to topics such as immigration, health care, terrorism, gun control, and the economy The significance of the 2016 election, marked by the nomination of the first female presidential candidate in U.S history, provides a unique context for examining the contrasting rhetorical approaches of Clinton and Trump Employing Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (1995) and Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar (2014), alongside Aristotle's rhetoric theory (1984), the research begins with a Description Stage that analyzes modality, vocatives, and appraisal to understand interpersonal meaning It also examines transitivity systems to reveal ideational meaning and explores the relationship between theme and rheme for textual meaning Subsequent Interpretation and Explanation Stages further uncover the connections between persuasive strategies, power dynamics, and ideologies in the discourse of both candidates.
Political speeches are characterized by various dimensions of discourse, including voice, sound, and gestures, which enhance their oral quality and impact However, when analyzing the discourse features and persuasive strategies in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, these elements will not be included in the research.
Research Significance
The study gives both theoretical and practical contributions Theoretically, the m result of this study is expected to provide knowledge in the areas of SFG (Halliday,
In exploring metafunctions related to textual, interpersonal, and ideational meanings, the subtle persuasive elements embedded in speakers' utterances are revealed Additionally, the analysis incorporates Aristotle's rhetorical principles of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos, enhancing the understanding of persuasive strategies This interdisciplinary approach significantly enriches the study of persuasive tactics within political discourse.
This study significantly contributes to Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) by exemplifying the application of Fairclough’s three-layered model (1995, 2010) It employs various theoretical frameworks as linguistic tools to uncover ideologies constructed through discourse, ultimately serving the purpose of persuasion.
Specifically, such a study unveiling metafunctions of the persuasive strategies in question under the light of CDA would be a favorable reference for language learners and future researchers.
Key Terms of the Study
Persuasion : the action of persuading someone or of being persuaded
Persuasion is also a form of speech that uses argument or emotion to make the listeners believe what the author is saying (Online Cambridge Dictionary)
Persuasive strategies: are techniques used to convince listeners to adopt a particular point of view or take a specific action Ethos, Logos, Pathos were Aristotle’s three forms of persuasive strategies
Ideology: a set of beliefs or principles, especially one on which a political system, party or organization is based (Online Cambridge Dictionary)
Power: the ability to control people and events or the amount of political control a person or a group has in a country (Online Cambridge Dictionary)
In Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), "lexico-grammar" highlights the intrinsic relationship between vocabulary and grammar in language It emphasizes that words possess both semantic and grammatical attributes that are deeply intertwined, making it essential to study them in conjunction rather than in isolation (Halliday, 2004, 2014).
Organization of the Thesis
The study is organized into 7 chapters
Chapter 1- Introduction – briefly introduces what would be done in the thesis, giving readers an overview of the study in stating the rationale, aims, objectives, scope, research questions, significance and organization of the study
Chapter 2 - Literature review - highlights the related studies to the research, giving a deep insight into the areas of research that have been reached conducted and identifying the gaps to be filled This Chapter also provides theoretical background relating to the theory of CDA consisting of an overview of discourse-to-discourse analysis Besides, theory regarding SFG, Rhetoric theory and Appraisal will also be discussed Particularly, as one of the spotlights of this research, political discourse and its relation to power and ideologies are analyzed in detail with a view to providing an adequate picture of political speeches with their features and functions In short, chapter two paves the way for the following chapters to effectively unfold the features of the strategies in question and
Chapter 3 - Research Methodology – presents the methodology for data collection and the research procedures of the current study Finally, a Description of data analysis is fully presented
Chapter 4 - Persuasive Strategies in Hillary Clinton’s Political Speeches – discovers the persuasive strategies utilized in the Democrat presidential candidate s’ political speeches during her 2016 presidential campaign and provides the description of the lexico-grammatical features highlighting metafunctions as manifested in Clinton’s persuasive strategies The Description Stage according to Fairclough’s CDA three-layered model begins with this chapter, setting preliminary findings for the later stages with further research discoveries
Chapter 5 - Persuasive Strategies in Donald Trump’s Political Speeches – discovers the persuasive strategies utilized in the Republican candidate s’ presidential m election speeches during his 2016 presidential campaign and provides the description of the lexico-grammatical features highlighting metafunctions as manifested in Trump’s persuasive strategies The findings were grounded for the Interpretation Stage which elaborates the contrastive analysis between the persuasive strategies deployed by the two politicians and the revelation of their distinctive ideologies communicated to eventually reach the advocacy and persuasion from the audience
Chapter 6 – A Contrastive Analysis of Persuasive strategies in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Political Speeches – provides the Interpretation
The article follows Fairclough’s three-layered model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), beginning with the Explanation Stage It then moves to the Interpretation Stage, which contrasts the persuasive strategies of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump This analysis is contextualized to enhance understanding of sociocultural practices Finally, the Explanation Stage reveals the ideologies and power dynamics within these structures, providing insights into how language is used to uphold or contest power relations.
Chapter 7 concludes the study by synthesizing its findings and highlighting implications for future research It also addresses the limitations of the current research and offers suggestions for further studies, underscoring the need for continued exploration in this area.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Critical Discourse Analysis
2.1.1 Discourse Analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a unique theoretical perspective in linguistic discourse analysis, emphasizing a critical approach to problem-solving rather than just a research method Unlike traditional discourse analysis, CDA is distinguished by its constructive, problem-oriented nature and its interdisciplinary, multi-methodical framework.
The ongoing discourse on the similarities and differences between discourse analysis and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) highlights the importance of understanding this linguistic approach Squire (2002) notes that non-critical discourse analysis focuses on immediate contexts, often overlooking broader socio-historical factors While it addresses social relations, it tends to accept language categories as fixed, failing to explore their circulation and implications In contrast, CDA investigates how ideologies permeate workplace discussions, questioning what is normalized and who benefits from these narratives (Nguyễn Hòa, 2006) CDA is not just a research method; it represents a critical approach to problem-solving that connects macro social structures with micro-textual analysis, emphasizing socially motivated insights over mere description Therefore, CDA is particularly effective for analyzing persuasive strategies in political speeches.
2.1.2 Critical Discourse Analysis – a Research Approach
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a versatile research method that transcends standard methodological steps for data collection, transcription, and analysis Its interdisciplinary nature allows for various approaches to examining the social and critical implications of language While some CDA methods are heavily influenced by linguistics, focusing on aspects such as syntax, lexicon, grammar, and phonology, they can vary significantly in their analytical focus Some analyses may delve into multiple linguistic features, while others might concentrate on specific elements like transitivity or voice Additionally, certain approaches incorporate detailed transcription techniques to capture language patterns, including emphasis, pitch variations, and pauses, which can illuminate power dynamics and ideological constructs within social and historical contexts The field of CDA encompasses a diverse range of analysts, each with unique perspectives and areas of focus.
(italic in original) form of analysis featuring language as a mode of social practice
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is tasked with examining texts within their social contexts, as highlighted by Fairclough (1995) His theory underscores the connection between language and ideology, advocating for the identification of ideology within language structures and events Fairclough argues that a broader spectrum of linguistic features and levels can carry ideological significance, extending beyond mere content to include linguistic form and style He asserts that discussions of language and ideology should be integrated into a comprehensive framework that addresses theories and analyses of power.
According to Locke (2004), CDA is characterized as follows:
• analytical because we have conducted a detailed systematic examination of a particular object to arrive at one or more underlying principles m
• discourse oriented in this analysis has been concerned with language in use and with the way in which patterns of meaning are socially constructed
Analyzing text is essential as it allows readers to reflect on the social implications of the meanings they encounter This process encourages a deeper understanding of the perspectives being presented and invites discussion on the significance of these interpretations.
Locke (2004) emphasizes that interpretation emerges from the act of reading and analyzing texts to derive meaning Fairclough expands on this by identifying three key dimensions of discourse analysis: the linguistic representation of discourse (the "texts" form), the social practices it reflects (such as political and ideological contexts), and the socially constructed processes that influence the production, distribution, and consumption of texts He asserts that analysis is inherently linked to interpretation, highlighting the importance for analysts to be aware of their interpretative biases and the social motivations behind them.
Literacy is defined as the ability to interpret discourse, encompassing both reading and writing skills It involves decoding written texts as a reader and encoding language in graphic form as a writer This process of textual interpretation is psychological, occurring within the reader's mind Rather than being a singular concept, literacy comprises a variety of socially constructed practices Different types of texts necessitate distinct reading approaches, and the same text can yield multiple meanings, highlighting the complexity of textual interpretation (Locke, 2004).
To fully grasp the discourse, one must comprehend the contextual references Critical discourse analysts play a crucial role in assessing the contextual knowledge required for interpretation, highlighting that discourse understanding is inherently linked to context and its audience This thesis leverages Fairclough's (1995) theory of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), employing his three-layered model to connect text construction with socio-political contexts Further justification for selecting Fairclough’s CDA will be discussed in the subsequent section.
Fairclough’s Three-layered CDA Model
Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) approach enables researchers to focus on the specific linguistic elements of a text, including their arrangement and context It emphasizes the importance of understanding the historical factors influencing these linguistic choices and their relationship to the conditions under which the discourse occurs This method is valuable as it offers numerous avenues for analysis, ensuring that various analytical approaches can collectively enhance understanding Ultimately, the integration of these analyses reveals intricate patterns and discrepancies that warrant thorough description, interpretation, and explanation.
When conducting an analysis, it is crucial to view the analysis points as interconnected factors that contribute to a comprehensive understanding By integrating these points, analysts can perform both micro and macro-level analyses Specifically, micro-level analysis examines grammatical elements like lexemes, phrases, and sentences, while macro-level analysis situates the discourse within its social and cultural context This concept is articulated in Fairclough's three-layered model (Fairclough, 1975, p 21).
Figure 2.1 Fairclough’s framework for analyzing a communicative event m
A) Text (Micro-level: the Description Stage)
Fairclough's three-part model begins with a focus on text, where the analyst performs a syntactic analysis that emphasizes grammatical elements and other directly observable features of the discourse This analysis requires a high level of objectivity and encompasses linguistic aspects such as vocabulary, grammar, semantics, and cohesion at a level beyond individual sentences Fairclough (1995) asserts that linguistic analysis examines both the lexical-grammatical and semantic properties of the text, highlighting their interdependent relationship Ultimately, this initial level serves as a comprehensive description of the object under analysis (Fairclough, 2001).
Fairclough analyzes text from a multifunctional perspective, suggesting that each sentence can be examined through its roles in representation, relations, and identities.
• Particular representations and recontextualizations of social practice (ideational function) - perhaps carrying particular ideologies
• Particular constructions of writer and reader identities (for example, in terms of what is highlighted - whether status and role aspects of identity or individual and personality aspects of identity)
• A particular construction of the relationship between writer and reader (as, for instance, formal or informal, close or distant) (Fairclough, 1995, p 58)
According to Fairclough (1995), linguistic analysis is concerned with presences as well as absences in texts that could include "representations, categories of participant, constructions of participant identity or participant relations" (p 58)
B ) Discourse practice (Meso level – The Interpretation Stage)
The meso level of discourse analysis is crucial for interpreting the semantic aspects of communication, focusing on the interaction between the sender and receiver This stage views discourse as a communicative action, emphasizing the context in which the text is situated (Fairclough, 2001, p 91) According to Fairclough (1995, p 58-59), this dimension encompasses two key facets: institutional processes, such as editorial procedures, and discourse processes, which refer to the transformations a text undergoes during its production and consumption.
In his position, "discourse practice straddles the division between society and culture on the one hand and discourse, language and text on the other" (p 60) (Figure 2.2)
C) Sociocultural Practice (Macro Level – The Explanation Stage)
The third level, illustrated by the outer box, emphasizes the importance of situating the text within a sociocultural framework This involves integrating analytical data from the previous two levels and contextualizing their significance to enhance understanding (Fairclough, 2001, p ).
According to Fairclough (1995b), the analysis of communicative events involves three key sociocultural dimensions: economic factors related to media economics, political aspects concerning media power and ideology, and cultural issues surrounding values He emphasizes that analysis does not need to encompass all levels but should focus on those relevant to understanding the specific event.
Political Discourse
Language possesses a unique allure, primarily due to the inherent power it wields in everyday interactions This power enables words to regulate, influence, and motivate individuals and circumstances Ultimately, language serves as a crucial tool in the pursuit of power, transcending the need for physical force (Fairclough, 1989).
In 1989, efforts were made to correct the common misconception regarding the significance of language in shaping social power dynamics This initiative aimed to enhance awareness of how language contributes to the domination of certain individuals over others, revealing the intricate connections between language and power While language can wield power in diverse ways, it is not inherently powerful; rather, its effectiveness depends on how influential individuals utilize it Ultimately, language attains its greatest power through the actions of those in positions of authority.
Cameron (2001) highlights the significant impact of language, noting that the authority to categorize individuals often accompanies the power to influence their lives (Muralikrishnan, 2011, p 23) Building on this idea, Fairclough (1989) posits that individuals serve as conduits of power rather than its direct source He further suggests that power can be understood through the imbalances present in discourse events, where unequal abilities shape the production, distribution, and consumption of texts within specific social contexts.
Fairclough (1989) explores the complex relationship between power and language in discourse, highlighting two key dimensions: power in discourse and power behind discourse Power in discourse manifests in various forms, such as face-to-face interactions, cross-cultural exchanges, and the subtle influences of mass media Conversely, power behind discourse reflects the broader societal structures that maintain control over discourse, revealing how power dynamics are sustained through social struggles Ultimately, discourse serves as a battleground for power struggles, where control over the narrative is crucial for preserving authority.
In summary, power dynamics in discourse highlight how speakers can exert control over others, shaping societal discourse order Power is not static; it is constantly negotiated through social struggle This concept is exemplified in the political discourse of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during their presidential campaigns, where both politicians utilized language as a strategic tool to manipulate and persuade voters, thereby asserting their dominance Ultimately, the effective use of language serves as a powerful mechanism for achieving political objectives.
Every discourse reflects the power dynamics that convey the ideologies of the author and the associated group or institution (Nyako, 2013) Van Dijk (1998a) emphasizes the interplay between text and talk in shaping ideologies, highlighting how discourse influences and transforms these beliefs Authors utilize ideologies to effectively communicate their messages to specific audiences, as these ideologies can manipulate audience actions and thoughts This indicates that language is not a neutral tool for communication; rather, it is a powerful medium that can influence and direct audience perceptions and behaviors by establishing relations of power, domination, and exploitation (Fairclough, 2003).
To enhance the analysis of ideology in research, it is essential to emphasize key features and highlights of "ideology," which will aid in uncovering the persuasive strategies used in political discourse.
The term "ideology," first introduced by French philosopher Debutt de Tracy in the 18th century, has since garnered significant attention from scholars across various fields, including social and cognitive psychology and discourse analysis Bourdieu (1980) characterizes ideology as "generative schemes," which are practical logics that help individuals navigate situations and experiences Furthermore, ideologies are viewed as "cognitive and motivating structures" that do not exist as external systems but emerge when individuals convert past experiences into future expectations, highlighting their dynamic nature and the range of possibilities they encompass.
77) Ideologies, in short, acquire durability as products of historically transmitted schemes of perception (1980, p.54)
Eagleton (1991) identifies sixteen distinct definitions of ideology, primarily focusing on its role in social dominance and political power He categorizes ideology into six perspectives, with one definition highlighting it as "the general material process of production of ideas, beliefs, and values in social life."
In 1991, ideology is defined as the ideas and beliefs that represent the conditions and life experiences of a particular socially significant group or class This concept illustrates the connection between ideology and social practices, highlighting how it reflects the lived experiences of individuals within that group Additionally, Eagleton (1991) emphasizes that ideology serves as a critical lens through which we can understand societal dynamics and cultural narratives.
In the "discursive field," self-promoting social powers instigate conflicts over issues vital to the perpetuation of social power Eagleton highlights that dominant ideologies unify social formations in ways that benefit their rulers, providing security and relief to subordinated classes rather than merely imposing ideas from above He further asserts that ideology conveys ideas and beliefs that serve the interests of the ruling class through "distortion and dissimulation." Ultimately, Eagleton posits that ideology focuses on "false or deceptive beliefs," which are produced by the controlling class and disseminated throughout society.
To understand the role of ideologies in discourse, it is crucial to explore the intersection of social, political, and cultural contexts (van Dijk, 1998) This research aims to analyze the ideological elements in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, highlighting their differing political positions and concerns By examining the use of power in their political discourse, this study seeks to enhance our understanding of ideology, its definitions, functions, and its manifestation within political communication.
Persuasion
Persuasion is achieved through the art of rhetoric and effective persuasive strategies This section explores the general theory of rhetoric and delves into the specific persuasive techniques outlined by Aristotle in 1984.
Recent research in social psychology reveals key insights into how beliefs are shaped within political and social contexts Beliefs are inherently flexible and easily influenced, especially in areas where individuals have limited personal involvement Additionally, social dynamics play a crucial role in shaping perceptions and decisions, as people tend to be swayed by their close acquaintances In the political arena, voters often have limited awareness of specific issues, increasing their susceptibility to persuasion Overall, persuasion can be understood as a compelling influence on belief formation.
Persuasion, as defined by Bloom (2004), involves advising an audience, such as voters in a political context, without resorting to violence or coercion Simon (2001) suggests that a practical approach to defining persuasion is to identify common characteristics known as paradigm cases, which encompass several key factors.
(i) Human communication : Persuasion relates to acts of human communication and exchanges of messages between human beings
Persuasion plays a crucial role in influencing others by altering their thoughts, feelings, or actions, as defined by Simon (2001) This process, known as attempted influence, can produce significant effects through messages, regardless of whether the intent behind them is recognized Consequently, the perception of persuasion remains consistent, highlighting its impact on communication dynamics.
Modifying judgments involves understanding the target audience, known as message recipients, who are receptive to persuasive input These individuals process the information and formulate judgments that reflect their thoughts about both the persuader and the persuasive message itself.
Persuasion is a form of human communication aimed at influencing the independent judgments and actions of others, leading them to change their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors (Simon, 2001) This process is distinct from other types of influence, highlighting its unique role in shaping perceptions and actions.
Figure 2.5 Features of persuasion (Simon, 2001)
This thesis examines the role of political speeches, specifically focusing on those delivered during the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump It explores how these speeches serve as rich sources for understanding persuasion in politics, defined as a form of human communication aimed at influencing audience perceptions and directing actions, particularly in the context of election voting The study's findings will enhance our understanding of how politicians effectively utilize persuasion to gain public support and confidence.
The power of rhetoric serves as an effective analytical tool for creating persuasive discourse (Eyman, 2015) Initially, Aristotle simplified and compiled methods for successful persuasion (1984) This study adopts Aristotle’s theory, focusing on the three rhetorical pillars—Ethos, Logos, and Pathos—to analyze persuasive strategies in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s presidential election speeches Persuasion is rooted in the speaker's character, which helps establish credibility (Aristotle 1356, p.2,3).
The speaker's ethos is communicated through their self-representation, capturing the audience's attention and encouraging them to grant authority to the speaker (Green, 2004) This aspect of rhetoric emphasizes the persuasive nature of the speaker's character (Aho, 1985; Conrad & Malphurs, 2008) Ethos is categorized into three key components that underline the speaker's credibility: intelligence, virtuous character, and good intentions (Griffin, 2012).
The perceived intelligence of a speaker significantly influences their credibility and competence, as it is shaped by their experiences and knowledge To enhance the persuasiveness of their message, speakers often incorporate factual evidence that supports their claims Audiences value this demonstration of intelligence, as it reflects the speaker's credibility and reinforces their motivations through logical reasoning and sound proof.
In 2012, it was noted that perceived intelligence can be exemplified by statements highlighting significant achievements, such as creating billion-dollar companies and generating tens of thousands of jobs This impact extends to transforming skylines, revitalizing neighborhoods, rejuvenating communities, and employing thousands of workers.
Donald Trump presented factual data and specific figures to highlight his achievements in fostering a strong economy for America, demonstrating his competence to the audience.
A virtuous character significantly enhances a speaker's image as a trustworthy individual, fostering trust among listeners through good motives and intentions (Verderber, Sellnow & Verderber, 2012, p 11) Audiences are more likely to be persuaded by speakers who embody values they admire and aspire to practice For instance, a speaker's demonstration of trustworthiness and good-heartedness can be illustrated through statements like, "I will fight for every neglected part of this nation – and I will fight to bring us all together as Americans." This reflects the speaker's genuine intentions and commitment to the audience, as seen in Trump's assertion that a Trump Administration would promote prosperity for all (T26-Ethos-Vch).
Goodwill is a crucial aspect of effective communication, reflecting a speaker's positive intentions toward their audience It signifies that speakers prioritize the needs of their audience over their own interests, fostering a sense of trust and empathy As highlighted by Verderber, Sellnow, and Verderber (2012), audiences perceive goodwill when speakers demonstrate responsiveness and understanding For instance, Hillary Clinton's acknowledgment of elected officials and a long-time friend during her speech exemplifies her appreciation for her supporters, showcasing her genuine concern and commitment to those who advocate for her.
Logos refers to the reasoning or logic of an argument (Aho, 1985; Green,
2004) Logos is employed by presenting credible information as additional evidence and proof Aristotle emphasized two forms of logical proofs - enthymeme and example which are presented as follows:
An enthymeme is a form of reasoning that omits a commonly accepted premise, relying on deductive logic to connect a general principle to a specific conclusion Often viewed as an incomplete syllogism, it typically leaves out the major premise, which the audience is presumed to already know By engaging logos, enthymemes prompt the audience to actively participate in the reasoning process, filling in the gaps to arrive at a temporary conclusion based on possible premises, as noted by Aristotle.
1984), the audience feels satisfied with possible conclusions relating to rhetoric (Corbett, 1999, p 62) Enthymeme can be illustrated thanks to the following example:
Related Studies
This chapter presents a literature review focused on themes pertinent to the research, aiming to identify gaps and emphasize the contributions of the findings By examining persuasive strategies in English political speeches through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the review explores critical themes relevant to the study It begins with an overview of prior research on persuasion and persuasive strategies, followed by an analysis of related studies that apply CDA to political speeches.
Political discourse has become a significant focus of research, aimed at providing a deeper understanding of its influential power This increasing academic interest highlights the importance of analyzing political communication to grasp its impact on society and governance.
The concept of "social request" reveals the unique characteristics of political thought and actions, as well as the linguistic strategies used by politicians to influence and manipulate public opinion Numerous researchers have dedicated significant effort to studying persuasive communication in politics, leading to a wealth of relevant studies within the field of political discourse.
In 2015, a study examined the application of Aristotelian theories in the political discourse of Taiwan's President Ma Ying-Jeou, specifically regarding the cross-strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement The research focused on Ma Ying-Jeou's debate discourse, particularly during the question-and-answer segments, and provided empirical evidence of the rhetorical strategies utilized by political leaders in public debates However, the study did not explore metafunctions, which restricted its analysis of Aristotelian persuasive strategies and limited the examination of interpersonal, textual, and ideational meanings.
Also coincidently adopting Aristotle’s three means of persuasion (Ethos,
Ghasemi (2020) emphasizes the significance of persuasive strategies in political discourse, highlighting how politicians can influence their audiences through language in presidential speeches by Barack Obama and Hassan Rouhani This analysis utilizes Aristotelian methods to identify the predominance of Logos as a persuasive strategy It explores three key themes—religion, time, and participant names—reflecting the distinct cultural and political contexts of the speakers While the study elaborates on Aristotle's rhetorical appeals, it lacks a detailed examination of the subcategories of Ethos, Logos, and Pathos, suggesting further research opportunities on various politicians with differing ideologies.
In their 2018 study, Abedi, Lashkarian, and Nematollahi examine Barack Obama's use of persuasion as a discursive strategy in his speeches on ISIS, employing typology and pronoun analysis The researchers acknowledge limitations in their study and suggest that future research could benefit from exploring the topic through various theoretical frameworks, such as psychoanalysis or critical social theory, for a more comprehensive understanding They also propose that comparing Obama's speeches with those of other political leaders addressing the ISIS crisis could provide a clearer perspective and highlight existing research gaps.
A study by Kleijn (2017) highlights Donald Trump's dominant non-verbal and verbal communication styles, illustrating how rhetoric and non-verbal cues can signify higher power within social contexts Unlike previous research that compares various politicians, this study uniquely focuses on individual politicians, offering a distinct perspective on their persuasive strategies.
This research aims to conduct a critical discourse analysis of the persuasive strategies used by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in their presidential election speeches, employing Fairclough's theory of CDA It is essential to review related studies on political discourse that adopt this analytical approach, as numerous investigations have explored the significant relationship between linguistic structures and ideological frameworks For instance, Sarfo and Krampa (2013) analyzed the speeches of Bush and Obama concerning terrorism, focusing on the linguistic resources utilized by Obama and their implications.
The analysis of Bush and Obama's rhetoric reveals that both politicians strategically employed a variety of linguistic elements, including verbs, nouns, and phrasal categories such as verb phrases, noun phrases, adjective phrases, adverbial phrases, and prepositional phrases, to convey concepts of terrorism and anti-terrorism Their use of simple, compound, and complex sentences underscores the importance of language in shaping political discourse surrounding terrorism This study highlights the need for further exploration of linguistic features related to terrorism, while also noting that focusing on a single concept may restrict the examination of broader political themes and ideologies present in such discourse.
Ehineni (2014) investigates the use of modals in Nigerian political manifestos through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), revealing how these linguistic elements serve as ideological tools for politicians to persuade voters The study highlights the significant role of modals in shaping political discourse and influencing electoral decisions, emphasizing that they extend beyond mere language to embody ideological motivations However, while the research claims to apply Fairclough’s CDA model, it falls short in clearly demonstrating how this approach informed the overall analysis.
Hassan (2016) conducted a pioneering study on the critical discourse analysis of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi's speech at the New Suez Canal inauguration, focusing on the linguistic features and ideologies that support his political objectives By examining semantic macrostructures and local semantics, the study offers a methodological framework for future research, emphasizing the importance of various discourse registers in revealing the ideologies within political language This approach addresses gaps in prior research by moving beyond mere persuasive strategies to highlight the interpersonal meanings and attitudes in political discourse Similarly, Javad (2019) utilized Fairclough's three-dimensional framework of critical discourse analysis to contrast the presidential discourses of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, revealing how language reinforces societal power dynamics However, this study primarily addresses language use without adequately exploring the ideologies and persuasive functions inherent in political speeches.
Vietnamese authors have made significant contributions to the study of persuasion in political discourse through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Nguyễn Thị Huyền's 2021 study explores persuasive strategies in political discourse, revealing that Hillary Clinton effectively employed three rhetorical pillars—logic, credibility, and emotions—in her speech, positioning herself as a competent language user The research highlights how the arrangement of viewpoints, ideas, and macro-structure can influence the audience's perception and garner sympathy for the Democratic presidential candidate Additionally, it underscores the ongoing challenges women face in society, advocating for their protection and social dignity While this study enhances the understanding of political discourse within CDA, it primarily focuses on a single politician and only briefly addresses Aristotle's theory of persuasion, lacking a comprehensive integration of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) to fully explore the metafunctions of persuasive strategies.
Nguyen Thi Minh Tam (2019) also carries out a CDA study of the Inaugural m
On January 20, 2017, President Donald Trump delivered a speech that serves as a focal point for examining the intricate connections between language, ideology, and power through the lens of Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) framework This study employs a descriptive qualitative method to analyze the language features, situational and intertextual contexts, and social processes within the speech The findings indicate that Trump effectively utilized soft skills to convey his ideology, inspire Americans, and outline future plans, encouraging them to unite under his leadership However, the research is limited to this single inaugural address, which restricts the representation of Trump's diverse ideologies to those articulated in this speech alone Additionally, the study primarily relies on CDA without integrating other theoretical perspectives, which could offer a more nuanced understanding of the language used.
Nguyen Thi Van Anh (2020) examines the connection between Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) in Barack Obama’s 2009 Inaugural Speech, focusing on how power, language, and ideology interact The study primarily analyzes the speech's lexicalization, syntax, and structure, highlighting Obama's effective communication of his ideology and presidential authority However, the research lacks a detailed exploration of metafunctions related to interpersonal, ideational, and textual functions Additionally, the author does not contextualize the speech within its discursive and sociocultural framework, which limits the findings and reduces the potential for a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between language and power.
In her 2014 study, Nguyen Dieu Hang utilizes Fairclough’s three dimensions to explore the interplay between power and ideology in Barack Obama's political speeches, particularly focusing on his address at Nelson Mandela's memorial The research employs Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to uncover how Obama strategically uses linguistic features to assert his power and convey his ideological messages However, the study does not categorize these strategies according to Aristotle’s rhetorical appeals or delineate the various stages of analysis as outlined in Fairclough’s model.
Summary
This chapter has provided a relatively comprehensive literature review and theoretical background related to the thesis Particularly, Fairclough’s CDA model
This research utilizes the grounding theories of Halliday’s Textual Analysis in Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) and Aristotle’s persuasive strategies to analyze the speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during their presidential campaigns To enhance the understanding of the interpersonal meanings that reflect each politician’s ideologies and power, the study incorporates the Language of Evaluation framework by Martin and White The theoretical framework is illustrated in Figure 2.6, while the conceptual roadmap for subsequent chapters is detailed in Figure 2.7.
Figure 2.6 Theoretical Framework of the Thesis m
Figure 2.7 Conceptual Framework of the Thesis m
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
Research Design
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary framework that explores the connections between language, power, and ideology It views language as a social practice shaped by power dynamics, which can either reinforce or challenge existing social structures By employing Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), CDA analyzes language choices to uncover the speaker's intentions and values, revealing underlying power relations and ideologies This approach is particularly useful for examining political speeches, such as those of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, to investigate how language constructs social identities and relationships, thereby illuminating the interplay of power, ideology, and hegemony in their discourse.
This study offers a comprehensive analysis of persuasive strategies used in political speeches, focusing specifically on those delivered by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton Through descriptive methods, it aims to provide detailed insights while facilitating a comparative examination of the data collected from both speakers This contrastive analysis seeks to underscore the significant differences and similarities in their rhetorical approaches, contributing to a deeper understanding of political communication.
This study employed a descriptive comparative research design with a qualitative approach, focusing on the linguistic features of syntactic units such as sentences, phrases, clauses, and words, categorized by their syntax and semantic functions It aimed to analyze the language used in the political speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during their presidential campaigns, providing quantitative data on the frequency of these linguistic units The research was guided by specific objectives and questions, allowing for a systematic examination of the persuasive strategies employed by both candidates By addressing the what, when, where, and how of the language used, the study utilized Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to assess the ideological implications of their rhetoric, seeking both qualitative and quantitative insights into their persuasive techniques.
(1) What lexico-grammatical features highlighting the metafunctions are manifested in persuasive strategies in Hillary Clinton’s presidential election speeches?
(2) What lexico-grammatical features highlighting the metafunctions are manifested in persuasive strategies in Donald Trump’s presidential election speeches?
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump employ distinct persuasive strategies in their political speeches, reflecting their unique ideologies and approaches to power While Clinton often utilizes a more formal lexico-grammatical structure and intertextual references to establish credibility and appeal to rationality, Trump tends to favor a direct, conversational style that emphasizes emotional resonance and populism Both politicians engage in discursive practices that reveal their social practices, shaping public perception and influencing political discourse Analyzing these similarities and differences provides insight into how language functions in the realm of political communication and the broader implications for critical discourse analysis (CDA).
With this design, the study was conducted with the following procedure:
• Locating and Defining Issues or Problems about the persuasive strategies in communication;
• Reviewing the literature with previous studies about the persuasive strategies in political speeches;
• Setting research specific aims, questions, objectives and assumptions about the description and identification of persuasive strategies utilized in Clinton’s and Trump’s presidential election speeches;
• Adopting a theoretical framework of CDA, SFG for the description and analysis of instances of persuasive strategies employed in Clinton’s and Trump’s presidential election speeches;
• Designing the Research Project guided by the objectives and research questions: Descriptive research for qualitative and quantitative information;
• Sampling: Deciding on the sample design to collect political speeches by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton;
• Selecting sources of data and instruments;
• Collecting valid and reliable data on instances of the linguistic units used in political speeches by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton;
• Analyzing data (Interpreting Research Data) qualitatively and quantitatively in the framework of CDA, SFG;
• Reporting research findings and conclusions.
Research Methods
This study aims to explore the qualitative and quantitative persuasive strategies used by the 2016 presidential candidates, focusing on a descriptive analysis of the political speeches delivered by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump By examining the context of these speeches, the research seeks to uncover the effectiveness of their rhetorical approaches during the election.
The choice of this method was made with the focus on:
• The purposes and effects of CDA and the evaluative language, specifically the language used as persuasive strategies in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s m election speeches
• How values, beliefs and assumptions are communicated in conformity with the assumptions of CDA (Fairclough, 1995, 2010) and the institutionalized systems of SFG (Halliday, 2004, 2014)
The study employed descriptive and contrastive analyses to examine the linguistic choices in the persuasive strategies used by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in their 2016 election speeches Descriptive analysis was chosen for its prevalence in qualitative research across humanities and social sciences, particularly in linguistics, allowing for an in-depth exploration of the persuasive techniques utilized by both candidates This approach aimed to uncover key insights regarding their differing rhetorical strategies.
- The persuasive strategies utilized in Hillary Clinton’s presidential election speeches and the lexico-grammatical resources realizing the metafunctions of these strategies (The Description Stage);
- The persuasive strategies utilized in Donald Trump’s presidential election speeches and the lexico-grammatical resources realizing the metafunctions of these strategies (The Description Stage);
- The contrastive analysis of the persuasive strategies utilized in the two politicians in their discourse as well as their metafunctions (The Interpretation Stage);
- The lexico – grammatical features highlighting the metafunctions of the persuasive strategies that reflected each politician’s ideology and power in their persuasive strategies (The Interpretation Stage);
- The relationship of persuasion strategies, power and ideologies employed by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump by relating the textual constructions to the socio-political context (The Explanation Stage)
The research analyzes the persuasive strategies used in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) This approach facilitates a descriptive examination of political texts, revealing the connection between textual constructions and the socio-political context Utilizing Fairclough's three-layered model (1995), the speeches were analyzed across three stages: Description, Interpretation, and Explanation.
This study utilized the classical steps of description, juxtaposition, and comparison to analyze the persuasive linguistic strategies employed by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump By examining the lexical and grammatical units within the framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), the research aimed to uncover the similarities and differences in their speeches Additionally, the study explored how ideology and power were conveyed through interpretive and explanatory information in their rhetoric.
This descriptive analysis was accomplished through three stages
The Description Stage involves a two-step process: initially, the text is thoroughly read to achieve a comprehensive understanding Subsequently, using Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) model as the research framework, the text is analyzed to identify utterances that employ persuasive strategies, drawing on Aristotle’s Rhetoric theory.
This article analyzes the persuasive strategies used by politicians, categorizing them into Ethos, Logos, and Pathos, along with their sub-categories Utilizing Halliday's Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG), the study examines the metafunctions within these strategies to reveal underlying ideologies and power dynamics The interpretation phase highlights the comparative analysis of the persuasive techniques in the presidential speeches of two politicians Subsequently, the explanation phase connects these textual constructions to their socio-political contexts, allowing for a comparison of the politicians' ideologies and political positions.
Sampling
This study analyzes the campaign speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, utilizing data sourced from The American Presidency Project, which archives speeches and press releases from American political figures The research focuses specifically on the paragraphs of presidential election speeches, resulting in a sample of 86 speeches for Clinton and 74 for Trump To refine the dataset, the researcher excluded interviews, news conferences, and debates, ultimately retaining 73 speeches for Trump and 64 for Clinton for further analysis.
During the campaign period, speeches by Trump and Clinton prior to their official announcements as presidential candidates were excluded from analysis Following the Republican and Democratic Party Conventions, which signified their nominations, Trump delivered 65 speeches, while Clinton gave 35 Only speeches made after their nomination announcements were considered for this evaluation.
To maintain balance and manageability in the research, a random sampling of 35 out of Donald Trump's 65 speeches was conducted using the Research Randomizer software This approach ensured an equal number of speeches from both Trump and Hillary Clinton for subsequent analysis.
Figure 3.1 A snapshot of Research Randomizer Software
Data Collection
This research analyzes utterances from politicians' presidential election speeches, focusing on persuasive strategies identified by Aristotle: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos The collected data, sourced from YouTube videos and speech transcripts, highlights various persuasive techniques through differing lengths and characteristics Utilizing Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) model, the study describes and explains how these persuasive strategies manifest in political communication.
This study conducts a contrastive analysis of the persuasive strategies utilized by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in their presidential election speeches, drawing on Halliday’s Textual Analysis in Systemic Functional Grammar By examining the interrelation between discourse and ideological structures, the research aims to uncover the ideologies and power dynamics of both politicians through a sociocultural practice analysis.
This research utilized transcribed spoken speeches as its data source, focusing on an equal number of speeches from politicians Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, facilitated by the Randomizer software The researcher meticulously collected and analyzed utterances from the speech transcripts, selecting instances that aligned with the study's objectives through careful document reading and observation Following Eyman's (2015) recommendation, close reading was employed as a foundational method, providing a contrast for newer rhetorical approaches Additionally, smaller units such as words and phrases were examined for a more detailed analysis.
An elaboration was then given with details being delved into the phenomenon of the written data using Fairclough’s CDA model (1995, 2010), SFG (Halliday,
This article analyzes the persuasive strategies and metafunctions in the political speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during their 2016 presidential campaigns, drawing on theories from Aristotle's Rhetoric It conducts a contrastive analysis to reveal how each politician employs distinct persuasive techniques, reflecting their differing uses of power and ideologies to influence voters.
This research analyzes speeches rich in persuasive strategies, utilizing data sourced from Hillary Clinton's campaign launch transcript available at http://time.com/3920332/transcript-full-text-hillary-clinton-campagn-launch/ The study focuses on the utterances of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during their presidential election campaigns, necessitating several methodological steps to ensure a comprehensive analysis.
The researcher downloaded the target presidential election speeches of the two politicians before close reading and observation These speeches were positioned to be those delivered during their 2016 presidential campaign
The researcher gathered a balanced number of speeches from both politicians to ensure objectivity and equality in the subsequent data analysis and comparison.
3 The researcher identified and coded expressions of persuasive strategies found, to Ethos, Logos and Pathos and their sub-categories (Aristotle, 1984)
The researcher meticulously analyzed the data to gain a profound understanding for subsequent analysis, identifying persuasive strategies within the utterances To uncover deeper layers of meaning, the researcher employed coding techniques on the collected speeches, while also examining smaller units like clauses, phrases, and individual words for a more insightful analysis.
The researcher analyzed persuasive strategies in speeches by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, categorizing them into Ethos, Logos, and Pathos By systematically separating the data from each candidate, the study aimed to facilitate a comparative analysis of their persuasive techniques.
6 The editing process, rechecking the data obtained to see whether the data was good enough and could be quickly prepared for the next process was necessary
The analysis of selected speeches involved coding for easier categorization, with Donald Trump's speeches labeled as T1 to T35 and Hillary Clinton's as H1 to H35 Detailed lists of these speeches and their codes can be found in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 Additionally, to clarify the specific categories of persuasive strategies, further information was included in the coding system, such as identifying Logos strategies from particular speeches.
H1 belongs to the sub-division of enthymeme, the instance would be coded as: H1.1-
Data Analysis
Utilizing the three-layered model of Fairclough (1995), Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump’s election speeches were analyzed throughout three stages: the Description Stage, the Interpretation Stage and the Explanation Stage
In the Description Stage, the analysis of utterances aimed to reveal the persuasive strategies used by Clinton and Trump, grounded in Aristotle’s theory (1984) This session also utilized Halliday’s Textual Analysis within Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) (2004, 2014) to uncover the metafunctions present in their speeches The thesis examined various aspects of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to analyze how these metafunctions were integrated into the persuasive strategies of both politicians during their presidential campaigns.
In terms of interpersonal metafunction, such aspects of SFG were stressed:
Modality is the linguistic tool that conveys a speaker's attitude towards their message This analysis examines the modal choices made by Clinton and Trump in their presidential election speeches, revealing the levels of certainty, obligation, and desirability they expressed.
Appraisal in language refers to the tools speakers use to convey their attitudes toward the content of their speech This analysis focuses on the appraisal choices made by Clinton and Trump in their presidential election speeches, highlighting how these choices reflect their emotional expressions and social positioning.
In terms of ideational metafunction, such aspects of SFG were stressed:
Transitivity highlights the connection between the subject, verb, and object within a clause This analysis focuses on the transitivity patterns in the presidential election speeches of Clinton and Trump, aiming to uncover the various actions and processes articulated by the politicians.
In terms of textual metafunction, such aspects of SFG were stressed:
Theme and Rheme are essential components in the structure of clauses and sentences, where the Theme serves as the starting point and the Rheme conveys new information This analysis of Clinton's and Trump's speeches focused on identifying the Theme and Rheme patterns to uncover their main ideas and arguments Additionally, the study revealed the use of topical and interpersonal themes within their rhetorical strategies.
The Interpretation Stage involved a detailed contrastive analysis of the persuasive strategies used by Clinton and Trump in their presidential election speeches, alongside a comparison of their discursive practices.
The Explanation Stage examines the persuasive strategies, power dynamics, and ideologies utilized by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, revealing how these elements are interconnected with the socio-political context to facilitate broader generalizations.
Reliability and Validity
To ensure the study's validity, the accuracy of the measurement methods was crucial in generating relevant constructs for valid findings Consequently, the thesis focused on specific measuring constructs to analyze persuasive strategies in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump The identified constructs are essential for obtaining meaningful insights into their rhetorical approaches.
(1) persuasive strategies: identify and categorize the persuasive strategies used by the politicians using the established methods of Critical Discourse Analysis
(2) language use: analyze how language is used to create persuasive effects
(3) power relation: analyze how persuasive strategies are employed to reinforce or sabotage power relations
(4) political discourse: analyze how political discourse construct the use of persuasive strategies in political speeches
To ensure construct validity and extract persuasive strategies from the political speeches of Clinton and Trump, Fairclough's three-layered model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) was employed, following a structured three-stage analytical process.
• The Description Stage to identify persuasive strategies utilized in Clinton’s and
This article examines Donald Trump's presidential election speeches through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis, identifying and categorizing persuasive strategies used in his rhetoric It explores the lexico-grammatical resources that realize these strategies, revealing how language functions to create persuasive effects in political discourse.
• The Interpretation Stage to point out the similarities and differences of the metafunctions in Clinton’s and Trump’s persuasive strategies to reflect the two politicians’ distinctive ideology and power
The Explanation Stage explores the interplay between persuasion strategies, power dynamics, and ideologies utilized by Clinton and Trump, linking their rhetorical choices to the broader socio-political landscape This analysis highlights how their communication styles reflect and influence public perception and political discourse.
Regarding the metafunctions in Halliday’s SFG (2004, 2014), meaning the interpersonal, textual and ideational functions, distinctive constructs were measured
To effectively analyze interpersonal functions in political discourse, it is essential to consider modality and appraisal resources Modality reflects how speakers convey their attitudes towards their messages, while appraisal encompasses the linguistic tools used to express their feelings about the content By utilizing these constructs, we can reveal the underlying interpersonal meanings in politicians' persuasive strategies.
Analyzing the relationship between theme and rheme is essential for understanding the textual function of discourse, particularly in the context of persuasive strategies This examination reveals how topical and interpersonal themes shape the arguments and main ideas presented by politicians, ultimately uncovering the underlying ideologies and power dynamics communicated through their persuasive techniques.
To identify the ideational function, the analysis of processes within the transitivity system was emphasized This approach examines the relationship between the verb, subject, and object in a clause to uncover the types of actions and processes executed by the two politicians.
Measuring variables are crucial for accurately assessing the constructs related to the discovery of power and ideology in persuasive strategies Ensuring internal validity is essential, as minimal irrelevance between the measures and constructs strengthens the research findings The thesis's theoretical framework highlights the strong connection between Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG), with key insights shared by Halliday (2004, 2014) and Fairclough.
The thesis ensures both construct validity and internal validity, which together support external validity, allowing for broader generalizations regarding its conclusions.
To ensure the reliability of the study and the consistency of the measuring method, multiple approaches were utilized to analyze the research question, enhancing confidence in the findings This research employed a combination of methodologies to uncover the persuasive strategies used in the political speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, specifically utilizing Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis model and Halliday’s Textual Analysis in Systemic Functional Grammar.
In 2014, a robust theoretical and conceptual framework was established for the analysis, necessitating meticulous reading and verification of findings to ensure consistency To enhance data reliability, thorough checking, process tracking, and note-taking were implemented Key terms and phrases in the analyzed text were emphasized using bold and italics for clarity Additionally, utterances from speeches were carefully documented and systematically coded in alignment with the original sources All collected data, including condensed and reconstructed information, along with transcriptions of the utterances, are included in the appendices, featuring comprehensive highlights and notes.
Summary
This chapter outlines the research design and methodology, employing a qualitative approach and descriptive analysis to explore semantic features and ideologies within discourse The study focuses on comparing the linguistic characteristics of two target politicians, drawing on Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis and Halliday’s Systemic Functional Grammar to provide a comprehensive understanding of the embedded meanings.
2014), all the features of persuasive strategies employed in the speeches were expected to be deliberately discovered in full m
PERSUASIVE STRATEGIES IN HILLARY CLINTON'S
Ethos in Hillary Clinton’s Political Speeches
Aristotle's Ethos persuasive strategy, which includes perceived intelligence, virtuous character, and goodwill, plays a crucial role in effective discourse (Griffin, 2011) Hillary Clinton effectively employed these elements in her election speeches, utilizing them in varying degrees to persuade her audience The distribution of these factors is detailed in Table 4.1, illustrating their impact on her persuasive efforts.
Table 4.1 Ethos in Hillary Clinton’s political speeches
Table 4.1 reveals that Hillary Clinton's virtuous character and goodwill are more prominent than her perceived intelligence, with rhetorical proofs showing 42%, 29%, and 28% respectively The following subsections will provide examples of each type.
Hillary Clinton's Ethos persuasive strategy predominantly relies on her virtuous character, which plays a crucial role in establishing her credibility Understanding this aspect of her approach provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of her rhetoric.
I envision an economy that benefits everyone, fosters growth, and generates more job opportunities It's essential to create a fairer economic system where hard work leads to financial stability, ensuring that individuals do not remain in poverty despite their efforts.
During the recent debate, I reflected on my aspirations for the presidency I have consistently outlined my goals and, if elected, my commitment to advocacy, as demonstrated by my work with the Children's Defense Fund.
Hillary Clinton worked to establish herself as a credible leader by showcasing her strong character and values Through her speeches, she conveyed her principles and intentions, which served as evidence of her integrity, ultimately helping her to earn the trust of her audience.
Hillary Clinton demonstrated her commitment to creating a fairer economy and alleviating poverty, emphasizing her empathy for marginalized communities affected by racial and gender discrimination She viewed her potential presidency as a unique opportunity to pursue her ambitious plans for the nation Among her key promises were to provide "opportunities for kids and fairness for families," reflecting her dedication to fostering equality and support for disadvantaged groups.
Hillary Clinton’s goodwill can be clearly seen through the following examples:
I aspire to be a robust partner, actively collaborating with Detroit and other cities on the path to recovery My goal is to ensure these communities receive the necessary investment, support, housing, and job opportunities they need to thrive.
Thank you all for an incredible convention Chelsea, I am immensely proud to be your mother and grateful for the wonderful woman you have become I also appreciate you bringing Mark into our family and welcoming Charlotte and Aidan into the world.
Hillary Clinton's campaign strategies emphasized her Ethos through expressions of goodwill and beneficence toward her audience She demonstrated gratitude to voters who attentively listened to her speeches and acknowledged the significant support from advocates, local officials, volunteers, and campaign organizers By declaring, “I want to be a strong partner,” Clinton conveyed her desire to collaborate closely with the community rather than leaving them to navigate challenges alone This commitment to partnership aimed to persuade her audience and garner their advocacy for her presidential campaign.
Clinton’s employment of intelligence was reflected clearly through all the instances Some typical instances can be discussed as follows
Having worked closely with troops and veterans for many years, including my time on the Armed Services Committee, I understand the importance of accurate information As your Secretary of State, I traveled to 112 countries, gathering facts and building coalitions to advocate for access to education for all students with disabilities I focus on the details of policy, whether addressing lead levels in Flint, Michigan, the availability of mental health facilities in Iowa, or the costs of prescription drugs.
Hillary Clinton's campaign speech effectively showcased her extensive experience in public service, particularly through her close work with the American military and her diplomatic efforts across various critical sectors, including education and healthcare By incorporating specific statistics and examples, such as the number of countries she collaborated with, Clinton reinforced her message of intelligence and capability This strategic approach helped to establish her as a dedicated and knowledgeable leader, solidifying the audience's perception of her as a genuinely capable candidate for the presidency.
This article explores the interpersonal functions within Hillary Clinton's ethos, focusing on modality and appraisal resources that reflect her attitudes It presents a detailed analysis of various aspects, emphasizing the interplay of ideology and power evident in her presidential election speeches.
Modality plays a crucial role in enhancing the interpersonal dynamics between speakers and listeners, reflecting the speakers' opinions and judgments regarding the likelihood of their propositions In the context of Ethos, specific modal verbs are strategically employed to emphasize unique characteristics of this persuasive approach, effectively serving its communicative objectives and interpersonal functions.
Table 4.2 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s Ethos
We will meet the challenge ahead, as we always have, by creating a pathway to citizenship for millions of immigrants who are already making valuable contributions to our economy Together with all Americans and our allies, we will unite to combat and ultimately defeat terrorism.
Logos in Hillary Clinton’s Political Speeches
Logos is a persuasive strategy that involves using logical arguments and facts to influence the audience According to Aristotle’s theory of persuasion, speakers can employ enthymemes and examples to provide logical reasoning Hillary Clinton effectively used both techniques in her speeches, presenting relevant evidence to support her arguments She tended to rely more on enthymemes to establish premises and draw conclusions, while examples served to reinforce her logical appeals.
Table 4.7 Logos in Hillary Clinton’s political speeches
Hillary Clinton's presidential election speeches often feature rhetorical proofs that exemplify enthymeme, showcasing her use of logical arguments to present compelling premises and draw temporary conclusions This persuasive strategy effectively highlights her qualities and values in contrast to her competitors Throughout her campaign, Clinton employed argumentation and reasoning to intentionally undermine her opponent's image, simultaneously elevating her own by emphasizing her distinguished attributes and principles.
My opponent has clearly shown his true character by advocating for the continued imprisonment of individuals who have been exonerated.
To determine if he can genuinely advocate for justice and fairness in America's criminal justice reform, we must consider his past actions He has consistently revealed his true character, leaving it to us to define our own values and beliefs moving forward.
[Premise 1: Trump’s true essence; Premise 2: concrete evidence of Trump’s wrongdoings →
Conclusion: Trump could not fight for the rule of justice and fairness and criminal justice reform in America]
I've had my disagreements with Republicans due to my contrasting vision of America, which is hopeful and inclusive rather than dark and divisive This perspective emphasizes being big-hearted and lifting people up instead of putting them down, reflecting my heartfelt belief that we are stronger together.
[Premise 1: disagreements with Republicans; Premise 2: different vision of America →
Conclusion: I believe this with all my heart, we are stronger together]
In H31-Logos-Enth, two premises were utilized to reach a conclusive argument: the first highlighted Clinton's portrayal of Trump's negative qualities, while the second exemplified her contrasting vision for America Clinton aimed to persuade Americans that Trump did not embody “justice and fairness” or support “criminal justice reform.” To emphasize her pivotal role in ushering in a new era of optimism and success, she effectively employed enthymeme in her rhetoric The initial premise illustrated conflicts with Republicans, followed by a strong assertion of Clinton's distinct vision, ultimately leading to the conclusion that America would thrive under her leadership.
To support her reasonings and arguments, Clinton also resorted to examples in her Logos Some instances of the use of examples are illustrated as follows.
As Americans, we possess remarkable strengths to tackle challenges, including a dynamic and diverse population, exceptionally tolerant and generous youth, and a powerful military Our innovative entrepreneurs drive progress, while our enduring values of freedom, equality, justice, and opportunity define our identity We should take pride in being associated with these principles.
In the past eight years, American businesses have generated 15 million new jobs, significantly contributing to economic recovery Additionally, 20 million Americans now have health coverage, with Latino Americans experiencing the largest decrease in uninsured rates due to the Affordable Care Act This week brings even more positive developments.
I met a young girl in a wheelchair who expressed her strong desire to attend school, a dream that felt unattainable at the time Her story reminded me of my mother's childhood struggles, highlighting the challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in accessing education.
Caring alone is insufficient for driving meaningful change; it requires transforming both hearts and laws Achieving this demands a combination of understanding and actionable steps By gathering facts and forming a coalition, we successfully influenced Congress to guarantee educational access for all students with disabilities.
To effectively reinforce her arguments, Clinton utilized a plethora of examples, showcasing the remarkable qualities of Americans in overcoming challenges She praised their traits with positive descriptors such as “the most tolerant and generous” and “the most innovative,” which served to enhance her logical appeal Rather than relying on vague statements, Clinton backed her claims with concrete achievements, citing statistics like “15 million new jobs” and “20 million Americans with health coverage.” This strategy not only resonated with the audience but also increased her chances of winning their support Additionally, she employed storytelling to further strengthen her reasoning, sharing a poignant encounter with a young girl in a wheelchair that inspired her to advocate for health insurance policies for children and educational programs for the disadvantaged Through these real-life examples, Clinton demonstrated that genuine action speaks louder than words.
The analysis of Clinton's election statements will focus on the use of Logos, examining both interpersonal and ideational functions to reveal the power dynamics and underlying ideologies embedded in her persuasive strategies.
To strengthen her Logos through reasoning and argumentation, Clinton employed various modalities that added specific meanings and nuances to her speech, highlighting the interpersonal metafunction of clauses and the perceived validity of her propositions Examples of these modalities in her Logos included:
Table 4.8 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s Logos
Persuasive strategies Instances Modality Type
None of us can raise a family, build a business, heal a community or lift a country totally alone
America relies on each of us to contribute our energy, talents, and ambition to enhance and strengthen our nation The phrase "stronger together" serves as a historical lesson and a campaign slogan, embodying a guiding principle for our country We envision a future where the economy benefits everyone, not just the privileged few.
Persuasive strategies Instances Modality Type
We're going to have to protect ourselves against that too
To combat unjustified price increases for essential, life-saving medications, we must impose penalties on companies attempting to exploit vulnerable patients Additionally, it is crucial to establish a cap on the monthly out-of-pocket expenses that working families incur for their prescriptions, ensuring that healthcare remains accessible and affordable for all.
Pathos in Hillary Clinton’s Political Speeches
Hillary Clinton effectively utilized Pathos in her presidential election speeches to engage and influence her audience's emotions This strategy aimed to connect with listeners on a deeper level, fostering empathy and resonance with her message.
Table 4.13 Pathos in Hillary Clinton’s political speeches
In her presidential campaign, Clinton effectively utilized Pathos to evoke strong emotions such as hatred, admiration, and confidence among her audience This emotional strategy aimed to either amplify or soothe the audience's feelings, ultimately facilitating successful persuasion By intentionally directing emotions and attitudes, Clinton was able to achieve her desired impact and influence her supporters.
In her rhetoric, Hillary Clinton primarily employed friendship as the most significant pathos, followed by admiration, hatred, and confidence She aimed to soothe the audience by expressing deep admiration for American traditions and the contributions of its people Clinton highlighted the humble yet admirable values of individuals in her stories, fostering a sense of compassion However, she also strategically incited hatred towards Donald Trump, utilizing negative language to emphasize her disdain By portraying Trump as a boastful figure who neglects his responsibilities, Clinton contrasted his perceived entitlement with the core American values of liberty and justice She labeled him as a proponent of divisive rhetoric and racism, particularly in relation to Mexican immigrants and federal judges, thereby reinforcing her position against his extreme policies.
Hillary Clinton, a seasoned politician with extensive experience in the federal political system, consistently displayed confidence, which helped her gain the trust of her audience during her presidential campaign against Trump Her ability to inspire confidence in her leadership promised a future filled with hope and ambition.
In America, we instill in our children the values of unity and equality, emphasizing that our nation is one under God, offering liberty and justice for everyone, regardless of appearance or belief Many express their alarm over the extreme policies and divisive language from my opponent, including the racist claims about Mexican immigrants that marked the start of his campaign, as well as his derogatory remarks towards a federal judge Such behavior is not only insulting but fundamentally misguided.
I have a deep love for our country and unwavering faith in the American people, knowing that we can achieve anything when we unite Throughout history, Americans have come together to face challenges, defending democracy and establishing the world's strongest middle class They have advocated for civil rights, voting rights, workers' rights, union rights, LGBT rights, and the rights of individuals with disabilities.
The individual boasts about exploiting loopholes to avoid paying his fair share of taxes, likely having evaded federal taxes for many years Despite disparaging our military and criticizing essential institutions like healthcare and education, he has likely contributed nothing to support our troops, veterans, schools, or healthcare systems.
The analysis of Hillary Clinton's presidential election speeches reveals the interpersonal function of her rhetoric, focusing on modality and appraisal resources related to attitudes This examination highlights how her use of language reflects underlying ideologies and power dynamics, providing a detailed discussion of each aspect.
Clinton effectively employed various modalities to enhance her Pathos and evoke emotions in her audience, aiming to persuade and resonate with them on a deeper level These techniques were strategically designed to mirror her feelings and stimulate similar emotions among listeners, reinforcing her persuasive message Examples of the modalities utilized are presented in the accompanying table.
Table 4.14 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s Pathos
Persuasive strategies Instances Modalit y Type
In my campaign, I am committed to prioritizing opportunities for children and ensuring fairness for families, just as I did at the Children's Defense Fund at the start of my career If elected president, I will uphold these values and focus on creating a brighter future for all.
In this election, we face a crucial moral responsibility to empower families, including hers, to achieve their dreams The focus should not be on trivial matters like golf course promotions or birth certificates, but rather on providing every family with the opportunity to rise and succeed.
It come down to who will fight for the forgotten, who will invest in our children, who will really have your back in the White House will probability, median
Think about that for a minute Because every single one of us has something to contribute To this great country We are already great but we can be greater
We will achieve greatness together, fueled by our love for our country and unwavering belief in the American people When we set our minds to a goal, there is nothing we cannot accomplish.
We are committed to ending family detention and closing private facilities, while also halting raids and roundups No child should face the distress of saying goodbye to their parents each morning, uncertain if they will return home.
Hillary Clinton predominantly utilized low and median value modalities rather than high value ones, reflecting her intention to engage in negotiation with her audience By presenting her ideologies and viewpoints, she aimed to influence and persuade them to align with her perspective In terms of Pathos, Clinton employed the modality "will," which signifies a higher level of modal commitment, to convey her emotions and express her desire to achieve significant goals.
Clinton's aspiration to serve as President of the United States was a profound honor for her, reflecting her commitment to children and families Her mission centered on spreading love and fulfilling her obligations to those in need, showcasing her dedication to creating a positive impact in society.
Pathos-Fe) employed “will” to strengthen the Clinton’s commitment and power through verbal expression
Summary
This chapter explores Hillary Clinton's persuasive strategies—Ethos, Logos, and Pathos—using Fairclough's three-layered model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) It examines these strategies through interpersonal, ideational, and textual functions to reveal the ideologies Clinton aimed to convey to her audience The findings serve as a foundation for the subsequent Interpretation Stage in Chapter 6, which will contrast the persuasive techniques of various politicians Additionally, the Explanation Stage will analyze the differing ideologies and power dynamics involved in their efforts to persuade voters during the presidential election.
CHAPTER 5 PERSUASIVE STRATEGIES IN DONALD TRUMP’S
In Chapter 5, the analysis focuses on Trump's use of persuasive strategies in his presidential election speeches, following Fairclough’s CDA three-layered model The chapter examines each strategy through the lens of Aristotle’s persuasive appeals—Ethos, Logos, and Pathos—emphasizing their role in achieving interpersonal, textual, and ideational functions This exploration ultimately reveals the power wielded by the politician and the ideologies intentionally conveyed for persuasive impact.
Ethos in Donald Trump’s Political Speeches
Donald Trump built his image and credibility through rhetorical proofs in Ethos, emphasizing his perceived intelligence, virtuous character, and goodwill In his presidential election speeches, he strategically leveraged these elements to effectively persuade his target audience.
Table 5.1 Ethos in Donald Trump’s political speeches
Donald Trump's discourse showcased his Ethos by highlighting his intelligence, aimed at convincing the audience of his competence as a future presidential candidate for America This intelligence underscored his credibility and trustworthiness, potentially swaying voters in his favor His strategic use of intelligence was evident in several key instances throughout his speech.
I've successfully conducted significant business with China, achieving impressive results My portfolio includes tenants in various properties, and I co-own the Bank of America building in San Francisco with an exceptional team We pride ourselves on having the most dedicated and intelligent individuals in the industry.
I am not a politician; my background is in business, where I've focused on creating jobs and revitalizing neighborhoods I have always avoided the insider jargon and political correctness that complicate communication Fourteen months ago, I launched my presidential campaign with a commitment to return the government to the people Since then, I have dedicated myself to honoring the trust you have placed in me, constantly aware of the significant stakes for our country This commitment will remain a top priority in a Trump Administration.
In my administration, I will strictly enforce laws protecting classified information and prohibit senior officials from exchanging favors for cash by banning them from receiving extravagant speaking fees through their spouses while in office Additionally, I will require senior officials to sign an agreement that prevents them from accepting speaking fees from corporations with registered lobbyists or any entities linked to foreign governments for five years after leaving office.
Trump strategically enhanced his image and credibility by emphasizing his business acumen rather than his political achievements, stating, “I’ve done great business with China I’ve done well with China.” He acknowledged his lack of political experience but demonstrated a deep understanding of economic and political issues, linking his business success to potential political leadership and reforms By proposing signed agreements with senior officials to curb excessive speaking fees from foreign engagements, he positioned himself as a solution-oriented candidate Recognizing the economy as a critical foundation for national prosperity, Trump articulated his insights on America’s economic challenges and solutions, thereby reinforcing his expertise in economics developed over a lifetime in business.
In addition to his perceived intelligence, Trump's emphasis on virtuous character traits enhanced his ethos, effectively communicating his genuine intentions for the benefit of the people and the nation This approach not only bridged the social gap between him and his audience but also fostered a positive relationship between them.
In my Administration, all Americans will be treated with equal respect and protection, as we stand united against bigotry, hatred, and oppression We aim to foster a future grounded in our shared culture and values, promoting unity among the American people.
The nation's deteriorating roads, bridges, and airports will be upgraded to meet essential infrastructure needs Children currently trapped in underperforming government schools will gain access to their preferred educational institutions The government will transform into a lean, efficient, and accountable entity Additionally, our borders will be secured, ensuring the safety of our children.
Trump sharpened his character to purposefully gain the trust from the audience
In T7-Ethos-VCh, Trump articulated a range of intentions addressing social issues like equality and the avoidance of hatred, alongside economic concerns regarding infrastructure for the American populace By emphasizing themes of education, politics, and national security in T8-Ethos-VCh, he positioned himself as a compassionate leader with virtuous character The topic of children, often evoking deep emotions from society, was deliberately highlighted by Trump, focusing on their education and safety to enhance his image as a leader with good intentions and a caring heart.
To enhance his positive brand image and persuade the audience, qualities that promote goodwill were emphasized to bolster Trump's credibility Analyzing these attributes provides valuable insights into his character and fosters a deeper understanding of his appeal.
Thank you for the warm welcome back to Iowa My time spent in this state has truly been one of the highlights of my campaign Together, we will secure a victory in Iowa this November, paving the way for us to win the White House and Make America Great Again.
Thank you, Nigel, for your incredible work! You truly accomplished an amazing feat against all odds, despite everyone doubting its possibility Your determination and skill have proven that challenges can be overcome.
Throughout this campaign, I have encountered many remarkable individuals, but my experiences with the families of the Remembrance Project have profoundly impacted me Their unwavering strength and courage in their often solitary pursuit of justice is truly inspiring.
In his address, Trump emphasized the vital role of the audience in achieving his goals, uniting himself with them as a cohesive team on a shared mission He highlighted the importance of collaboration by repeatedly using the word "together," inviting attendees to join him in the noble pursuit of making America great again Trump articulated that through their combined efforts, they would secure successive victories, starting with winning Iowa in November and culminating in capturing the White House.
Logos in Donald Trump’s Political Speeches
Logos features in Donald Trump’s political speeches could be classified 2 types: m
Enthymeme regarding logical arguments via premises, and examples to give evidences and relevant proofs
Table 5.7 Logos in Donald Trump’s political speeches
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump often utilize rhetorical proofs, particularly enthymemes, in their presidential election speeches This persuasive strategy involves presenting logical arguments through premises to draw temporary conclusions, effectively highlighting their qualities and values in comparison to their competitors Both speakers frequently employ argumentation and reasoning to intentionally undermine their opponents, diminishing their image while simultaneously elevating their own with distinct superior traits and values.
The policies of Hillary Clinton have led to significant issues, exemplified by the disappearance of 33,000 emails To achieve real change, we must replace the current leadership, as relying on the same politicians who created our problems will not lead to solutions A new future demands fresh leadership to effectively address these challenges.
[Premise 1: America could not rely on a politician like Hillary whose scandals were revealed
→ Conclusion 1: America should change leadership; Premise 2: fixing problems created by a problematic politician was impossible → Conclusion 2: a new leadership was expected]
When discussing immigration reform, politicians often refer to amnesty, open borders, and reduced wages This failure to secure our borders and enforce existing laws has resulted in the tragic loss of countless innocent American lives Many Americans who have died in recent years could have been saved had it not been for the open border policies promoted by the current administration and its predecessors, particularly those associated with Hillary Clinton.
[Premise: politicians’ promises about their responsibilities to be fulfilled → Conclusion: countless American people were suffering due to the failure of Hillary Clinton’s administration in fulfilling their duties]
Trump countered Clinton's stance by highlighting the common tendency of politicians to make promises about their responsibilities to the nation, particularly concerning issues like amnesty, open borders, and wage reductions Ironically, the actual outcomes have revealed significant failures in these areas.
Clinton’s administration in implementing “their duty to secure the borders” or in
“enforcing the law”, pushing both the nation and its people to the verge of hardship and obstacles and leading to countless American fatalities (as in T13-Logos-Enth)
This was the conclusion drawn by Trump to arouse the audience’s suspicion toward Clinton’s leadership and capacity in ensuring a healthy America Additionally, in T8-
In his campaign, Trump emphasized the importance of addressing his rival's scandals, notably highlighting the issue of the Democratic candidate's missing confidential emails He argued that relying on a problematic leader like Clinton would lead America into further troubles Concluding that a change in leadership was essential for the nation's salvation, he confidently proclaimed, "A new future requires brand new leadership," urging listeners to embrace a mindset focused on replacing the current administration with a vision for a brighter future.
Examples were also employed in Trump’s Logos to foster his reasonings and arguments Some instances of examples can be illustrated as follows
The Democratic Party's leadership in Detroit has led to alarming statistics, with 40% of residents living in poverty and half unable to find work Additionally, Detroit ranks as the most dangerous city in the United States for violent crime, highlighting the consequences of prolonged Democratic governance.
Hillary Clinton represents a troubling return to a past where politicians exploited vulnerable citizens for their own benefit The Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals that Michigan once had 285,000 auto workers before NAFTA, but that figure has now plummeted to 160,000 With new car manufacturing plants emerging in Mexico, the outlook for American auto jobs continues to deteriorate.
In his speeches, Trump effectively utilized numerous examples to reinforce his arguments, particularly through the use of enthymemes that highlighted the evidence of his claims For instance, he illustrated the consequences of failed democratic governance in Detroit by citing alarming statistics on unemployment, violence, and poverty among residents In contrast, he depicted Clinton as a greedy politician who sacrificed citizens for personal gain, referencing the detrimental impact of NAFTA, which saw Michigan's auto workforce plummet from 285,000 to 160,000 due to job losses to Mexico This served as a compelling example to criticize Clinton's business acumen Additionally, Trump incorporated personal stories to further convey his message, providing supplementary evidence that bolstered his criticisms of his opponent and aimed to persuade the audience in his favor during the presidential campaign.
Table 5.8 illustrates the distribution of modality in Donald Trump's presidential statements, emphasizing the role of Logos as a key strategy employed by the Republican candidate to enhance his persuasive efforts.
Table 5.8 Distribution of modality in Donald Trump’s Logos
To make a difference, it's essential to vote on November 8th, engage in grassroots efforts like door-to-door campaigning, and reach out through phone calls Visit our website for more information on how you can help Let's share the love and passion we have in this room with communities across the country.
To beat the system, you have to lift your voice, pound the pavement and get out the vote have to obligation, high
The snake symbolizes the dangers associated with increasing immigration from areas known for terrorism As more individuals from these regions enter, the likelihood of negative consequences rises It's crucial to recognize and discuss these issues openly, as they impact our safety and security.
The FBI has reopened its investigation into Hillary Clinton, uncovering 650,000 emails that raise serious concerns about her candidacy This development suggests significant wrongdoing, leading to claims that she should not be eligible to run for president Critics argue that the political system is rigged, emphasizing the need for accountability in such high-stakes situations.
The United States faces a staggering $20 trillion in debt, compounded by over $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities and an uncontrollable budget with persistent annual deficits To secure the future of our country and protect the interests of our loved ones, it is imperative to dismantle the failing political establishment.
In his persuasive strategy, Trump utilized high and median modalities like "have to" and "should" to convey a sense of obligation In T10.8-Logos-Enth, he expressed his desire for audience engagement in the election, urging them to take action by picking up the phone, visiting websites, and amplifying their voices, which aligned with imperative sentences This approach empowered him to motivate the audience to act decisively He emphasized that by following his guidance, they could overcome challenges and achieve success Additionally, in T4.7-Logos-Enth, Trump reinforced his reasoning by posing numerous questions, encouraging the audience to thoughtfully consider various issues.
In posing the question, “should I do it again?” the speaker encourages the audience to engage in self-reflection and discover their own solutions These rhetorical questions serve to provoke deeper thought and raise awareness of the darkness and ignorance they may be experiencing Similarly, Trump’s use of modality with terms like “should” and “shouldn’t” further emphasizes this logical appeal, prompting listeners to consider the implications of their choices.
Pathos in Donald Trump’s Political Speeches
Trump effectively utilized Pathos to evoke strong emotions in his audience, aiming to address issues of advocacy and dissent His strategy predominantly focused on instilling feelings of anger, hatred, and fear, which he leveraged to enhance his persuasive communication.
Table 5.13 Pathos in Donald Trump’s political speeches
Our movement is not just a campaign; it embodies the dedication of millions of hardworking individuals who are passionate about their country and aspire for a better future for themselves and their families.
In our commitment to prioritizing America's interests, we also strive for fairness and collaboration with all nations and peoples Our goal is to foster common ground and partnerships rather than conflict I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to those who contributed to what is being recognized as a historic victory tonight.
(T17.6-Pathos-Fr) While my opponent slanders you as deplorable and irredeemable, I call you hardworking American patriots who love your family and love your country
Pathos in friendship emphasizes gratitude, love, and community to evoke inner strength and power For effective persuasion, Trump aimed to create allies among his audience by offering compliments and fostering a sense of harmony He characterized his campaign not merely as a political endeavor but as "an incredible and great movement" of patriots seeking a "brighter future" for themselves and their loved ones This approach acknowledged the audience's patriotism while encouraging individual self-defense for national peace and well-being Additionally, Trump frequently expressed gratitude to his companions and supporters throughout his presidential election journey.
Fr) as a way to praise their hard work and motivate them for further contributions 5.3.1.2 Hatred
Hillary Clinton is often criticized as the "queen of corruption," and many believe that her presidency would lead to significant turmoil, particularly in terms of national security Concerns are raised that if she were to become president, terrorism could severely undermine the foundations of the country.
(T34.2-Pathos-Ha) Hillary Clinton is the most corrupt person ever to seek the office of the presidency of the United States
(T17.7-Pathos-Ha) Hillary Clinton has been there in Washington for 30 years – her disastrous record speaks for itself The only people she delivers for is her donors
Showing negative feeling, such as hatred or scornfulness was the strategy which m
Trump aimed to foster social distance by promoting his positive stance on Republican values while actively opposing his campaign rival, Hillary Clinton This strategy was designed to strengthen his political relationships and reinforce support within his party.
Specifically, He criticized Clinton as the “ queen of corruption”, “a disaster”,
Donald Trump criticized Hillary Clinton, labeling her as "crooked" and linking her administration to potential national downfall He condemned her ambition to run for president, arguing that her history of scandals demonstrated a lack of concern for citizens, as her focus appeared to be on her donors and personal gain.
Many individuals in the audience may soon discover that their jobs are at risk due to companies relocating from Mexico or other locations This shift can lead to widespread devastation, resulting in unemployment and a loss of stability for many workers.
To evoke feelings of fear and annoyance among voters, Trump utilized fear appeals, drawing on his background as a businessman rather than a politician This strategy aimed to exploit the mistakes of his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, by painting a bleak picture of America characterized by rising unemployment due to outsourcing By foreseeing potential disasters and linking them to Clinton, Trump sought to instill a deep sense of fear in the audience, encouraging them to align with his perspective instead.
(T17.5-Pathos-Conf) Jobs will return, incomes will rise and new factories will come rushing back to our shores m
We will revitalize our infrastructure by rebuilding roads, bridges, tunnels, highways, airports, schools, and hospitals, ensuring American cars, planes, and ships thrive With American steel, we will construct new skyscrapers, powered by energy sourced domestically Our focus is on hiring American workers to restore our nation, reinforcing its backbone with new steel I am committed to advocating for every overlooked area and uniting us as one American people.
Despite the challenges facing the U.S., Trump remained optimistic about the nation's revival, aiming to make it "great again." His proposed plans indicated signs of improvement across various sectors, including the economy through job creation, increased incomes, and factory construction He emphasized infrastructure development by advocating for new roads, bridges, and schools, while also focusing on energy initiatives Trump's determination to unite American citizens as "One American People" showcased his strong will and belief in the country's potential for transformation.
Trump’s confidence in uttering his promises sowed positive belief among the audience and made them start believing in him
Thank you, Maria, for your introduction and for the invaluable efforts of your organization in honoring the lives of stolen Americans and advocating for justice for all victims across the nation.
Throughout this campaign, I have encountered many remarkable individuals, but my most profound experiences have come from my time with the families involved in the Remembrance Project Their extraordinary strength and unwavering courage in their often solitary pursuit of justice have deeply touched me.
Donald Trump's expressions of admiration and gratitude highlight his use of pathos, showcasing essential leadership qualities By acknowledging the contributions of individuals like Maria for her dedication and the courageous efforts of others fighting for justice, Trump fosters a sense of respect and appreciation This recognition not only strengthens the bond between him and his supporters but also encourages them to continue their support and serve as role models for others.
There are currently over 2 million criminal aliens with convictions in the United States, alongside many others who have evaded justice As President, my priority will be to swiftly remove these individuals from our country Additionally, we must remain vigilant against the infiltration of terrorists into our nation.
A CONTRASTIVE ANALYSIS OF PERSUASIVE
A Contrastive Analysis of Ethos in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump employed Aristotle's persuasive strategies—Ethos, Logos, and Pathos—in their presidential election speeches The analysis of these strategies reveals distinct approaches utilized by both politicians, as detailed in Table 6.1, which outlines the distribution of their persuasive techniques.
Table 6.1 Persuasive strategies employed in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s political speeches
The factors entailing the realization of Ethos strategy in discourse as highlighted by Aristotle (Aristotle in Griffin, 2011, p.292) were perceived intelligence, virtuous character and goodwill In Hillary Clinton’s and Donald
Trump’s election speeches, these factors were also utilized with distinguished percentages with a view to conducting the act of persuasion towards the audience In
In the analysis of persuasive strategies during the presidential campaigns, Ethos accounted for 20% of Clinton's tactics compared to 9% for Trump Clinton employed Logos more effectively, utilizing logical reasoning in 17% of her arguments, while Trump used it in 13% Both candidates relied heavily on Pathos to engage the audience emotionally, with Clinton and Trump using this strategy 63% and 78% of the time, respectively Clinton's emotional appeals primarily invoked feelings of hatred, admiration, and confidence, whereas Trump's rhetoric tended to elicit fear and anger.
The following section will closely look at each persuasive strategy with its distinctive features and metafunctions to eventually unearth the ideologies and power as embedded in these strategies m
Aristotle's Ethos strategy in discourse emphasizes three key factors: perceived intelligence, virtuous character, and goodwill (Griffin, 2011, p.292) Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump employed these elements in their election speeches, albeit with varying degrees of emphasis to persuade their audiences effectively Figure 6.1 illustrates the percentage distribution of each Ethos category in the speeches of Clinton and Trump.
Figure 6.1 Ethos’s features in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s political speeches
Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump employed Ethos in their speeches to project intelligence, virtuous character, and goodwill, aiming to convince the audience of their competence as presidential candidates Their caring nature and good intentions were evident, particularly in Clinton's approach, where 42% of her Ethos instances emphasized virtuous character, significantly surpassing Trump's 14% In contrast, Trump focused heavily on showcasing his intelligence, with 82% of his Ethos instances dedicated to establishing credibility and trustworthiness, compared to Clinton's 28% This strategic use of Ethos played a crucial role in shaping the candidates' persuasive efforts during the election.
VCh Gw PIn demonstrated a balanced distribution of goodwill and intelligence, while Donald Trump showcased a significantly higher intelligence percentage at 82%, with goodwill at 10% and virtuous character at 8%.
Clinton emphasized her extensive political experience and problem-solving capabilities to establish her credibility with voters, while Trump focused on showcasing his economic intelligence as his primary strength Both candidates portrayed themselves as strong leaders with commendable character, using their values and motives to foster trust among the audience Additionally, their expressions of gratitude towards supporters and their dedication to presidential responsibilities highlighted their qualities as effective leaders.
Modality employment in Trump and Clinton’s discourse can be displayed in
Table 6.2 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Ethos
Type Value Word Frequency Percentage
Low may 8 1 3 0 might 2 1 1 0 can 0 0 0 0 could 13 7 4 3
Obligation High must 0 5 0 2 have to 18 7 5 3
According to Halliday (1994), modal commitment can be categorized into three levels: high, median, and low Each level conveys distinct meanings, highlighting the varying degrees of certainty in a proposition Modality plays a crucial role in interpersonal communication by indicating the validity of statements.
Osei, p.36) and also shows the speaker’s opinion and judgment about the probabilities presented Table 6.2 shows the distribution of modality in Hillary Clinton’s and
Donald Trump’s Ethos, functioning as one strategic way which two presidential candidates utilized to achieve their purpose of persuasion
Figure 6.2 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Ethos
In the analysis of presidential speeches by Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the modal verb "will" emerged with notable frequency, accounting for 55% of Trump's speech and 37% of Clinton's, indicating a strong emphasis on probability and future actions compared to other modal verbs used.
In the analysis of modal verb usage, "should" and "have to" were notably prevalent; however, Trump's usage of these verbs was significantly lower than that of Clinton Specifically, Clinton utilized "should" in 7% of her statements, whereas Trump only used it in 1% of his Conversely, Trump employed "have to" more frequently than Clinton, highlighting a distinct difference in their communication styles.
The analysis of modal verb usage reveals a correlation with the persuasive strategies employed by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Specifically, the modal verbs associated with Ethos, which emphasizes the speakers' credibility and ability to fulfill responsibilities, are strategically used to reinforce their promises for the future This connection highlights how language choices can enhance persuasive communication in political discourse.
60% can't will would may might can could must have to should
Clinton and Trump's use of modal verbs reflects their commitment to fulfilling campaign promises as U.S presidents, showcasing their determination to implement measures and actions once in office.
The appraisal system has helped researchers uncover how speakers express their attitudes towards listeners, effectively communicating their ideologies through persuasive elements This study aligns with politicians' emotions, focusing on the sub-types of Attitude: Affect, Judgment of Behavior, and Appreciation of Things Previous sections have thoroughly examined these aspects, and a contrastive analysis will be presented to highlight the differing persuasive strategies employed by the two politicians This approach aims to enhance our understanding of their strategic use of persuasion in discourse.
6.5 respectively show the findings in Trump’s and Clinton’s distribution of Affect, Judgement and Appreciation
Table 6.3 Affect in Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton’s Ethos
Speaker Happiness Security Satisfaction Inclination Total Affect Donald
Table 6.3 reveals that both Trump and Clinton exhibited similar configurations of Affect, with Desire/Inclination being the most prominent in their Ethos-driven utterances Trump expressed 276 instances of positive Affect compared to 2 negative, while Clinton had 245 positive and 45 negative instances Clinton's positive satisfaction followed closely, with 120 mentions versus Trump's 56 Both candidates demonstrated a strong desire to instigate change for the U.S., promising a brighter future through numerous plans Additionally, they expressed admiration for the American people, acknowledging their sacrifices and contributions to the nation's development, as well as gratitude for their support during the campaign.
Table 6.4 presents an analysis of Judgment in the rhetoric of Trump and Clinton, focusing on Ethos The findings reveal a clear distinction between positive and negative sentiments, categorized into five key areas: Normality.
Capacity, Tenacity, Veracity, and Propriety are key attributes highlighted in the positive judgment items, with Trump having 59 and Clinton 76 Phrases like “make sure” and “stand up” reflect both candidates' strong confidence in their ability to lead the U.S towards becoming a robust, secure, and prosperous nation, effectively persuading voters to support them in the presidential race.
Table 6.4 Judgement Appraisal in the Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton’s Ethos
Speaker Normality Capacity Tenacity Veracity Propriety Total
A Contrastive Analysis of Logos in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s
Logos is a persuasive strategy that employs logical arguments and facts to influence an audience, and it was prominently featured in the presidential election speeches of both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Clinton utilized 213 instances of Logos, primarily through enthymemes, while Trump employed a lower number of 157 instances.
Figure 6.8 Logos’s features in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s political speeches
Both Clinton and Trump effectively utilized enthymemes and examples in their speeches to support their arguments, with Clinton employing enthymemes 76% of the time compared to Trump's 73% Their use of examples was also comparable, with Clinton at 24% and Trump at 27% Analysis from Chapters 4 and 5 revealed that Trump primarily used Logos to critique Clinton and her administration's past failures, while Clinton's verbal attacks focused on questioning Trump's capability to lead the nation toward a better future.
The distribution of modalities in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos were displayed in the following table and chart
Figure 6.9 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos
Table 6.6 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos
Type Value Word Frequency Percentage
Low may 6 3 2 1 might 4 0 2 0 can 0 25 0 10 could 28 9 12 3
Obligation High must 3 10 1 4 have to 39 34 17 13
As can be seen from Table 6.6, “will” constituted the highest percentage among various modal verbs used in the two politicians’ presidential election speeches
50% can't will would may might can could must have to should
In comparing the use of modal verbs in the logos of Clinton and Trump, it is evident that Trump favored "will," which constituted 48% of his modal usage, while Clinton employed "have to" more frequently, with 17% versus Trump's 13% Clinton's use of "have to" emphasized her commitment to collective responsibility in safeguarding and strengthening the nation A notable contrast emerged in their use of "should," with Clinton adopting a more advisory tone to maintain politeness, while Trump opted for a direct approach Additionally, Trump’s use of "must" illustrated his authoritative stance, urging listeners to take action.
Logos serves as a persuasive strategy that employs logical reasoning through premises and conclusions to achieve the speaker's objectives In the context of political discourse, the use of Logos is enhanced by appraisal techniques that express attitudes and foster interpersonal connections between politicians and their audiences The analysis of Affect, Judgment, and Appreciation within the Logos of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump is effectively illustrated in the accompanying tables.
Table 6.7 Affect in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos
Speaker Happiness Security Satisfaction Inclination Total Affect Donald
According to Table 6.7, both Trump and Clinton produced all features of
Both politicians aimed to persuade their audience by expressing a shared vision for a better future, which fostered trust in their potential presidencies This strategy resulted in a notable use of positive affective language by both the Democratic and Republican candidates.
Table 6.8 Judgement in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos
Speaker Normality Capacity Tenacity Veracity Propriety Total
In the analysis of Judgement (Table 6.8), both Trump and Clinton frequently employed positive Judgement items related to capacity Trump emphasized his ability to initiate significant change in various aspects of life, while Clinton focused on strategically positioning herself to gain an advantage over Trump, effectively undermining his presidential candidacy Notably, Clinton's argumentation prominently featured the phrases “make sure,” highlighting her future plans upon election, and “stand up,” which underscored the measures she intended to implement Additionally, Clinton utilized the term “good” to enhance her persuasive strategies, painting an optimistic vision for America's future and its citizens.
Table 6.9 Appreciation in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos
Appreciation Impact Quality Balance Complexity
In analyzing the appreciation expressions in the presidential speeches of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, it is evident that Trump's rhetoric encompasses both positive and negative reactions, as well as composition and valuation According to Table 6.9, Trump strategically utilized a balanced mix of negative and positive expressions to emphasize his significant influence on America's change process while simultaneously undermining his opponent's contributions to the nation.
The transitivity system, which illustrates the ideational function, was utilized to emphasize the use of Logos in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump The analysis, depicted in Figure 6.10, reveals the distribution of various processes within the transitivity system as applied by both candidates.
Figure 6.10 Ideational function in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Logos
In both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton's presidential election speeches, the use of material processes significantly supported their persuasive strategy of Logos These speeches included premises that depicted societal realities and actual situations, ultimately leading to conclusions designed to engage the audience's participation and critical thinking The emphasis on material processes highlighted the tangible aspects of their arguments, reinforcing their overall effectiveness in persuasion.
The politicians' proactive approach during their campaigns aimed to counteract the prevailing negativity in the U.S and foster a sense of optimism While Trump utilized 702 material processes in his speeches compared to Clinton's 687, both candidates demonstrated a similar high percentage of these processes, highlighting their focus on appealing to logic and reason.
Mental processes play a crucial role in the rhetoric of politicians, ranking second in their use of Logos Defined as a process of "sensing," these mental activities encompass psychological aspects such as affection, cognition, and perception, significantly influencing how individuals interpret their messages.
Material mental Relational Verbal Existential Behavioral m
Understanding the psychological concerns of many Americans regarding issues like illegal immigration, terrorism, and bribery, Trump proposed a recovery plan aimed at making his policies easily comprehensible to garner public support In contrast, Clinton focused on critiquing Trump's strategies related to immigration, education, the economy, and military policies, emphasizing her vision of Americanism to build consensus against his candidacy.
6.2.4 Textual Function: Theme and Rheme
The two politicians also resorted to their topical and interpersonal themes for persuasion Typical illustrations could be shown as follows
Interpersonal theme in Hillary Clinton’s Logos
H2-Logos-Enth Do you know how hard that is?
H4-Logos-Enth Do you know the difference between our allies and our adversaries?
H6.4-Logos-En Are you going to pit Americans against each other and deepen the divides in this country… ?
Figure 6.11 Interpersonal theme – Finite in Hillary Clinton’s Logos
Interpersonal theme in Donald Trump’s Logos
T12-Logos-Enth Do you believe that?
T22-Logos-Enth Do you know what a gun-free zone is?
Figure 6.12 Interpersonal theme – Finite in Donald Trump’s Logos
The two politicians utilized interrogative structures to formulate questions that stimulated critical thinking and self-reasoning, thereby reinforcing their Logos These questions functioned as both interpersonal and topical themes, often taking the form of rhetorical inquiries Rather than seeking direct answers, these questions served as premises for deeper conclusions, strategically engaging the audience in the thinking and argumentation process.
In contrast to Trump's use of vocatives in persuasive strategies, his logos lacked this element, while Clinton emphasized the significance of audience inclusion, addressing Democrats, Republicans, and independents in the fight against "hate and division." Clinton portrayed Trump as an advocate of Americanism through his "America First" slogan, which she argued isolated the U.S from global progress By referencing "hate and division," Clinton characterized Trump as a creator of discord, effectively rejecting his divisive rhetoric.
“hate and division” also meant rejecting Trump and his administration (Figure 6.13)
Democrats, Republicans, independents, all of us are to reject hate and division
Figure 6.13 Vocatives in Hillary Clinton’s Logos
A Contrastive Analysis of Pathos in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s
Pathos, the persuasive strategy aimed at evoking and calming the audience's emotions, is prominently featured in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, each showcasing unique characteristics Figure 6.14 illustrates the contrasting ways in which both politicians employ Pathos in their political discourse.
The analysis of collected data reveals that emotion arousal in political discourse serves two primary purposes: to elevate or to soothe the audience's emotions Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump effectively utilized Pathos in their presidential campaigns to connect with voters Clinton predominantly evoked feelings of hatred and admiration, with these emotions representing 15% and 16% of her rhetoric, respectively In contrast, Trump primarily incited hatred and anger, which accounted for 26% and 13% of his emotional appeals.
Figure 6.14 Pathos in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s political speeches
Clinton criticized her opponent for his boastful demeanor, failure to meet tax obligations, and his divisive "America First" ideology that promotes isolationism She condemned his inhumane treatment of innocent immigrants and his role in fostering fear, hatred, and division within the American populace.
She expressed deep gratitude and admiration for her supporters, coordinators, and partners for their unwavering support throughout her presidential campaign In contrast, Donald Trump aimed to instill fear in his audience by painting a bleak picture of America's future, warning of a looming trade deficit, rising unemployment, and pervasive terrorism Phrases like "Our nation is broken" and "We end up in devastation" were common themes in Trump's election speeches, highlighting his use of pathos to evoke concern among voters.
The findings reveal how modality plays a crucial role in expressing the interpersonal function of Pathos, effectively conveying politicians' emotions while simultaneously engaging the audience's feelings A contrastive analysis is illustrated in Table 6.10 and Figure 6.15.
Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s use of modality in discourse
Table 6.10 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Pathos
Type Value Word Frequency Percentage
Low may 25 22 2% 2% might 1 2 0% 0% can 337 411 32% 31% could 79 38 7% 3%
Obligation High must 14 35 1% 3% have to 90 60 9% 4%
Figure 6.15 Modality in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Pathos
In a comparative analysis of modal verb usage, Hillary Clinton utilized "will" in 24% of her modalities, whereas Donald Trump exhibited a significantly higher frequency at 49% This indicates that Trump relied more heavily on modal verbs in his communication style.
In his use of Pathos, Trump effectively expressed deep-seated hatred, anger, and fears about the nation's future By leveraging these emotions, he positioned himself to propose numerous national reform plans aimed at rectifying past mistakes.
60% can't will would may might can could must have to should
Clinton's use of pathos through modal verbs emphasized a sense of continuity from the previous administration, while Trump positioned himself as the nation's savior, promising to alleviate fears and restore stability, prosperity, and security with his slogan "Make America Great Again."
The modal verb “can” (obligation, low) came the first in the rank of high frequency with the figures of 337 instances in Clinton’s speeches and the second with
During the campaign, both Trump and his Democratic counterpart used the modal verb "can" almost equally, with 411 instances recorded This strategic choice aimed to instill confidence and trust in their audiences By fostering this sense of assurance, both candidates sought to ensure that trust would be sustained and grow, ultimately serving their persuasive goals.
The appraisal system effectively showcased the attitudes of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, revealing their ideologies in detail Tables 6.11, 6.12, and 6.13 illustrate the distribution of various sub-types of attitude, including Affect, Judgment of behavior, and Evaluation of things within their discourse.
Table 6.11 Affect in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Pathos
Speaker Happiness Security Satisfaction Inclination Total Affect
According to Table 6.11, both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton utilized Affect similarly, with a focus on desire/inclination in their Ethos persuasive strategies In terms of Pathos, both candidates expressed a strong desire for comprehensive reforms to improve the U.S and enhance citizens' lives Notably, Trump employed a significantly higher number of positive Affect items related to desire/inclination compared to Clinton, with counts of 1266 and 676 respectively, as he aimed to rectify the perceived failures of the current administration through his political vision.
Table 6.12 presents the analysis of Pathos in the utterances of Trump and Clinton, categorizing Judgment into positive and negative feelings across five areas: Normality, Capacity, Tenacity, Veracity, and Propriety Trump exhibited a higher count of positive Judgment items, totaling 310, compared to Clinton's 294 His use of words like "together" and "start" emphasized solidarity and a commitment to initiating positive change for the nation Conversely, Clinton focused on fostering friendship through her promises for a better future, while simultaneously expressing anger and resentment towards Trump, highlighting the emotional struggles of her audience.
Table 6.12 Judgement in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Pathos
Speaker Normality Capacity Tenacity Veracity Propriety Total
In the terms of Appreciation (Table 6.13), the expression items found in Trump and Clinton’s presidential speeches indicated as the attitude of Trump consist of positive and negative Appreciation
Table 6.13 Appreciation in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Pathos
Speaker Impact Quality Balance Complexity Valuation Total Appreciation
Particularly, Clinton was in favor of describing the impact created by the
Individuals described as "extraordinary" and "amazing" have made significant contributions to the well-being of American society, positively impacting others with their admirable qualities In contrast, Trump emphasized future potential by highlighting the importance of "growth" and "change."
(positive Appreciation items in the realm of capacity) for a more “beautiful” and
“rich” (positive Appreciation items in the realm of quality) future
The following section describes the contrastive analysis between ideational function as demonstrated in Clinton’s and Trump’s persuasive strategies
In their persuasive strategies, Clinton and Trump exhibited notable differences in their use of the transitivity system, particularly in the realm of Pathos aimed at evoking emotions Clinton's approach heavily relied on mental processes, comprising 40% of her rhetoric, while Trump favored material processes, which accounted for 36% This disparity suggests that Clinton focused on engaging the audience's psychological responses, addressing their primary concerns to enhance her persuasiveness By emphasizing the importance of unity for success, Clinton effectively criticized Trump’s claims of solitary leadership, highlighting the illogical nature of his mindset and the shortcomings of his policies Furthermore, as the sole female candidate, Clinton connected with her audience by underscoring her opponent's negative treatment of women, positioning herself as a compassionate advocate for women's rights.
Material Mental Relational Verbal Existential Behavioral
Hillary Clinton emphasized her commitment to gender equality in America, aiming to garner support from female voters through her ideational function In contrast, Donald Trump concentrated on tangible actions, utilizing material processes to communicate his promises He instilled fear and presented a pessimistic view of the future under the Obama-Clinton administration, which served as a backdrop for introducing his plans to improve the situation and transform the city.
6.3.4 Textual Function: Theme and Rheme
Discursive Practices: Donald Trump versus Hillary Clinton - The
This article highlights the significance of text interpretation, emphasizing the processes of distribution and consumption to illustrate discourse practices influenced by social factors It aims to contextualize the meanings of political speeches by Clinton and Trump, as shown in Table 6.14, and examines how these contextual elements relate to the subsequent interpretation of the texts.
Table 6.14 Positioning Text production in the Communicative Context – Interpretation Stage
- Ethos: median value modality “will” regarding probability to highlight intentions, virtuous character & good will
“can” regarding probability to highlight doubtfulness of an action & support reasoning
• median value modality “should” regarding obligation to highlight intentions and proposed plans
- Pathos: median value modality “will” regarding probability to arouse emotion among audience
• desire dominates the utilization of
• positive capacity dominates the utilization of judgement
• more positive judgement than negative ones
• Impact dominates the utilization of
* Material processes took up the highest proportion in Ethos and Logos to enforce Clinton’s credibility and capacity
* Mental processes dominated in Clinton’s Pathos
→ Clinton targeted the audience’s psychological process by criticizing Trump to eventually win more advocacy
Pathos: Clinton used vocatives as interpersonal theme → aroused the audience their spirit as one united community
* Logos: communicate topical and interpersonal themes for persuasion
Interrogative structures to generate questions and trigger thinking and self- reasoning
- Clinton represents for the Democrats
- had had many years in politics -was the first America female to be nominated the president candidate of the U.S
The controversy surrounding Hillary Clinton's use of personal email accounts on a non-government server, rather than federal government servers, during her time as Secretary of State has raised significant concerns regarding the security and transparency of official communications.
30000 emails were marked as confidential
- Ethos: median value modality “will” regarding probability to highlight intentions, virtuous character & good will
“have to” regarding obligation to support reasoning
• median value modality “should” regarding obligation to highlight intentions and proposed plans
- Pathos: median value modality “will” regarding probability to arouse emotion among audience
• positive capacity dominates → the potential competence of Trump’s administration
Judgement than negative ones → fear appeal
- Appreciation: positive Impact dominates → cast a better future for the U.S within Trump’s presidency
* Material processes accounted for the highest frequency in Ethos, Logos and Pathos to strengthen promises, demonstrate power and create social relationship
Logos: using vocatives, Trump regarded the audience as his
“fellow citizens” to seek allies and advocates, generating power and authority and communicating the targeted ideologies
- was originally a successful businessman with no prior military or government service m
During the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump emerged as an outsider and an unconventional Republican nominee, despite his lack of political experience Known for his success in real estate, Trump appealed directly to the American working class, positioning himself as a viable candidate His acceptance speech at the RNC in Cleveland, Ohio, was pivotal in solidifying his nomination for the general election In this speech, Trump aligned his ideology with the Republican Party while contrasting it sharply with Hillary Clinton and the Democratic Party His campaign was marked by aggressive tactics and numerous scandals, yet he consistently emphasized the importance of unity among Americans.
Hillary Clinton made history as the first official female Democratic presidential nominee, marking a significant milestone in American politics After nearly a decade of efforts, she was formally nominated for the 2016 presidential campaign, leveraging her extensive experience as a former New York senator and Secretary of State Despite facing challenges, including controversies over her use of a private email server, Clinton focused on advocating for women's rights, emphasizing issues such as reproductive rights and equal pay Her candidacy aimed to create more opportunities for women and address the systemic sexism they face in the political arena.
In the research context, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, as presidential candidates, engaged in delivering persuasive political speeches aimed at influencing voters Both candidates established a social relationship with their audience, employing persuasive strategies such as Ethos to effectively manipulate public opinion and achieve their electoral goals.
In political discourse, the effective use of Logos and Pathos is crucial for bridging social distances and exerting power The social relationships formed during advocacy are often influenced by specific social groups, highlighting the importance of candidates in winning over audiences and securing votes Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, despite their differing personalities and rhetorical skills, each employed unique strategies to connect with the public and assert their influence.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, the contexts of speeches by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump significantly influenced their ideological communication and power dynamics Hillary Clinton emphasized her extensive political experience, showcasing her roles as a lawyer, activist, diplomat, and Secretary of State, which established her credibility as a seasoned politician Operating within a cultural framework of social and political liberalism, Clinton focused her message on themes of diversity, inclusion, and progressivism.
Donald Trump emphasized his business acumen as he entered politics, aiming to restore America's prominence in global affairs His speeches often highlighted themes of nationalism and a longing for a perceived golden era, reflecting widespread concerns and frustrations related to globalization, immigration, and cultural shifts.
In their presidential election speeches, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump employed distinct persuasive strategies to convey their ideologies and connect with voters, asserting that their actions were in the best interest of the nation Ideologies play a crucial role in shaping social relationships and influencing social order, guiding politicians as they seek power amid varying social, economic, and political contexts The contrasting ideologies of Clinton and Trump reflect their differing political affiliations, with Clinton promoting the message of "Stronger Together" and Trump advocating for "Make America Stronger Again." Trump's ideology emphasizes "Americanism" in opposition to "globalization," while Clinton focuses on collectivism, citizenship rights, and feminist ideals Trump's speeches often invoked fear and highlighted past mistakes, whereas Clinton aimed to inspire courage and resilience among her audience.
The audience, who actively participated in the text interpretation process, was significantly influenced by the ideological communication of the two politicians With sufficient information provided and messages effectively conveyed, the audience ultimately aligned with one political side, establishing social distance and shaping their social relationships.
The Explanation Stage: Social Practices: Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump
Fairclough (1995) proposes a macro level of analysis to explore the relationship between interactions and social structures, emphasizing the significant effects that arise from this connection within the realm of social practice.
Analyzing the broader social and cultural context, along with power dynamics, is essential in understanding how social order, ideological beliefs, and norms influence political discourse This examination connects discursive events to socio-cultural practices By investigating the linguistic strategies employed by Trump, we gain valuable insights into how ideology and power are expressed and challenged within political discourse.
Investigating the historical and cultural context in which Hillary Clinton’s and m
Donald Trump's speeches were delivered can unearth how ideology and power are embedded in broader social and cultural structures
During the Interpretation stage, it is evident that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, as representatives of the Democratic and Republican parties respectively, embodied the contrasting ideologies of their political affiliations Each candidate aimed to establish and maintain power dynamics that aligned with their party's core beliefs In their presidential election speeches, both politicians exerted significant effort to persuade the audience, advocating for their political views and encouraging voters to support them.
Donald Trump's repeated failures and focus on the past administration's mistakes during his presidential election speeches can be attributed to his lack of political experience compared to his rival, Hillary Clinton, who had a well-established position in American politics To counter this disadvantage, Trump strategically chose to attack Clinton by scrutinizing her administration for errors and weaknesses, thereby attempting to elevate his own profile This approach explains the linguistic techniques he employed in his speeches, which emphasized his interpersonal and ideational functions while also showcasing his ethos.
Hillary Clinton's persuasive strategies effectively showcased her confidence and trustworthiness as a leader capable of advancing America's growth and development Recognizing the historical male dominance in American governance, Clinton launched her presidential campaign to promote women's empowerment and social justice, aiming to inspire female advocacy By emphasizing her potential to be the first female president in U.S history, she sought to impart her feminist ideology and reinforce the importance of women in positions of power.
6.5.2 Ideological Beliefs as Manifested in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Persuasive Strategies
Analyzing the ideological foundations of Hillary Clinton's and Donald Trump's speeches reveals how power operates through discourse By exploring the integration of ideology and power within their persuasive strategies, we gain insight into how language is utilized to uphold or contest power dynamics.
In their presidential election speeches, both Clinton and Trump articulated their political ideologies and expressed a profound love, patriotism, and loyalty to their country However, they exhibited significant disagreements on numerous issues An analysis reveals six conflicting ideologies present in their speeches, which can be further explored through the persuasive strategies and linguistic features employed by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
In their presidential election speeches, both Clinton and Trump emphasized the critical role of economics in national development, making it a central theme of their campaigns They presented differing perspectives on the application of the tax code as a means to foster economic growth.
Clinton's tax platform aimed to create a progressive tax system that disproportionately affects high earners by increasing taxes on the wealthy and estates, ensuring that high-income individuals contribute more than those with lower incomes She advocated for significant investments in the nation’s infrastructure, technology, and energy sectors Additionally, Clinton promoted global trade initiatives, including the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) involving 12 countries around the Pacific Rim, excluding China, and the ongoing negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with Europe, as well as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), all designed to stimulate economic growth in the United States.
Table 6.15 Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Promises on the Economy
Clinton’s Promises on the Economy Trump’s Promises on the Economy
- promises to bring back jobs
- promises to support female-owned businesses
- promises to develop the energy industry
- promises to help refinance and pay back as a percentage of income
- promises to create the strongest economy in the world
- promises to support small business
- promises to raise wages for workers
- promises tax cuts for working families
- promises to provide paid family leave
- promises to impose penalties on companies leaving the US
- promises to improve the tax system
- promises to help the poor get out of poverty
- promises to appoint a trade prosecutor
- promises not to raise middle-class federal taxes
- promises to bring back jobs
- promises to be the greatest job president
- promises to save money for America
- promises to create the strongest economy in the world
- promises to make the tax code fairer and simpler
- promises to be tough on companies leaving America
- promises to help workers increase their output
- promises to scrap the Trans-Pacific Partnership
- promises to keep America out of the TPP
- promises to renegotiate disastrous trade deals
- promises to improve jobs and wages for United States citizens
- promises to create opportunities for businesses to grow
- promises to eliminate every unnecessary regulation
Donald Trump proposed a traditional Republican platform focused on tax reductions for households and corporations, leveraging his extensive business experience to advocate for bridging the wealth gap through significant investments and the expulsion of illegal immigrants, whom he blamed for undermining American prosperity He favored protectionist economic policies, arguing that globalization had inflicted more harm than benefit on American workers due to job outsourcing to countries with cheaper labor Trump strongly opposed trade agreements like NAFTA and the TPP, criticizing Hillary Clinton's support for these deals as indicative of her administration's failures and warning that continuing such policies would be detrimental to the nation.
Terrorism has long been a focal point in foreign policy discussions, with both Clinton and Trump emphasizing ISIS as a significant threat to the U.S While both politicians identified terrorism as a common enemy, their approaches and proposed solutions varied significantly, highlighting contrasting ideologies in addressing this pressing issue.
Table 6.16 Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Promises on Terrorism
Clinton’s promises on dealing with
Trump’s promises on dealing with
- Clinton promises to protect people from waves of crime
- Trump promises to protect people from waves of crime
- Clinton promises to develop national security network
- Trump promises to develop national security network
- Clinton promises to destroy terrorism - Trump promises to destroy terrorism
- Clinton promises to protect the country from Radical Islamic Terrorism
- Trump promises to protect the country from Radical Islamic Terrorism
- Clinton promises to reduce crime rate - Trump promises to reduce crime rate
- Clinton promises to keep Radical
Islamic Terrorists out of the country
- Trump promises to keep Radical Islamic Terrorists out of his country m
Table 6.17 Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Promises on Military
Clinton’s Promises on Military Trump’s Promises on Military
- Clinton promises to defeat ISIS
- Clinton promises to help improve the lives of veterans
- Clinton promises to defeat ISIS
- Clinton promises to help improve the lives of veterans
- Clinton promises to defeat ISIS
- Trump promises to improve the military
- Trump promises to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons
- Trump promises to take care of veterans
- Trump promises to make America strong and reliable as a foreign ally
- Trump promises to deploy the military when necessary
- Trump promises to be tough on ISIS
- Trump promises to defeat ISIS
Trump employed fear-based rhetoric by suggesting that refugees might be terrorists infiltrating the U.S., particularly within mosques He advocated for the use of force and heightened surveillance, even targeting the American Muslim community, to combat terrorism Additionally, he fostered Islamophobia by labeling ISIS as the enemy, positioning them against "us," the American people.
Obama advocated for housing Syrian refugees in the U.S while focusing on controlling illegal immigration, particularly among Muslims, to address concerns about terrorism and extremist groups In contrast, Trump proposed hardline policies, including torture and stricter border controls, to persuade voters of the impending disasters facing the nation without his leadership He further intimidated his opponents by accusing Democrats of having ties to ISIS terrorist organizations.
Hillary Clinton's approach focused on empathy for refugees, emphasizing that terrorism and Islamic individuals should not be viewed as a monolith She sought to inspire a sense of unity and pride in America, arguing that closing borders to refugees is inhumane and detrimental to the nation's image, as the U.S has a history of welcoming immigrants Throughout her discourse, Clinton positioned herself as the sole advocate for a comprehensive strategy against ISIS, while ensuring the safety of American citizens.
The 2016 presidential race highlighted immigration as a pivotal issue, revealing stark contrasts in the candidates' political views Hillary Clinton advocated for creating a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and emphasized that her administration would focus on deporting only felons, not families, thereby aiming to protect those who had not committed other crimes.
Table 6.18 Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trump’s Promises on Immigration
Clinton’s promises on Immigration Trump’s promises on Immigration
- Clinton promises comprehensive immigration reform
- Trump promises to build a wall on the southern border to stop illegal immigrant
- Clinton promises to protect immigrants - Trump promises to triple the number of
- Trump promises to hire 5000 more border patron agents and create an advanced immigration system
- Trump promises to end sanctuary cities
- Trump promises to use biometric entry- exit visa tracking systems
The Effects of Ideologies as Manifested in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald Trumps’ Persuasive Strategies – The Explanation Stage
This article examines the impact of ideologies on the persuasive strategies of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump across three levels: situational, institutional, and societal It highlights how these ideologies significantly influence the politicians' ability to exert power over their audiences.
Political speeches serve to convey political messages and ideologies, aiming to manipulate and persuade audiences while establishing social relationships amid conflicting political views During the presidential election, both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump delivered impactful speeches that led to significant backlash and criticism from each other Clinton accused Trump of providing "zero solutions" and mockingly questioned his commitment to "America First," while consistently asserting his inaccuracies Conversely, Trump threatened investigations into Clinton's alleged wrongdoings, labeling her as deserving prosecution and using derogatory terms like "liar" and "nasty woman" to undermine her credibility A survey by the Boston Globe revealed that Trump's speeches contained 87% more attacks than Clinton's, highlighting his strategy to diminish her image and assert his dominance as the more qualified presidential candidate.
The governmental level reflects the impact of ideologies communicated by politicians Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during their presidential campaigns Both candidates utilized persuasive strategies in their speeches to propose changes aimed at improving America and enhancing the quality of life for all citizens Key issues such as economic policies, education, health, and gun regulations were central to their platforms, aiming to create more opportunities for a better future However, their differing ideologies resulted in varied levels of advocacy and audience reactions According to CBS poll statistics, voters expressed distinct opinions about Clinton and Trump, with Clinton being perceived as a candidate who contributed significantly to society Both candidates garnered appreciation for their trustworthiness and honesty, resulting in similar audience approval ratings in that regard.
Figure 6.20 Voters’ views on Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump according to CBS
In the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton was viewed as a more capable leader with the right temperament for the presidency compared to her opponent, Donald Trump Despite her strengths, Clinton ultimately lost the election, while Trump emerged victorious The outcome was influenced by various persuasive strategies employed by both Democratic and Republican politicians, which shaped public opinion However, Clinton's defeat and Trump's success were the result of multiple factors, including their distinct campaign strategies, the impact of media coverage, and the prevailing political climate in the country.
In the realm of societal issues, both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump aimed to connect with voters by emphasizing their commitment to the interests and security of all Americans Trump utilized fear-based rhetoric, focusing on topics like immigration and terrorism to paint a bleak picture of America without comprehensive solutions, while simultaneously blaming Clinton for economic failures and advocating for a robust economy His criticisms of global trade and healthcare were designed to sway public opinion in his favor Conversely, Clinton approached global and national issues with compassion, highlighting her dedication to human rights, minorities, and marginalized communities She emphasized the importance of defending core American values and fostering an inclusive future where every individual has a place and can contribute to society.
Intertextuality as displayed in Donald Trump’s and Hillary Clinton’s
Intertextuality holds a significant role in three layers of CDA, namely, the m textual (Description Stage), discursive (Interpretation Stage), and sociocultural practices (Explanation Stage) layers
Intertextuality in the Description Stage
Intertextuality in campaign speeches highlights how linguistic elements draw from various texts, discourses, and ideologies Both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton utilized explicit and implicit references to historical events to bolster their policies and political ideologies while enhancing their perceived intelligence Trump's speeches, in particular, showcased intertextuality through the Description Stage, incorporating phrases linked to other texts and cultural elements Notably, Trump adopted a pop culture slogan that resonated with specific voter demographics, echoing Ronald Reagan's 1980 campaign slogan.
The slogan "Make America Great Again" became a trademark of Trump's presidential campaign, effectively appealing to voters' nostalgia and the desire to restore America's former greatness Additionally, Trump emphasized the phrase "build the wall" to highlight his commitment to constructing a border wall, reinforcing his stance on immigration and national security.
States and Mexico are collaborating to tackle immigration issues, a straightforward concept that carries significant weight due to its association with a physical barrier The slogan "America First," deeply rooted in American political history, was prominently utilized by Trump to highlight his dedication to prioritizing U.S interests in global affairs These phrases not only influenced Trump's presidential campaign but also showcased his ability to leverage historical political discourse and cultural references to resonate with a diverse audience.
Intertextuality played a crucial role in the Description Stage of Hillary Clinton's campaign, illustrating how she drew upon existing political discourses, cultural tropes, and historical events By recognizing direct quotations, allusions, and implicit references, it became clear how her persuasive strategies connected to a broader discourse network During the 2016 presidential campaign, Clinton's slogan “Strong together” effectively countered Donald Trump's assertion, “I alone can fix it,” emphasizing unity and collaboration to foster a sense of inclusivity among her audience Additionally, her reference to feminist figures with the phrase “A woman’s place is in the White House” highlighted her commitment to gender equality and the significance of her candidacy as the first female major-party nominee for President Another central theme in her speeches, “love trumps hate,” not only targeted her opponent but also conveyed cultural values, reinforcing her message of choosing love over hate and creating a memorable campaign slogan.
Intertextuality in the Interpretation Stage
Fairclough's discursive layer highlights how language shapes meaning and reveals power dynamics through discourse, particularly through intertextuality, where candidates utilize specific texts to craft their political narratives Hillary Clinton strategically appealed to Democratic voters by invoking nostalgia for past successes, aligning her campaign with traditional Democratic values and emphasizing her husband Bill Clinton's legacy of economic growth This intertextual strategy positioned her as a candidate deeply connected to the party's history and committed to its traditions of progress In contrast, Donald Trump employed various rhetorical strategies to resonate with past Republican principles, focusing on border security and immigration control to attract traditional Republican voters, advocating for tax cuts reflecting free-market ideals, and prioritizing American interests in his "America First" foreign policy, thus echoing the sentiments of previous Republican administrations.
Intertextuality in the Explanation Stage
The sociocultural practices layer highlights the significance of language and discourse within wider social contexts, emphasizing intertextuality's role in understanding how candidates' language choices and references shape their interactions with audiences, media portrayals, and the socio-political landscape of their speeches Both Clinton and Trump utilized intertextual sociocultural patterns in their persuasive strategies to strengthen their messages and align themselves with their respective groups Clinton’s approach to intertextuality is evident in various aspects of her discourse.
Hillary Clinton often drew on historical figures and events to highlight her continuity and expertise as a leader By referencing past presidents and influential leaders, she aimed to align herself with their legacies and values, portraying herself as a knowledgeable and experienced candidate capable of addressing complex sociocultural issues.
Clinton effectively employed inclusive language that connected with various social and cultural groups, recognizing the struggles of minority communities, women's rights movements, and civil rights activists By positioning herself as an advocate for these causes, she aimed to foster a sense of unity and support among her audience through this intertextual approach.
Clinton's speeches effectively appealed to identity by utilizing intertextuality, referencing shared cultural symbols and historical events to resonate with her audience By alluding to iconic figures such as Martin Luther King Jr., she created a powerful connection that emphasized common values and experiences This strategic approach not only engaged listeners but also reinforced her message through familiar cultural narratives.
Luther King Jr., Abraham Lincoln, or other historical events such as the Civil Rights Movement to evoke a sense of collective identity and shared values
On the other hand, Trump’s intertextuality in sociocultural practices facilitated the construction of his persuasive strategies in discourse, which was demonstrated via the following aspects:
Trump's speeches frequently featured populist references that connected with the working-class audience and those disillusioned with the political establishment By using language that reflected the concerns and frustrations of everyday Americans, he positioned himself as a candidate who truly understands and advocates for their interests.
Trump effectively employed intertextuality to foster a robust sense of national identity and pride among his audience By referencing iconic American symbols, significant historical events, and patriotic narratives, he established an emotional connection that positioned him as a defender of American values and interests This strategic use of intertextuality aimed to resonate deeply with his supporters, reinforcing their sense of belonging and loyalty.
Trump's candidacy has been likened to significant historical events, notably the Reagan revolution, which positions him as a transformative figure in American politics By drawing these comparisons, he effectively aligns his movement with influential moments in history, enhancing his narrative and appeal to voters.
In the context of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), both Trump and Clinton strategically employed language to shape their political identities, frame key issues, engage their target audiences, and align themselves within wider ideological and cultural frameworks.
It facilitates comprehension of the intricate interplay between language, power, and the broader societal context, following Fairclough's three-layer model of CDA.
CONCLUSION
Recapitulation
This study aims to analyze the persuasive strategies used in the political speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign, employing Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis model The research seeks to reveal the diverse persuasive techniques utilized, grounded in Aristotle’s rhetoric theory, while also examining the lexico-grammatical resources that underscore the metafunctions—textual, interpersonal, and ideational—according to Halliday’s framework.
The thesis explores textual analysis in Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) to interpret lexical resources in the context of sociocultural practices, particularly focusing on the interplay of power and ideology in persuasive strategies Analyzing 35 presidential election speeches from Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, the study identifies 1,071 and 1,232 instances of persuasive strategies, respectively It reveals that Clinton employs three primary persuasive strategies: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos Her credibility is established through Ethos, characterized by intelligence and goodwill; Logos is demonstrated through enthymemes and examples; and Pathos is conveyed through emotional appeals The analysis highlights Clinton's use of modality to assert her authority and willingness to collaborate, enhancing her persuasive effectiveness Additionally, her evaluative language targets various audiences and issues, reinforcing her commitment to social justice and equality Through the transitivity system, the study shows how Clinton positions herself as a champion while depicting her opponent as obstructive Lastly, the textual function emphasizes her use of repetition and rhetorical devices to promote unity and collective action.
In the Description Stage of Fairclough’s CDA three-layered model, the analysis of Donald Trump’s presidential election speeches reveals his use of persuasive strategies rooted in Aristotle’s theory of Ethos, Logos, and Pathos These strategies highlight the interpersonal, textual, and ideational functions that underscore the power dynamics and ideologies he communicated for persuasion Trump's political discourse is characterized by a strong sense of certainty and conviction, achieved through modality and appraisal, reflecting his unique construction of nationalism and Americanism His ideational function illustrates his efforts to maintain power relations by positioning himself as an agent of change while undermining his opponents through associations with passiveness and failure The textual function, emphasizing interpersonal and topical themes, reinforces Trump's unwavering belief in American identity and culture.
(iii) The Interpretation Stage which entailed a contrastive analysis of Hillary
Clinton and Trump employed distinct persuasive strategies influenced by their cultural contexts during the 2016 presidential election Clinton's approach emphasized diversity, inclusion, and progressivism, encapsulated in her slogan "Stronger Together," which aimed to foster collectivism and advocate for citizenship rights and feminism In contrast, Trump leveraged his business background to promote nationalism and a nostalgic vision of America, with his slogan "Make America Stronger Again" reflecting a desire to separate American identity from globalization The analysis of their speeches revealed a significant ideological divide and differing power dynamics, illustrating how each candidate's rhetoric was designed to resonate with their audiences This exploration of persuasive strategies across situational, institutional, and societal levels highlighted the intricate relationship between language, ideology, and power, providing insights into how political discourse can reinforce or challenge existing power structures.
Table 7.1 Ideology dichotomy as presented in Hillary Clinton’s and Donald
- used Ethos, Logos, Pathos to promote feminism
- used Ethos, Logos, Pathos to promote the ideology of being “stronger together”
- used Ethos, Logos, Pathos to promote globalization
+ used Logos to mock Trump on his refusal to release tax review
+ used Ethos to promise to impose higher tax on high earners than the low-paid individuals
+ used Pathos to show sympathy toward disadvantaged refugees
+ used Logos to reason that terrorism and
Islamic people were not homogeneous
+ used Ethos to present intentions to provide pathway to citizenships for the undocumented immigrants
+ used Ethos, Pathos to spread desire and advocate Obamacare
+ used Ethos to prove herself as the leader with goodwill, credibility and good heart for people, especially health issues
+ used Logos and Pathos to strongly reject gun violence
+ used Ethos to present plans to combat gun violence
+ used Ethos to make promises to provide debt-free college tuition plan for students
Americanism employs Ethos, Logos, and Pathos to advocate for the vision of "making America great again," highlighting Clinton's past scandals and failures while promising to create a brighter future for the nation.
+ used Logos to mock Clinton’s past failures
+ used Ethos to stretch out protectionism and go against globalization
+ used Ethos to enforce his will in implementing unprecedented surveillance with Muslim to prevent terrorism
+ used Pathos to show hatred and anger toward terrorism and extremist groups
- Immigration + used Ethos to present plans of imposing restrictions on immigrants
+ used Ethos, Pathos and Logos to repeal and replace Obamacare
+ used Logos and Pathos to mock Clinton on her gun-zone area
+ used Ethos to portray his endeavor on applying control measures on weapons
+ used Logos to criticize Clinton’s policy m
Intertextuality played a crucial role in the critical discourse analysis (CDA) of Trump and Clinton's presidential campaign speeches, operating through three distinct stages At the textual layer, it highlighted Trump's strategic use of specific linguistic elements, notably the phrase "Make America Great Again," which exemplified his persuasive tactics.
The phrases “American First” and “Build a wall” illustrate a strong emphasis on Americanism, nationalism, and anti-immigration sentiments, highlighting a focus on border control In contrast, Hillary Clinton's use of phrases like “Stronger together,” “Love trumps hate,” and “A woman’s place is in the…” showcases her commitment to unity and progressive values, reflecting a different political ideology.
The White House aims to craft a campaign narrative that resonates with diverse voter segments by emphasizing themes of unity, solidarity, collectivity, and feminism In contrast, Trump's discourse leverages historical events and national symbols to evoke nationalism, underscoring his America-first vision.
Clinton's references to civil rights leaders reflect her commitment to progressive values and social justice, showcasing her persuasive strategies within political discourse Meanwhile, Trump's speeches resonate with the rhetoric of past populist leaders, aligning with the rise of contemporary populist movements Similarly, Clinton's allusions to historical advocates for social change highlight her efforts to connect with targeted audiences and rally support.
Implications
This study offers significant theoretical and practical contributions, particularly in the realms of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) By integrating Fairclough’s CDA model with Halliday’s Textual Analysis, the research reveals the metafunctions of persuasive strategies in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump The findings highlight the importance of this approach for future research in the field However, critiques of Halliday’s theory post-2014 suggest a disconnect between Critical Discourse Studies and textual analysis, citing concerns over the complexity of "lexico-syntactic" elements and "esoteric vocabulary" (Dijk, 2008).
The thesis highlights the essential connection between textual function and its social-historical context, emphasizing that a text cannot be fully understood in isolation (Bloor, 2013) To advance research in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), a combination of methodologies is essential (Bloom, 2013) Ultimately, this study contributes to CDA by exemplifying the use of Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) and various theoretical frameworks as linguistic tools to uncover ideologies constructed through discourse for persuasive purposes.
In examining persuasive strategies in political speeches, the integration of Aristotle's rhetorical concepts of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos significantly enhances our understanding This comprehensive approach to these theoretical frameworks facilitates a deeper analysis of how persuasive techniques are employed effectively.
Persuasion is crucial for effective communication, engaging listeners while minimizing awareness gaps and potential coercion In political discourse, understanding the unique language features of persuasion offers valuable insights into linguistic functions and meanings This study aims to enhance comprehension of persuasive strategies in linguistics and social interaction, particularly for L2 English users and students in English departments specializing in linguistics and communication By exploring the metafunctions and rhetorical aspects of these strategies through Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the research serves as a valuable resource for language learners and future researchers seeking to improve communication and negotiation skills.
Limitation and Suggestions for Further Studies
This study examines the English persuasive strategies used in the presidential election speeches of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, highlighting both contributions and limitations for future research While the focus is on English persuasive tactics, there is potential for further exploration of these strategies in Vietnamese, as well as a contrastive analysis of their similarities and differences in political discourse across both languages Additionally, the research emphasizes the need to investigate persuasive strategies within various cultural and social contexts It also notes that only verbal elements were analyzed, suggesting that non-verbal communication merits further examination in future studies.
Persuasive strategies employed by politicians often serve to manipulate public perception and behavior, highlighting the need for deeper theoretical exploration of manipulation within Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) A triangulated approach to understanding manipulation as social abuse, cognitive control, and discursive interaction is essential for future research Utilizing van Dijk’s socio-cognitive model, studies can examine strategies such as mind control, rhetorical techniques, emotional appeals, and historical distortion, fostering public awareness of how political leaders influence opinion While CDA and Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) provide valuable frameworks for political discourse analysis, van Dijk’s model addresses contextual limitations and enhances interdisciplinary insights by emphasizing beliefs, attitudes, and social cognition in political speech interpretation This approach also sheds light on the production of political discourse within social contexts and explores the interplay of power relations and ideology through critical reflection.
Persuasion is crucial in various social contexts, leading to valuable insights from studies conducted in diverse areas such as business, economics, education, and healthcare By exploring persuasive strategies within these fields, researchers can uncover numerous benefits and practical applications that enhance communication and influence.
Abdel-Moety, D M (2015) American political discourse as manifested in Hillary Clinton’s interviews: A critical approach English Linguistic Research 4(1), 1-
Abedi, M., Lashkarian, A., & Nematollahi, A (2018) Persuasion in political discourse: Barack Obama’s presidential speeches against ISIS Russian Journal of Linguistics, 22(2), 278-291
Aho, J (1985) Rhetoric and the invention of double entry bookkeeping Rhetoric: A
Journal of the History of Rhetoric, 3, 21-43
Aristotle (1967) The art of rhetoric London: William Heinemann Ltd
Aristotle (1984) Rhetoric (R Roberts, Trans.) (2 nd ed.) New York: The Modern Library
Bayram, F (2010) Ideology and political discourse: A critical discourse analysis of Erdogan’s political speech The Asian EFL Journal Research Committee and Linguistic Society Vol.7, 23-40
Blommaert, J (2005) Discourse: A critical introduction Cambridge, UK: CUP Bloom H (2004) Bloom’s modern critical interpretations – Jane Austen’s
Persuasion New York, NY: Chelsea House Publishers
Bloor, T & Bloor, M (2013) The functional analysis of English (3 rd ed.) London, UK; New York, NY: Routledge
Bourdieu, P (1977) Outline of a theory of practice Cambridge: CUP
Bourdieu, P (1999) Language and Symbolic Power In A Jaworski and N Coupland (eds.), The discourse reader (pp 502-513) London: Routledge
Brown, G & Yule, G (1983) Discourse analysis Cambridge University Press Butt, D., Fahey, R., Feez, S., Sprinks, S & Yallop, C (2000) Using Functional Grammar: An Explorer’s Guide National Center of English Language Teaching and Research Macquarie University
Chilton, P., & Schaffer, C (1997) Discourse and politics In T van Dijk (Ed.),
Corbett, E.P.J and Connors, R.J (1999) Classical rhetoric for the modern student Oxford: Oxford University Press
Conrad, C., & Malphurs, R (2008) Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Management Communication Quarterly, 22, 123-146
Eagleton, T (1991) Ideology: An introduction London: Verso
The discourse surrounding power dynamics in the English language highlights the significant role of influential participants Understanding these interactions is crucial for analyzing how language shapes social structures and authority Essays UK (2018) emphasizes that powerful individuals in discourse not only influence communication but also establish norms and expectations within various contexts This analysis provides insights into the interplay between language and power, underscoring the importance of recognizing who holds authority in conversations.
Ehineni, T.O (2014) A critical discourse analysis of modals in Nigerian political manifestos International Journal of Linguistics Doi:10.5296/ijl.v6i3.558 Eyman, D (2015) Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice http://dx.doi.org/10.3998/dh.13030181.001.001.
Fairclough, N (1989) Language and power London, UK: Longman
Fairclough, N (1992a) Discourse and social change Cambridge, UK: Polity Press Fairclough, N (ed.) (1992b) Critical language awareness London, UK: Longman Fairclough, N (2003) Analyzing discourse: textual analysis for social research
Fairclough, N (2008) The language of critical discourse analysis Discourse & Society, 19, 811-819 doi: 10.1177/0957926508094645
Fairclough, N (1995) Critical discourse analysis London, UK: Longman
Fairclough, N & Wodak, R (1997) Critical Discourse Analysis In T van Dijk (Ed.),
Discourse as social interaction, 258–84 London, UK: Sage
Fernandez-Ulloa, T (2019) The rhetoric of persuasion: Talking to our emotions
Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 80, 5-30 Doi:
Ghasemi, F (2020) Persuasive language in presidential speeches: A contrastive study based on Aristotelian rhetoric Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics,
Griffin, E (2012) A first look at communication theory (8 th ed.) New York: Mc
Green, S (2004) A rhetorical theory of diffusion Academy of Management Review,
In his 2016 study, Hassan I H conducted a critical discourse analysis of Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi's political speech during the inauguration ceremony of the New Suez Canal This analysis, presented at the Arab Academy for Science, Technology and Maritime Transport, examines the rhetorical strategies and political implications embedded in El-Sisi's address, highlighting how language shapes public perception and national identity.
Halliday, M.A.K (1985) An introduction to functional grammar London: Edward Arnold
Halliday, M.A.K & Hasan, R (1976) Cohesion in English, London: Longman Higgins, C., & Walker, R (2012) Ethos, Logos, Pathos: Strategies of persuasion in social/ environmental reports Accounting Forum, 36, 194-208
In her 2017 bachelor thesis, Kleijn analyzes the verbal and non-verbal expressions of dominance exhibited by Donald J Trump during the 2016 presidential debates The study employs multimodal interaction analysis to explore how Trump's communication style, including both spoken language and physical gestures, conveys power and authority This research highlights the significance of lower-level mediated actions in shaping perceptions of dominance in political discourse.
Holt, R., & MacPherson, A (2010) Sense making rhetoric and the socially competent entrepreneur International Small Business Journal, 28, 20-42
James, M (2014) Politics & rhetoric Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge
Critical discourse analysis serves as a vital research tool for examining language use in political contexts, as demonstrated in Janks' (1997) unpublished manuscript from the University of the Witwatersrand Additionally, Javad (2019) offers a comparative analysis of the language utilized by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump during the US presidential campaign, presenting a novel analytical framework for interpreting journalistic texts.
Ko, H (2015) Political persuasion: Adopting Aristotle rhetoric in public policy debate strategies International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 5(10), 76-83 m