Examining the Use of Personal Pronouns in Political Speeches by Tun Dr. Mahathir and President Trump

Personal pronouns are often used to the point they often get overlooked. Unlike content words, they do not convey meaning but portray the perception of the speaker (Nakaggwe, 2012). Looking deeper into this, personal pronouns have the power to include or exclude a person or people of the subject (Khafaga, 2021), and it is crucial to master them especially in the political context. However, cultural differences exist in the use of personal pronouns since culture affects the way a person communicates and interprets information (Gocheco, 2012). For this reason, this qualitative research attempts to identify the use of personal pronouns, specifically those that demonstrate inclusiveness and exclusiveness, in the collectivistic Malaysian and individualistic American cultures, and compare the similarities and differences in the use of personal pronouns in speeches given by Tun Dr. Mahathir who represents the collectivistic Malaysian culture and Mr. Trump who represents the individualistic American culture. The AntConc software was used to determine the speech profiles and identify the personal pronouns based on the coding schemes and guidelines. It was found that the most popular personal pronoun used in their speeches is we, while the least popular are me and the subject singular you. They was used more frequently by Tun Dr. Mahathir to indirectly address the audience, while Mr. Trump opted to directly convey his message by using the plural you. The results have practical implications for speech writing and political persuasion and negotiation skills.

Strategic functions of linguistic impoliteness in US primary election debates

Since presidential primary debates in US election campaigns serve the function of identifying the most promising nominee for the subsequent presidency, they constitute a highly adversarial multilogue. Debaters do not only exchange factual arguments but also use diverse forms of impoliteness geared towards damaging the public image of political opponents and persuading audiences to vote accordingly. Combining political discourse analysis with pragmatic approaches to impoliteness, this paper examines the ways in which verbal aggression in debates inflicts damage on the addressee’s positive and negative face. On the basis of five Democratic and five Republican debates from 2016, it is shown that impolite utterances fulfil the four central strategic functions of (a) delegitimization, (b) coercion, (c) entertainment, and (d) (self-)defence, all of which support the macro-function of political persuasion through the construction of personal preferability.

Split Feelings: Understanding Implicit and Explicit Political Persuasion

Research in psychology has established that people have visceral positive and negative reactions to all kinds of stimuli—so-called implicit attitudes. Implicit attitudes are empirically distinct from explicit attitudes, and they appear to have separate consequences for political behavior. However, little is known about whether they change in response to different factors than explicit attitudes. Identifying distinct antecedents for implicit and explicit attitudes would have far-reaching implications for the study of political persuasion. We hypothesized that implicit attitudes would change primarily in response to political advertisements’ emotional valence, but this turned out to be wrong. In contrast, our next hypothesis that implicit (but not explicit) attitudes would improve in response to increased familiarity with an attitude object was supported across several tests. Aside from this finding, our studies illustrate how routine preregistration helps researchers convey what they learned from each test—including when predictions are not borne out.

Conclusion

Religious reformers in sixteenth-century Europe were integral to the development and implementation of poor relief programs. They effectively utilized theological justification through writings, sermons, and strategic political persuasion to gain support and funding for social welfare. The reformers’ unique positions as ecclesiastical authorities allowed them to connect care for the poor with one’s practice of devotion to God and religious ideals of generosity and compassion. The establishment of these reforms emerged in the context of an expanding migration of religious refugees, who required relief but were at first poorly received by city residents. One of the key components of determining poor relief was the importance of community formation and the demarcations in the process of determining poor relief coverage. Ultimately, religious reformers served as a major driving force in the efforts toward poverty alleviation and community motivation in the care for the poor; and their efforts impacted the development of poor relief.

Political persuasion in a Spanish electoral debate

In this paper, we study the elements of political discourse where persuasion is present as communicative strategy. In particular, we focus on the analysis of intonation and affectivity in a two-candidate Spanish electoral debate (Hidalgo Downing and Nieto y Otero 2014; Ponsonnet 2014; Reber 2012).The methodology consisted in selecting the openings and closings of each turn, taking the act as analysis unit (Briz 2003); for the acoustic analysis we have examined three parameters – fundamental frequency, intensity and vowel durations –, and four strategies for the positive affective bonds: assertiveness, inclusion, specificity and naturalization, in order to pursue the initial hypothesis on whether it is possible to find relations between intonation and affectivity. The analysis shows that both candidates use affective bonds and intonation to enhance persuasion, although there are interesting differences between candidates and between openings and closings. While openings show greater number and variety of strategies, both verbal and intonational, closings show lower intonational contours and less variation, therefore openings showing higher use of positive persuasive strategies, whereas in closings, there are no strategies addressed to the hearer, the most frequent being assertiveness. As for intonational contours, there is a general lowering in all values.

Rhetorical moves in political discourse: closing statements by presidential candidates in US primary election debates

Presidential primary debates in the USA are commonly concluded by brief closing statements, in which the competitors outline the central messages of their election campaigns. These statements constitute a subgenre characterized by a set of recurring rhetorical moves, which are defined as functional units geared towards the respective communicative objective, in this case political persuasion. Located at the interface of rhetorical move analysis and political discourse studies, this paper demonstrates that moves and embedded steps in closing statements fulfill the persuasive function of legitimizing the respective candidate as the most preferable presidential successor. The study is based on the transcripts of 98 closing statements, which were extracted from eight Democratic and eleven Republican primary debates held between August 2015 and April 2016. Typical moves, such as projecting the speaker’s future political agenda or diagnosing the current situation in America, are presented with the help of illustrative examples, frequencies of occurrence, and a sample analysis of a complete closing statement.

Interdiscursive Revitalization of the Red Plague Metaphor in Archbishop Jędraszewski’s 2019 Sermon: A Critical Analysis

Celem artykułu jest ukazanie opiniotwórczego potencjału metafory konceptualnej stosowanej w perswazji społeczno-politycznej, interpretowanej zarówno jako mechanizm poznawczy, jak i wysoce zideologizowane narzędzie dyskursywne. W części teoretycznej analizowane sązagadnienia interdyskursywności i intertekstualności w Krytycznej Analizie Dyskursu. Częśćempiryczna zawiera przeprowadzone na podstwie modelu Krytycznej Analizy Metafory jakościowe studium struktury i efektów perswazyjnych metafory tęczowej zarazy, publicznie użytej przez arcybiskupa Marka Jędraszewskiego w odniesieniu do środowiska LGBT w Polsce, będącej przykładem świadomego przekraczania granic gatunkowych w komunikacji społeczno-politycznej i religijnej. W odniesieniu do oryginalnego tekstu, z którego czerpie określenie wykorzystane przez arcybiskupa krakowskiego w jego kontrowersyjnym kazaniu, a mianowicie bardziej zakorzenionej historycznie metafory czerwonej zarazy, spopularyzowanej przez polskiego poetęJózefa Szczepańskiego w wierszu skomponowanym w czasie powstania warszawskiego w 1944 roku, analizowane sąinterdyskursywne i intertekstowe korelacje między dwiema metaforami ZARAZY (KOMUNIZM TO ZARAZA i LGBT TO ZARAZA). ABSTRACT The paper aims at demonstrating the creative perlocutionary potential of interdiscursive production and interpretation of conceptual metaphor used in socio-political persuasion, simultaneously interpreted as mental phenomenon and discursive practice that is historically entrenched and highly ideological. The Critical Metaphor Analysis model is used to investigate the interdiscursive application of two PLAGUE metaphors (COMMUNISM IS A PLAGUE and LGBT IS A PLAGUE) as an example of deliberate transcending of genre boundaries in the increasingly intertextual and interdiscursive world of both socio-political and religious discourses. The empirical part provides a qualitative study of the historical background, structure and persuasive effects of the rainbow plague metaphor (Pol. tęczowa zaraza), publicly used by the Archbishop of Cracow, Marek Jędraszewski, in reference to the LGBT community in Poland, conducted in relation to the original text on which it draws, namely the more historically entrenched red plague (Pol. czerwona zaraza) metaphor made popular by the Polish poet Józef Szczepański in his poem composed during the Warsaw Uprising 1944.