MORE ON POLITICAL DISCOURSE: ESTABLISHING IDENTITY AND INTERACTING WITH THE AUDIENCE

  • Zorica Trajkova Department of English language and literature, Faculty of Philology, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, Skopje, Macedonia

Abstract

The pervasiveness of politics in modern society renders political discourse susceptible to linguistic analysis, especially pragmatic and discourse analysis. This paper aims to shed light on the talks delivered by presidential candidates during election campaigns. Its objective is to investigate how politicians gain power by establishing their identity and at the same time actively engaging the electorate within the argumentation presented in their pre-election political speeches, through the use of self-mentions and engagement markers as metadiscourse categories. More precisely, it sets out to explore the function and usage of selfmentions and engagement markers i.e. personal pronouns, directives and rhetorical questions in 12 pre-election speeches, delivered by 6 Macedonian and 6 American presidential candidates.
It is essential for politicians to know how to balance the use of these markers in order to avoid being intrusive and appear more persuasive for the listeners i.e. potential voters. The research shows that there are differences in the use of the markers in both languages, as well as among the different politicians. The politicians’ discourse appears to change depending on whether they are addressing the audience as leaders of the ruling party or as leaders of the opposing party.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Crismore, A., Markannen, R., Steffensen, M., 1993. Metadiscourse in Persuasive Writing. A study of texts written by American and Finnish University students. Written Communication 10 (1), 39–71.

Crismore, A. and Farnsworth, R. (1990). Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse. In Nash, W. The Writing Scholar, Studies in Academic Discourse. Sage Publications, Inc. 118-136.

Fairclough, N. 1989. Language and Power, London: Longman.

Fairclough, N. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Longman.

Horvath, J. (2009). Critical discourse analysis of Obama’s political discourse. Language, Literature and Culture in a Changing Transatlantic World International Conference Proceedings, University Library of Prešov University, 22-23.

Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes 20 (3), 207-226.

Hyland, K. (2002а). Authority and invisibility: authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics 34, 1091-1112.

Hyland, K. (2002b). Directives: Power and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 215–239.

Hyland, K. (2004). A convincing argument: Corpus analysis and academic persuasion. In Connor U. and Upton, T.
A. (2004). Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 87–112). John Benjamins B. V.

Hyland, K. (2005a). Metadiscourse. Exploring Interaction in Writing. MPG Books Ltd, Bodmin, Cornwall.

Hyland, K. (2005b). Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education 16, 363-377.

Rachman, A. & Yunianti, S. (2017). Critical Discourse Analysis In Donald Trump Presidential Campaign To Win American’s Heart. TELL Journal, 5(2): 8-17.

Shayegh, K. & Nabifar, N. (2012). Power in Political Discourse of Barak Obama. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research. 2(4): 3481-3491.
Published
2018-11-30
How to Cite
TRAJKOVA, Zorica. MORE ON POLITICAL DISCOURSE: ESTABLISHING IDENTITY AND INTERACTING WITH THE AUDIENCE. International Journal of Education TEACHER, [S.l.], v. 8, n. 16, p. 69-83, nov. 2018. ISSN 1857-8888. Available at: <http://ijeteacher.com/index.php/ijeteach/article/view/74>. Date accessed: 12 dec. 2018. doi: https://doi.org/10.20544/teacher.16.07.