SPECIALIZAREA: LB. ȘI LIT . ROMÂNĂ LB. ȘI LIT. ENGLEZĂ [617802]

UNIVERSITATEA “DUNĂREA DE JOS” GALAȚI
FACULTATEA DE LITERE
SPECIALIZAREA: “LB. ȘI LIT . ROMÂNĂ – LB. ȘI LIT. ENGLEZĂ ”

LANGUAGE MANIPULATION
IN THE POLITICAL DISCOURSE

COORDONATOR Ș TIINȚIFIC: ABSOLVENT: [anonimizat]
2018

Declarație pentru conformitate asupra originalității operei științifice

Subsemnata Ciucă Ionela Mirela, candidată la examenul de diplomă la Facultatea de Litere,
specializarea Română -Engleză declar pe propria răspundere că lucrarea de față este rezultatul
muncii mele, pe baza cercetărilor mele și pe baza informațiilor ob ținute din surse care au fost
citate și indicate, conform normelor etice, în note și în bibliografie. Declar că nu am folosit în
mod tacit sau ilegal munca altora și că nici o parte din lucrare nu încalcă drepturile de proprietate
intelectuală ale altcuiva, persoană fizică sau juridică. Declar că lucrarea nu a mai fost prezentată
sub această formă vreunei instituții de învățământ superior în vede rea obținerii unui grad sau titlu
științific ori didactic.

Semnătura,
___________________

Contents
Foreword ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 1
CHAPTER 1: ON LANGUAGE MANIPULATION ………………………….. ………………………….. .. 3
1.1: The Influence of Rhetorics ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………………. 3
1.1.1: The Importance of Language ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 3
1.1.2.: The Power of Language in Politics ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… 4
1.1.3.: Manipulation and Its Link to Politics and Language ………………………….. ……………… 5
1.1.4.: Rhetorical Devices Used in Political Speeches ………………………….. …………………….. 6
1.2.: Discourse Analysis: the Foundation of Language Manipulation ………………………….. ….. 10
1.2.1: Discourse and Its Delimitations ………………………….. ………………………….. …………… 10
1.3.: Linguistic Characteristics of Political Discourse ………………………….. ………………………. 12
1.3.1: The Political Speech as Rhetorical Discourse ………………………….. ……………………… 12
1.3.2: Introductory Formulas ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………….. 15
1.3.3: Collateral Circumstances ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………. 16
1.4. Conclusions ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. 17
CHAPTER 2: LANGUAGE MANIPULATION AT ITS BEST: THE DISCOURSE OF
BARACK OBAMA ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………… 19
2.1.: On a Skilled Public Speaker ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………….. 19
2.2. Cases in Point: Obama’s Speeches ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 20
2.2.1. Democratic National Convention Keynote Addr ess………………………….. ……………… 20
2.2.1.1. Context ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ………….. 20
2.2.1.2. Discourse Layout ………………………….. ………………………….. …………………………. 21
2.2.1.3. Stories, Pathos and Ethos ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. 23
2.2.1.4. Logos and Intertextuality ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………. 24
2.2.1.5. Employing Rhetorical Schemes ………………………….. ………………………….. ……… 25
2.2.2. President -Elect Victory Speech ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 28
2.2.2.1. The Circumstances ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………. 28
2.2.2.2. Celebrating the Victory ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………… 29
2.2.2.3. Acknowledging the Supporters ………………………….. ………………………….. ………. 30
2.2.2.4. Overcoming the Challenges ………………………….. ………………………….. …………… 32
2.2.2.5. “Yes We Can!” ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. .. 33
2.2.3. Second Presidential Inaugural Address ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 34
2.2.3.1. Speech Background ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………… 34
2.2.3.2. Uniting “We” ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …. 35
2.2.3.2. National Values in Intertextuality ………………………….. ………………………….. …… 36

2.2.3.4. A Balance of Rhetoric ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………….. 38
2.2.3.5. Persuading through Rhetorical Devices ………………………….. ……………………….. 39
2.3. Conclusions ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. 40
CHAPTER 3: UNCONVENTIONAL LANGUAGE MANIPULATION: THE DONALD
TRUMP PHENOMENON ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 41
3.1.: Brief Investigation into the Discourse of Donald Trump ………………………….. ……………. 41
3.2.: Sample Analysis: Public Speeches ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 42
3.2.1.: The Presidential Announcement Speech ………………………….. ………………………….. . 42
3.2.1.1.: Framework of the Speech ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 42
3.2.1.2.: Simple Language – An Attention Grabber ………………………….. …………………… 43
3.2.1.3.: The Persuasive Power of Repetition ………………………….. ………………………….. . 44
3.2.1.4.: The Use of Pronouns: I – We – They ………………………….. ………………………….. 47
3.2.1.4.: The Rhetorical Effect of Hyperbole ………………………….. ………………………….. .. 49
3.2.1.5.: Incoherence vs. Authenticity ………………………….. ………………………….. ………… 50
3.2.2. President -Elect Victory Speech ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………. 51
3.2.2.1 Placing the Speech in a Background ………………………….. ………………………….. … 51
3.2.2.2. Looking Like a Traditional Victory Speech ………………………….. ………………….. 51
3.2.2.3. A Unifying and Hopeful Speech ………………………….. ………………………….. …….. 53
3.2.2.4. Proving to be an Unconventional Victory Speech ………………………….. ………….. 55
3.2.3. Presidential Inaugura l Address ………………………….. ………………………….. …………….. 56
3.2.3.1. What the Tradition Says ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. 56
3.2.3.2. A Seemingly Rhetorical Speech ………………………….. ………………………….. ……… 57
3.2.3.3. Unity and Division ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………. 58
3.2.3.4. A Negative Past ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. . 59
3.2.3.5. A Bright Future ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. . 61
3.3. Conclusions ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………….. 62
General conclusions ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………… 64
Bibliography ………………………….. ………………………….. ………………………….. ……………………….. 67

Foreword

The topic of this academic paper is focused on the analysis of how language is
employed in the political speeches so as to manipulate the audiences.
One of the reasons I have chosen this topic is a linguistic one. It is worthy
analyzing how the rhetoric influences the manipulation of language in these
speeches , turning them almost in poetic speeches , bringing thus an important
linguistic contribution. However, there are also speeches which do not employ
rhetorical devices as much, yet they still achieve the purpose of manipulation
because of the authenticity they rely on, making the linguistic manipulation more
interesting.
Besides the linguistic reason, there is also a social one. Lan guage manipulation in
the political discourse is a topic which deserves careful attention becau se it can
affect people’s lives , considering the fact that the reality is distorted through
manipulation in favour of the politician. Thus, most of the time, peo ple choose a
political representative based on the promises he mak es in the electoral speeches,
but after t he victory, all the promises di sappear. This happens because the
politicians use the language to manipulate people in most of the cases just to gain
the power and people should be aware of this.
I have always been interested in politics and the way the politicians gain power
after being elected. I have always been fascinated with manipulation in all its
forms and how reality can be easily distorted thr ough particular devices. Despite
my interest in these two topics as separate subjects, this academic paper gives me
the opportunity to fuse them into a single one allowing me to gain more insight in
both of the topics.
The first chapter of our work, On La nguage Manipulation , is devoted to the
exposition of the theoretical base needed for the analysis of the speeches. It is
broken up into three subchapters so as to analyse every single theoretical element
which defines language manipulation . The first subch apter, The Influence of
Rhetorics , focuses on the connection between language, politics and manipulation,
underlying the importance of rhetorical devices to achieve the politicians’ aim of
persuading people. The second subchapter, Discourse Analysis: the F oundation of
Language Manipulation , clarifies the notion of discourse, as well as the Critical
Discourse Analysis’ role in detecting language manipulation. The third
subchapter, Linguistic Characteristics of Political Discourse , sheds light on the
notion of political discourse as a genre and it focuses on the peculiarities of

2
audience it addresses, pragmatic functions, layout, introductory formulas and
collateral circumstances.
The second chapter of this academic paper, Language Manipulation at Its Best:
The Discourse of Barack Obama , is subdivided into two subchapters, which
demonstrate the rhetorical skills Barack Obama applies in his speeches, shaping
manipulation in its best form. The first subchapter, On a Skilled Public Spe aker,
present s the various opinions of the scholars on Obama’s rhetorical skills, as well
as it briefly mentions the themes and the rhetorical devices he uses in order to
manipulate language. The second subchapter, Cases in point: Obama’s Speeches ,
is furt her subdivided into three parts which represent the analysis of three
speeches relevant for the topic of this study: the Democratic National Convention
Keynote Address, the President -Elect Victory Speech and the Second Presidential
Inaugural Address. The a nalysis of these speeches focuses on presenting the
discourse layout, the appeals of logos, ethos and pathos, the use of pronouns, the
intertextuality as well as the rhetorical devices employed, in order to prove the
elevate manner of manipulating through language.
The third chapter, Unconventional Language Manipulation: The Donald Trump
Phenomenon , is split into two subchapters, illustrating another face of the
language manipulation which departs from the tradition. The first subchapter,
Brief Investigatio n into the Discourse of Donald Trump , analys es the main
characteristics of Donald Trump’s speeches, which consist in the simplicity of the
language, the frequent use of repetition and hyperbole in their simplest forms, as
well as the refuse to praise the p ast of the country. The second subchapter, Sample
Analysis: Public Speeches , focuses on the following speeches: the Presidential
Announcement Speech, the President -Elect Victory Speech and the President
Inaugural Address. The analysis of these speeches hav e the purpose of showing
that Donald Trump uses , as well as other politicians , language manipulation, but
he employs it in unconventional ways, like: using simple language, using personal
pronouns to divide, not to unite, building incoherent phrases, emplo ying negative
language and relying mostly on the figures of speech of repetition and hyperbole.
Thus , the two last chapters provide a comparison between the two ways of
language manipulation through the speeches chosen. Combining theoretical
considerations and highly relevant examples, the present academic paper is
illustrative, clear and synthetic for understanding the stated topic.

3
CHAPTER 1: ON LANGUAGE MANIPULATION

1.1: The I nfluence of Rhetorics
1.1.1: The Importance of Language
Since the creation of this world, the aspect which made people different and
special at the same time from the rest of the beings is language: the ability to
express themselves through words. Language in people’s life is of great
importance, as the founder of modern linguistics , Ferdinand de Saussure affirmed:
“in the lives of individuals and societies, speech is more important than anything
else. That linguistics should continue to be prerogative of a few specialists would
be unthinkable – everyone is concerne d with it in one w ay or another” (1966: 7).
Most of the times, people take language for granted, but the truth is that language
can have great effects, especially in relation to “power, representations and
control ”. (Annabelle Mooney: Betsy Evans: 2015:1).
A short definitio n of the language illustrate s it as a rule -governed system. These
rules can be considered more like building codes which help the speakers of the
respective language to combine different parts of the languages (Annabelle
Mooney; Betsy Evans: 2015:4). To pa y attention to the words people choose to
use in different situations and to the way people combine them makes us critically
aware of the language.
The importance of the critical awareness does not rely in making us more
intelligent or more accomplished, b ut in understanding power, pe rsuasion and
how people live together, as Norman Fairclough argued (1999: 73). As Fairclough
also states, in order to understand society and other people, it is necessary to
understand how language functions. Many good things c an result from being
critically aware of the language, for ex ample we can “resist oppression, protect
the powerless and build a good society” (Annabelle Mooney; Betsy Evans: 2015:
2).

4
Considering the areas of linguistics that help us become critically awa re of the
language, semantics helps us understand and construct meaning, syntax helps us
describe the construction of word order and phonetics, phonology and
morphology help us describe the sounds that make up words (Annabe lle Mooney;
Betsy Evans: 2015 ). W hen some people use the language to convey a certain
message or persuade other people, they make use of t hese linguistic areas in a
skilful way in order to achieve their goal. Thus, they use the language in a
persuasive way, which is also the object of our study: the persuasive function of
the language.
1.1.2.: The Power of Language in P olitics
The first things we think when we hear about politics are: politicians, Parliament,
electoral campaigns and the talk and texts that surround these. Of course, the field
of politics is not restricted only to these, because as a famous advertising from
2004 which the Electoral Commission in the UK created in order to encourage
people to vote and en gage in politics finishes with “Politics affects almost
everything, so if you don’t do politics there’s not much you d o do” (cited in
Walker 2004). Thus, the field of politics includes also policy planning, legislation
and discussions of social issues by politicians and people who are not politicians.
Therefo re, politics can be defined as “the process by which members of a
community discuss and deci de about how they are governed.” (Annabelle
Mooney; Betsy Evans: 2015: 43). This process, which is present in all of our
lives, is related to power, bec ause these discussions concer n “who is in power,
how they are using these powers and whether they should continue to be in
power” (2015: 43).
In most of the countries, people elect their politicians. In order to convince the
electorate to vote for them, these politicians hold speeches during the electoral
campaigns. Thus, through these speeches, the politicians aim at gaining the
power; and the quick conclusion is that language is power, which we will further
demonstrate in this study.

5
Two aspects of the language which should be taken into consideration are the
influential and inst rumental power. First of all, “the influential power inclines
people either to behave in certain ways or makes people adopt opinions/attitudes
without exerting obvious force on them.” (Gunta R ozina ,Indra K arape tjana: 2009:
113). This kind of power operates in advertising, culture, media and politics. The
instrumental power can operate in business a nd education and it represents “the
explicit power” because it “is imposed by the state, by the laws and conventions
of this state and by the institutions and orga nizations we work for.” (2009:113) .
The instrumental power also involves some kind of penalty.
In politics and in law, language can operate with both of her powers: the
influential and the instrumental one: the politicians can impose laws and taxes,
using thus the instrumental power and they also try getting the voters’ political
loyalty, through the influential power. Therefore, politicians aim at having the
power and they try to achieve it by using the languag e.
1.1.3. : Manipulation and Its Link to P olitics an d Language
In the v arious definitions of the verb ‘ to manipulate’ and its nominal and
adjectival derivatives there are involved negative, as well as positive connotations.
The n egative connotations refer to processes of controlling, deceiving, influencing
and handling people, while the positive connotations include terms as skill,
ability, dexterity, knowledge, which are qualities required, in order to successful ly
manipulate someone. Thus, manipulation pr esupposes “some skills, abilities,
tactics which are used by a person, a group of people or an institution to get what
they want from other people and institutions. ”
(https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
These abilities, skills and tactics are vital for politicians in order to influence the
public through their speeches. They can influence or manipulate their addressees
through their words, either on an intel lectual level, on a behavioural level or on an
emotional level. Another important aspect of the manipulation is that it involves

6
speaking to people politely and skilfully without giving the audience a negative
feeling. Thus, the politicians use language to gain power, to manipulate the
audience to vote for them and to support their id eas. The beautiful aspect of
manipulating the words consists in the rhetoric al devices used, subject which will
be further analysed in this study.
1.1.4. : Rhetorical Devices Used in Political S peeches
The process of manipulation includes some psychological components which are
mental representations of the rhetorical devices, th us belonging to the art of
rhetorics, also known as “the art of per suading by speaking beautifully” , as
Aristotle described it. (The R hetoric, Book I, Part 1).
Aristotle defines rhetorics as “the faculty of observing in any given case the
available means of persuasion. ” He also says that :
This is not a function of any other art. Every other art can instruct or
persuade about its own particular subject -matter; for instance,
medicine about what is healthy and unhealthy, geometry about the
properties of magnitudes, arithmetic about numbers, and the same is
true of the other arts and sciences. But rhetoric we look upon as the
power of observing the means of persuasion on almost any subject
presented to us; and that is why we say that, in its technical char acter,
it is not concerned with any special or definite class of subjects. (The
Rhetoric, Book I, Part I)
So, the term ‘persuasion’ is in connection with the main aim of rhetorics.
Giambattista V ico argues that to persuade is “to instill in the listener co nformity
to the spirit of the oration so that the listener wills the sa me as that the oration
proposes.” (1996:5) Thus, according t o Vico’s words, the outline of the speeches
and the ideas rendered by the orator are important . But also, the oratorical skil ls of
the person who renders the speech matter .

7
The three aspects of persuasion are also important, because it will make the
speech more effective, if they are followed, and these are: the communicative one,
the seductive one and the inciting one (Gheorghe Mihai: 1998: 15). By conveying
ideas with beautiful words, and proving the beauty of their mind, the orators can
incite the audiences to action, thus manipulating .
Going back to the structure of the rhetorical speech, the components which make
it effective and help it fulfill the persuasive function of language are the rhetorical
devices. Such powerful techniques are alliteration, allusion, lists, especially of
three items, metaphor, parallelism, enumeration and repetition. In order to see
these de vices in action, a careful analysis of the political speeches can
demonstrate their power and this will be further covered in our study.
Among the most common persuasive devices in political rhetoric we can count the
metaphor and the simile. The me taphor i s the figure of speech “that describes a
subject by asserting that it is, on some point of comparison, the same as anot her
otherwise unrelated object.” (Maya Khemlani David, 2014:165). The metaphor is
closely related to other figures of speech, like allegor y, hyperbole and simile
because they all achieve their effects through association, comparison or
resemblance. In the domain of politics, the metaphor can be useful in simplifying
concepts. On the other hand, the simile states an explicit comparison by usi ng
words like, as or then (e.g.: fast as the wind) (Maya Khemlani David, 2014:166)
Another rhetorical de vice is the allusion, which is “an indirect or casual
reference to a historical or literary figure, event, or object” (Maya Khemlani
David, 2014:165). I n general, this technique refers to or quotes a powerful phrase
that the audience may already know.
It is already well -known that in order to learn something to best way is to repeat
it. Also, in terms of persuasive techniques, repetition is one of the mo st effective
rhetoric devices to activate the mental schemata, because repeating certain phrases
helps to make the ideas found in the speech sound common to the audience.
Emphasizing and repeating certain ideas will persuade the audience to accept

8
them. Re petition in persuasive speeches does not include only repetition of words
or of ideas, but it goes on inferior levels of the language such as phonology. Thus,
we should also take in consideration the alliterations and t he a ssonances.
Alliteration represent s “the repetition of the same sounds, usually initial
consonants of words or of stressed syllable – in any sequence of neighbouring
words.” (Chris Baldick 2001: 6). Assonance is another figure of speech which
repeats “identical or similar vowel sounds in th e stressed syllables (and
sometimes in the following unstressed s yllables) of neighbouring words” (Chris
Baldick 2001: 49).
Other figures of speech which involve repetition are anaphora and epiphora.
Anaphora represents “the repetition of a word at the beg inning of successive
phrases, or of a phrase at the beginning of successive clauses or lines. ”(Chris
Baldick 2001: 11).The rhetorical effect of these initial repetitions lies in the
memorable impact made by the first sounds or words uttered. Epiphora consists
in repeating “the same word or phrase at the end of successive sentences ” (Chris
Baldick 2001: 85: this figure is called epistrophe; the term epiphora is not
mentioned). Most of the times this rhetorical device is combined with other
rhetorical techniques such as anaphora and polyptoton. The polyptoton has the
same effect as anaphora and epi phora by emphasizing a certain wo rd or phrase
through repetition . Chris Baldick defines it as “a figure of speech in which a
partial repetition arises from the use in close proximity of two related words
having different forms.” (2001:199)
The ‘three part list’ is a particular way of repetition in wh ich new ideas and
information are presented in three parts. Each part has a specific purpose: the first
one initiates an argument, the second one emphasizes or responds to the first part
and the third part reinforces the first two and it is a sign that the stated argument
from the first part is completed assisting the audience by suggesting when it is
appropr iate to applaud. The political speakers frequently use three part lists
because presenting statement in groups of three is appealing and

9
memorable. (https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation –
through -Words -Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
Enumeration is another rhetorical device speakers use to convince the audience of
the complexity of the ideas whose various sides are revealed in the enumeration.
The terms in the enumeration come from “the same lexical or morphological
class, or they have identical syntactic structure, but their form as a whole
differs. ”(https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through –
Words -Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
A similar rhetorical device to the enumeration is the accumulation which al so puts
together a number of linguistic structures. The differences between the two
rhetorical techniques consist in the fact that accumulation may link a variety of
structures that only partially share syntactic and semantic resemblance, whereas
enumerati on links structures identical from a morpho -syntactic point of view and
similar semantically.
(https://www.sc ribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
Another important rhetorical device is the intertextuality. According to Michael
Riffaterre, the intertext represents “one or more texts which the reader must know
in order to understand the work of literature in terms of its overall
significance.” (1990, pp. 56 -78). He argues that references, such as quotations and
allusions to other previous texts, may be used in literature as well as speeches, and
they have to be detected and deciphered by the reader or the listener in order to
understand the overall meaning of the text. Most of the times, in the political
speeches, the speakers lead their audience to the interpretation of the allusion or
the quote they make.

10
1.2.: Discourse Analy sis: the Foundation of Language
Manipulation
1.2.1: Discourse and Its D elimitations
The main focus of this paper will be the speeches rendered by some politicians.
But, before analyzing these texts, we have to clarify the notion of dis course,
which can be a real obstacle for the newcomers to the field, because of the various
definitions.
First of all, we take into consideration the distinction made by Bloor and Bloor
(2007: 6 -7):
– discourse -1 is the highest unit of linguistic descript ion;
phonemes, morphemes, words, phrases, clauses, sentences and texts
are below;
– discourse -2 is a sample of language usage, generally written
to be spoken, that is, a speech;
– discourse -3 refers to the communication expected in one
situation context, alongside one field and register, such as the
discourse of law or medicine;
– discourse -4 is human interaction through any means, verbal
and non -verbal;
– discourse -5 is spoken interaction only;
– discourse -6 stands for the whole communic ative event.
Three different terms can be associated with this definition diversity, according to
Wodak and Meyer (2009): The German and Central European tradition, which
links discourse with text linguistics; the Anglo -American tradition, in which
discourse refers to writt en and oral texts; and the Foucaldian tradition, in which

11
discourse represents an abstract form of knowledge, understood as cognition and
emotions.
Van Dijk (1997) tackles this notion in a similar way and proposes linguistic,
cognitive and socio -cultural d efinitions. From the linguistic point of view, the
discourse is described at the syntactic, semantic, stylistic and rhetorical levels.
From the cognitive perspective, van Dijk adds that the discourse needs to be
understood in terms of the interlocutors’ pr ocesses of production, reception and
understanding. The social dimension of discourse, is understood by van Dijk as a
sequence of contextualized, controlled and purposeful acts accomplished in
society, namely, a form of social action taking place in a cont ext, a physical
setting, temporal space plus participants. Van Dijk also considers that each
context controls a specific type of discourse and each discourse depends on a
specific type of context.
Widdowson’s perspective should also be taken into consideration: he argues that
the texts , written or spoken, must be described in linguistic terms and in terms of
their intended meaning. Thus, discourse “is the pragmatic process of meaning
negotiation” , and text, it product (2004: 8).
This concept repres ents the main focus in Critical Discourse Analysis. In order to
establish its link to language manipulation, we have to clarify that the scope of
CDA is not only language -based; from its beginning, this discipline was
“designed to question the status quo, by detecting, analyzing and also resisting
and counteracting enactments of power abuse as transmitted in private and public
discourses” (Encarnacion Hidalgo Tenorio). Thus, CDA’s purpose is “to expose
the manipulative nature of discursive practices, and im prove communication and
well-being by removing the barriers of assumed beliefs legitimized through
discourse” (Encarnacion Hidalgo Tenorio).

12
1.3.: Linguistic Characteristics of Political Discourse
1.3.1: The Political Speech as Rhetorical Discourse
We have already tackled the notion of ‘discourse’ and now we will move on to a
specific type of discourse and that is the political discourse. Summing up the
definitions given by various authors (Baranov and Kazakevich, 1991; Parshin,
1999; Sheygal, 2004 and etc. ) the term ‘political discourse’ represents “a
collection of all speech acts, which is determined and expressed in the form of
verbal formations, content subject by an addressee belonging to the sphere of
politics ”. In this paper, we will take into account the political speech seen as a
rhetorical product, delivered in a political context.
A political speech can be classified taking into account many criteria. However, in
this paper we will tackle the criteria of audience, informational content and the
function of pragmatic function.
(https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
Thus, considering the audience and the informational content, the political
speeches address:
a) Specialized audiences, represented by the participants in the so –
called internal communication process. According to Christina Schäffner , the
informational content envisages the politics itself, namely “the functioning of
politics within political institutions, i.e. governmental bodies, parties or other
organizations”, and they discuss “political ideas, beliefs, and practices of a
society o r some part of it” (1996: 202) .
b) The general public, represented by non -politicians, the participants
in the so called external political communication process. In this case, the
informational content may include various other topics of general interest:
morality, religion, human and civil rights etc.

13
Another important criterion is the pragmatic function which classifies the political
speech, regarding its rhetorical implications, in:
a) Persuasive: focusing on the informational content and its logical
argumentation. The orator aims to make the listeners believe the truthfulness of
his words, thus addressing their mind.
b) Seductive: focusing on the linguistic form considering the
rhetorical and stylistic sides . The orator addresses the audience’s emotions an d he
tries to make them have the same feelings towards the topic of the speech.
c) Inciting or inflammatory: aims at changing th e recipients’ behavior
in a favourable manner for the speaker ; thus, this type of speech address es the
recipients’ will.
Another aspect of the political speech as a rhetorical discourse which we will
further help as in the analysis of several political speeches is its outline. Thus, it
consists of:
I. Introduction
-Greeting and Attention Gatherer. This is the part at the
beginning o f the speech in which the locutor greets and capture the
attention of the listeners.
-Thesis. This is a sentence in the introduction specifying the
purpose and the subject of the speech.
-Authority. This part refers to the process of introducing
oneself to the audience, if necessary, and to the locutor’s establishing
credibility to persuade the audience that s/he is trustworthy enough to
speak about the subject.
-Summary. This is an overview of the main points of the
speech.

14
-Important Answer. Now the locut or mentions, as an answer
for an implicit question, why the speech will be useful or valuable to
the audience.
II. Body
-Transition. This is a sentence that signals to the audience the
end of the introduction and the beginning of the main part of the
speec h.
-Main Points. The locutor provides a detailed presentation of
the main points and ideas of the speech along with the description of
the supporting ideas and illustrative examples to explain and clarify
the main points.
III. Conclusion
-Transition. This takes the form of a sentence that signals to
the audience the end of the body part of the speech and the beginning
of the concluding part of the speech.
-Paraphrasing of the Main Points. The locutor restates,
usually using a different wording, the main po ints and ideas and
emphasizes on those parts of the speech that s/he wants the audience
to remember.
-Closing Statement. This is a final sentence where the locutor
emphasizes the key statement. It can be followed, but not necessarily,
by
-The Taking Leave Statement. This is a sentence that markes
the end of whole speech. The locutor may use a classic salutation
formulation or he may invoke God’s help for the audience’s wellbeing
and for a good course of the future

15
events. (https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation –
through -Words -Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
We also take into consideration for this paper the tra ditional terminology which
identifies the following main parts: the Exodium which introduces the speaker, the
issue and makes the audience receptive , the Narratio, which consists of a narration
of the main points in the whole speech , the Argumentum, which can be further
divided into Partitio (‘division of the main points’), Confirmatio (consists of the
arguments the rhetor uses to elaborate his/her case) and Refutatio ( consists of the
arguments the rh etor uses against his opponent), t he Digressio, which is not an
obligatory part of a speech, but it can help in persuading the audience and
Peroratio, in which the speaker appeals to the emotions and it can be presented as
a prayer to God. (https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation –
through -Words -Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
1.3.2: Introductory F ormulas
We all know how important a first impression can matter in the fur ther developing
of any kind of relationship. This aspect applies also in the case of political
speeches. A speech is successful or fails depending on the orators’ fame, their
charismat ic attitude and pleasant appeara nce; but, what matters the most a re the
first words uttered in front of the audience . The speaker ’s audience -awareness is
crucial to the way in which the public perceives him and its speech and how they
react to it. The public’s interest , attention and sympathy can be easily lost if the
people addressed feel that the speaker looks down on them , or that the place th ey
live in is underestimated.
Thus, the introductory formulas can play a huge rule in gaining the listeners’
minds and hearts. These appellatives have a double function: a psych ological one
and a social one. From the psychological perspective, these appellatives draw the
listeners’ attention to the moment the speech begins. From the social perspective,
these formulas are used as a sign of respect.

16
One famous rhetorical strategy that politicians use at the beginning or their
speeches is the introductory noun -phrases in the Nominative of Address. Thes e
are appellatives that address the whole audience, which aim at reducing the
distance between the or ator and audience. The orator tries to get closer to the
listeners’ mind s and hearts, because, in terms of persuasion, a friendly advice is
followed more consideration than orders. Also, the ideas presented in a language
familiar to everybody are more like ly to be understood more easily by the
audience. Some of the most frequent formulations used in political speeches are:
“Friends and fellow citizens…” , “My fellow Americans…” , “My friends” etc.
The appellatives that address specific listeners, or ca tegorie s of listeners, such as
“Your H onor..” , “Mr. President” , “Your Eminences, Your Excellencies, Mr.
President…” etc. are “strictly related to the content of their speech whose main
issue is, most of the times if not a matter of only these individuals’ concern , then it
is one of general concern to which these individuals have contributed or can
contribute a great share. ”
(https://www.scr ibd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
There are also cases in which the political speeches contain appellat ives that
address both specific listeners and the whole audience, such as: “Your Honor,
ladies and gentlemen…” , “Mr. President, fellow delegates” , “Mr. President,
Ladies and Gentlemen of the Convention, my fellow citizens…” etc.
1.3.3: Collateral Circumstances
In his Art of Rhetoric, Giambattista Vico talks about the collateral circumstances
of place, of time, of issues and of persons (1996). These rhetorical devices or
structures are used by the orators “to win the listeners’ benevolence and more
credibility in their eyes by showing their audience that they are well anchored in
the realities that they all face.”
(https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Politica l-Speeches )

17
The collateral circumstance of place is a rhetorical device which is used in order
to stimulate the audience’s pride. By praising the beauty and the importance of the
place, the speakers show their gratitude for having the opportuni ty to delive r
speeches in such important locations.
The speakers also use the collateral circumstance of time along with those of place
and persons, in order to show their knowledge of the audience’s history and of the
current preoccupations.
The collateral circumstan ces of issues rhetorical device introduces some facts to
be argued later. It can be used along with other collateral circumstances or
individually, when the issue which is to be discussed is of tremendous importance
and there is no time to waste with irrel evant things.
The collateral circumstances of persons rhetorical device consists in politicians
who begin their speeches by praising the audience, some famous people, some
institutions, or even by being ironical about some people, by speaking about
thems elves, when they are unknown to the audience or by thanking God for
helping them. (https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation –
through -Words -Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
1.4. Conclusions
The American writer, Philip Kindred Dick said that “The basic tool for the
manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the
meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words.” His
saying covers what we have talked about in this chapter and thus, we consider it
illustrative for this part of our academic paper.
To sum up, we talked about language as the main instrument politicians use in
order to gain their public’s attention, votes, loyalty. During the electoral
campaigns, people are curiously watching and listening to the speeches rendered
by the p oliticians and many of them do not t kno w that those beautifully ‘ornated’
speeches are meant to manipulate them, to make them believe that what the

18
speaker says is the truth and only the truth. The politicians do this by choosing the
right words, the right rhetorical devices and by putting them in the right place.
However, our purpose is not to judge the fact that politicians manipulate people,
but to analyze how they do it.
We have already tackled the notion of political spe ech, whic h besides language
and manipulation, is another important ref erence point for this study. The
structure of the political speech, as well as the rhetorical devices politicians use in
order to manipulate, will be of great interest in the following chapters.

19

CHAPTER 2: LANGUAGE MANIPULATION AT ITS BEST:
THE DISCOURSE OF BARACK OBAMA

2.1.: On a Skilled Public Speaker
Barack Obama, the 44th president of United States, who served from January 20,
2009 to January 20, 2017, has remarked h imself in his career through the political
achievements, but most important for us, through his incredible rhetorical skills
and his great pleasure of dealing with words.
It has been generally observed how much words matter for Barack Obama and it
has been rein forced by his statement as well : “[W]ords are important, words
matter, and the implication that they don’t, I think, diminishes how important it is
to speak to the American people directly about making America as good as its
promise. ” (Barack Obama, February 21, 2008) . Even from his early years in
Occidental College, Obama l earned “the power of words and his own power with
the spoken word ” (Christian Andersen: 2008:25) : “I noticed that people had
begun to listen to my opinions. It was a discovery that made me hungry for
words… W ords that could carry a message support an idea. ” (Barack Obama:
2007: 150)
The speeches he rendered have been endowed with elevated words carefully
placed in rhetorical devices. A great number of scholars, after analyzing these
speeches, have revealed the main themes and rhetorical devices that lie at the core
of his speeches. Obama used thematic appeals such as “hope, change, unity”
(Kevin Coe and Michael Reitzes: 2010: 394) , policy appeals such as “economy,
national security, health care, environment and education” , which have been
widely used in his campaign discourse as central components. The scholars have
also tracked in Obama’s discour se some morality appeals like: “values,
patriotism, religion and family” (Kevin Coe and Michael Reitzes: 2010: 395) and

20
some factitious appeals such as “abortion, r ace, immigration and issues
pertaining t o the gay and lesbian community” (Kevin Coe and Michael Reitzes:
2010: 395). Even though these appeals differ from one politician’s discourse to
another, in Barack Obama’s speeches they allowed him to play with words in
many ways so as to influence his audience into being on his side.
Our analysis of Barack Obama’s speeches will prove a certain characteristic of the
44th president of United States: that he is a skilful orator. His speeches, as we will
demonstrate, con sist of various linguistic and rhetorical devices, which are tightly
linked together, giving the sense of unity. An important characteristic of an orator,
a persuader is that he is ‘artistically creative’ and this aspect associates him with a
poet because ‘Both work with symbols to breathe life into ideas’ ’ and use ‘ their
imaginations to engage their audiences imaginations ’ (Hart: 1997). This is what
Obama also does in his speeches: he uses the language of poets, thus transforming
the meaning of the sentenc e into metaphorical, hidden beyond the bare words.
2.2. Cases in Point: Obama’s Speeches
2.2.1. Democratic National Convention Keynote Address
2.2.1.1. Context
It has been said by many scholars, politicians, journalists that this particular
speech has been a major step in Barack Obama’s political career, catapulting him
from an almost anonymous figure onto the national political stage and later on
into the White House itself. For the first time, on the night of Tuesday, July 27,
2004, in Boston, Barack Obama, by then Illinois State Senator, United States
senatorial candidate, has proved his intelligence, his rhetorical skills and his great
gift of talking to large groups in giving the keynote address at the 2004
Democratic National Convention. This speec h is also known as ‘The Audacity of
Hope’, a title which summarizes very briefly the main the matic appeal of the
speech that is hope and a title which has the same great rhetorical effect as the
speech has. We will further analyse in this paper the rhetori cal peculiarities of this
speech which we consider to be an illustrative example of a rhetorical discourse.

21
2.2.1.2. Discourse L ayout
In this part of our work, we will take into account the traditional structure used to
identify the main parts of a rhetori cal discourse, which is : the exodium, the
narratio, the partitio, the confirmatio, the refutatio, the digressio and the peroratio.
In this speech, Barack Obama has respected this particular layout and he has
arranged his arguments so as to make the discour se persuasive and as clear as
possible.
In the exodium the main purpose is to gain the audience’s attention and sympathy
toward the orator. Barack Obama begins this speech using the collateral
circumstances of place: “ On behalf of the great state of Illino is, crossroads of a
nation, Land of Lincoln, let me express my deepest gratitude for the privilege of
addressing this convention .”, praising the importance of the place “ great state of
Illinois ” and showing his gratitude for having the chance to deliver hi s speech in
this particular place in order to stir the audience’s feeling of pride. The allusion he
makes to Lincoln, a highly respected former president, not only that gives the
audience information about his background and the people he looks up to, but it
also gives him authority.
Barack Obama’s life story that follows has the purpose of raising everybody’s
attention and focusing on a subject that can be easily followed due to the narrative
form which makes it more accessible :
Tonight is a particular h onor for me because, let’s face it, my
presence on this stage is pretty unlikely. My father was a foreign
student, born and raised in a small village in Kenya. He grew up
herding goats, went to school in a tin -roof shack. His father – my
grandfather – was a cook, a domestic servant to the British.
Barack Obama uses his own story in this speech for two reasons: to introd uce
himself to the audience as an equal to them so as to gain their sympathy and to
integrate it within the main topic of the speech. The s econd aspect reveals a real
asset of Obama as an orator, because it gives him and his speech credibility. At

22
the end of the exodium, Obama reinforces the idea that he has the privilege of
speaking in front of the people only because he is equal to them as “part of the
larger American story ”, using again circumstances of persons “I owe debt to all of
those who came before me ” and circumstances of places “ in no other country on
earth, is my story even possible”.
The middle section of the text, the Narratio a nd the Pa rtitio, is dedicated to the
Presidential Election from 2004 . Obama tackles some particular topics like the
Iraq war, foreign policy, education and health care which were of great interest to
the Democrats to whom he was speaking:
I thought of the 900 men and women – sons and daughters, husbands
and wives, friends and neighbors, who won’t be returning to their own
hometowns. I thought of the families I’ve met who were struggling to
get by without a loved one’s full income, or whose loved ones had
returned with a limb missing or nerves shattered, but still lacked long –
term health benefits because they were Reservists.
In Confirmatio, Obama uses argum ents to elaborate his case of supporting John
Carry of whom he thinks “he embodies the best this coun try has to offer ” and he
enumerates the reason s why he is the best choice for the people’s future:
John Kerry understands the ideals of community, faith, and service
because they’ve defined his life. From his heroic service to Vietnam,
to his years as a pr osecutor and lieutenant governor, through two
decades in the United States Senate, he's devoted himself to this
country. Again and again, we’ve seen him make tough choices when
easier ones were available. His values and his record affirm what is
best in us . John Kerry believes in an America where hard work is
rewarded; so instead of offering tax breaks to companies shipping
jobs overseas, he offers them to companies creating jobs here at
home.

23
What is representative for the layout of this discourse is that it also has another
part, the Refutatio, in which Obama arguments against the opponents “Now even
as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us – the spin masters,
the negative ad peddle rs who embrace the politics of ‘ anything goes ’." and ma kes
the distinction between the politics of cynicism, represented by the opponents and
the politics of hope which he further develops on.
In the last part of the speech, Obama addresses “America” with the same energy
throughout the speech and summarizes the main purpose of the speech: gaining
the people’s votes. Barack Obama ends his speech by thanking and invoking God:
“God bless you.”
2.2.1.3. Stories, Pathos and E thos
In defining rhetoric, Aristotle talked about three main divisions: ethos, which is
“the speaker’s power of evincing a personal character which will make his speech
credible ”, pathos, representing the speaker’s “power of stirring the emotions of
his hearers” and logos, referring to the speaker’s “ power of proving a truth, or an
apparent tru th, by means of persuasive arguments.” (The Rhetoric, Book I, Part I:
236).
Throughout the discourse, Barack Obama uses stories and arguments in order to
impress his audience and make himself credible. In the beginning of the speech,
the speaker uses the pathos, remarking through his story the improbability of
someone with both hi s past and skin color having this immense privilege of
addressing the convention. Barack Obama appeals directly to the audience’s
emotions through describing his family’s past, describing the American Dream in
his perspective, in his parents’ perspective b ut also what it means for Americans.
The climax of the pathos is to be found in his name’s story : They would give me
an African name, Barack, or “blessed,” believing that in a tolerant America your
name is no barrier to success”, illustrating what most Am ericans hope to find in
America and thus giving Obama’s story credibility.

24
Pathos and ethos further combine in the stories Barack Obama uses in order to
personify the points he is trying to make. For example: “(We have) more to do for
the young woman in Ea st St. Louis, and thousands more like her, who has the
grades, has the drive, has the will, but doesn’t have the money to go to college.”
However, Obama further solidifies his ethos by saying that the people he met
“don’t expect government to solve all the ir problems ”, and that they know that
they have to work hard in order to achieve their dreams.
Another great example of Obama using pathos rests in the following sentences:
If there is a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that
matters to m e, even if it’s not my child. If there is a senior citizen
somewhere who can’t pay for their prescription drugs, and having to
choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even
if it’s not my grandparent.
At this point, the speaker has managed through pathos and ethos to gain the
audience on his side and draw it into his oratory.
2.2.1.4. Logos and Intertextuality
Consideri ng the Logos, in ‘The Audacity of Hope’ speech, Obama uses The
Declaration of Independence as a support for his argu ments of pride and greatness
of the nation: “We hold these truths to be self -evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ”
He also uses the Bible in order to support his arguments of caring about the
people in his country: “It is that fundamental belief: I am my brother’s keeper. I
am my sister’s keeper that makes this country work. “
As these quotations from authoritative so urces like the Bible or other religious
texts and from famous political works like The Declaration of Independence,
strongly appeal to the audience, Barack Obama has easily reached his goal
through this rhetorical devices, of persuading people.

25
2.2.1.5. Em ploying Rhetorical Schemes
As we have mentioned in the Chapter I, the use of figures of speech gives
individuality to the text and marks it stylistically and helps to ac hieve an
interesting effect of provoking emotional reactions in listeners and readers. This
aspect is of great importance in a political speech which aims “to convince other
people of something they may not have been convinced of before. ”
(https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
In this part of the work we will focus on the way Obama uses in his favour every
sound, every word, every part of speech and every syntactic structure and we will
also analyse the richness of rhetorical devices presen t in Obama’s well -known
speech ‘ The Aud acity of Hope’ . The speech consists of simple words, necessary
in this particular context of addressing the speech to com mon people and trying to
appeal to the audience. But, there must be noticed the great deal of figurativeness
and formality necessary in tackling this subject.
Starting from the simplest rhetorical device, well known and widely used in all
sorts of speeches , as well as in daily conversation, the re petition is present in
Obama’s ‘The Audacity of Hope’ too. The orator makes use of the repe tition in all
its forms, phonetic, lexical, grammatical or syntactical in order to emphasize
certain ideas that otherwise m ay pass unnoticed by the listeners. An important
characteristic of the repetition is that it can create structures which “ are usually
considered catch phrases that the listeners leave home ” and which can produce
attitudinal or behavioural changes in the li steners, thus effectively helping in
achieving the speaker’s aim of persuading the
audience. (https://www.scribd.com/document/26796 2121/Manipulation -through –
Words -Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches )
The alliterations which are to be found in this speech not only give the text
musicality and rhythm, but they also make some structures memorable like “ Land
of Lincoln ”, “jobs to the jobless ”, “homes to the homeless ”.

26
One of the most employed rhetorical device s used in this speech by Barack
Obama is the anaphora, whose role is to emphasize particular words at the
beginning of the phrases . In this respect, Barack Obama seems to have a particular
fondness for lists of three parts, a number preferred by most of the orators when it
comes to repetition.
An illustrative example in this respect is the anaphora “ that we can ” reinforcing,
especially through this modal verb, the American dream, the idea that America is
the country of all possibilities. The personal pronoun “ we”, which is also to be
found throughout the rest of the speech, is used to strengthen the idea of inclusion
and of equality. As well as the structure “ you and I ”, Obama use s these pronouns
to indicate the close relationship he wants to establish through directly addressing
the audience regarding the issues that involves them as well.
A good example of three part lists can be found in the repetition of “ more work to
do” thro ugh which Obama appeals to various categories of people: workers,
fathers and young people by introducing the idea that it has not been made enough
for thes e and there is still work to do , which his Party will take care of, if the
people vote. It is import ant to mention that Obama uses an introductory
appellative with this repetition “ fellow Americans, Democrats, Republicans,
Independents” trying to reduce the distance between him and the audience in
order to produce change in people’s attitude and behaviour.
Another example which we find illustrative for this speech, as well as for this
rhetorical device is the following three part list: “We have real enemies in the
world. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued. And they must be
defeated.” First of all, there can be noticed the opposition between “ we”
representing the good people, those who take care of the country, of its unity and
hope, and “ they” representing the enemies. Then, the repetition of the modal verb
“must ” points to the Party’s obligation to eliminate the threats addressed to the
country’s wellbeing.

27
A form of repetition which is frequent in the speech on focus is ep izeuxis and it
has the same purpose of highlighting specific ideas, as it can be observed in the
following examples: “The pundits, the pundits like to slice -and-dice our country
into red states and blue states. ” – in which Obama emphasizes who are the
enem ies and “Hope – Hope in the face of difficulty. Hope in the face of
uncertainty. ” in which Obama brings to light one of the main thematic appeals of
the speech.
Enumeration comes in connection with anaphora, revealing the multiple facets of
the idea expre ssed or the parts affected by a certain issue, as the following
example illustrates:
It’s the hope of slaves sitting around a fire singing freedom songs; the
hope of immigrants setting out for distant shores; the hope of a young
naval lieutenant bravely patrolling the Mekong Delta; the hope of a
millworker’s son who dares to defy the odds; the hope of a skinny kid
with a funny name who believes that America has a place for him, too.
We also notice that in his speech Obama enumerates the beliefs of John Ke rry and
his own beliefs, sketching thus the beliefs of their Party. The fact that he presents
them under the form of enumeration, preceded by the repetition of the verb “ to
believe ” leaves a clear image of the Party’s perspective in people’s minds.
Antith esis is one of the frequent rhetorical device Obama makes use of in almost
all of his speeches and this particular speech makes no exception from this.
Obama uses this rhetorical device in order to defend his idea of unity from the
enemies’ action of divis ion: “Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal
America and a conservative America – there is the United States of America.
There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian
America – there’s the United States of Ameri ca.” Through this antithesis Obama
manages to create quite an opposite effect: by bringing together opposites, he
reinforces the feeling of unity to his audience.

28
Another figure of speech from the discourse that des erves attention is the
metaphor “America… a beacon of freedom and opportunity ” which appeals to the
audience’s conceptions of America being a shining light to the rest of the world
and the imagery of the Statue of Liberty.
An interesting detail of this speech is how Barack Obama uses adverbs of ti me
and place as well as other time and place indicators like: “ tonight ”, “today ”,
“here ”, “this year ”, “this election” , “now” to anchor the audience in the present
and to underline the importance of the election and of the things discussed
throughout the speech.
In the end of his speech, Obama transmits to his audience a great energy and
confidence through the combination of a s yntactic repetition and an enumeration.
Also, Obama uses a syntactic inversion so as to persuade his audience that the
previous political situation can be compared to a “ long darkness ”, yet the political
future is “ brighter ”:
America! Tonight, if you feel the same energy that I do, if you feel the
same urgency that I do, if you feel the same passion that I do, if you
feel the same hopefulness that I do (…) then I have no doubt that all
across the country, from Florida to Oregon, from Washington to
Maine, t he people will rise up in November, and John Kerry will be
sworn in as President, and John Edwards will be sworn in as Vice
President, and this country will reclaim its promise, and out of this
long political darkness a brighter day will come.
2.2.2. Presi dent -Elect Victory Speech
2.2.2.1. The Circumstances
Barack Obama delivers his victory speech, after being elected as president in the
United States presidential election, on November 4, 2008, at Grant Park, in his
home city of Chicago, Illinois. His audie nce consisted of approximately 200,000

29
people in the Grant Park and of millions of people around the globe, watching him
on television and the Internet.
With the long eight -year presidency of George W. Bush coming to an end and the
problems America was fa cing, Barack Obama came as a new face, embodying
hope and change for the Americans. In his speech, then -President -elect, Barack
Obama celebrates the victory, he thanks to the many parts involved in achieving
it, but he al so focuses on the major issues facing the United States and the world
and gives the audience hope in overcoming those challenges together. There are
some recurring thematic appeals in his speech, as hope, unity and change, as well
as policy appeals, as economy, wars, healthcare and educatio n. (Kevin Coe;
Michael Reitzes: 2010: 294)
But, most of all, we give tremendous consideration to the rhetorical skills Barack
Obama proves to have in this particular speech, by organizing his political speech
as a rhetorical discourse, by employing a varie ty of rhetorical devices and by
using pathos, ethos and logos in order to communicate ideas, seduce the audiences
and incite them to action.
2.2.2.2. Celebrating the V ictory
After greeting the people who live in the place he delivers the speech (“ Hello,
Chicago .”), Barack Obama calls on the anaphora “who still ” amplifying the idea
that there still exist people who question America’s greatness, only to culminate it
with the fact that their doubts will disappear after this election “ tonight is your
answer ”. Obama anchors America and the American Dream across time: the past
with “ our founders ”, the general present “our time” and the immediate present
“tonight ”, thus, bringing it back to the people who are watching and who have
made this victory possible. An int eresting allusion in this paragraph is related to
Martin Luther King, as the word “ dream ” echoes his ‘I have a dream’ speech. By
ending the paragraph with the word “ answer ” and by reviving it in the following
paragraphs in a three part list, Barack Obama m akes use of another figure of

30
speech, polyptoton, in order to mark the great contribution each person had to this
victory.
Antithesis lies again at the core of Obama’s speech, having the same purpose: to
unify the country through dispelling the notion of A merica as multiple divisions
based on colors, races or creeds:
It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and
Republican, black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay,
straight, disabled and not disabled Americans who sent a m essage to
the world that we have never been just a collection of individuals or a
collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be,
the United States of America!
Allusion to Martin Luther King recurs again in the exodium in a common phr ase
“Arc of History ” that he used in his speech in Selma and it serves as an instrument
in supporting the idea that something historical happens. As other allusions made
throughout the speech to historical figures, the reference to the “ Arc of History ”
serves as well in establishing Barack Obama’s logos and it gives him credibility.
The great importance of the moment is established through another three part list
“on this day, in this election, at this defining moment ” and the presence of the
inclusive “ we” underlines the contribution people have in making a change.
2.2.2.3. Acknowledging the S upporters
Barack Obama starts his list of thanking those who supported him and who made
the victory possible with an interesting mention: praising and congratulating his
competitor before friends:
Senator McCain fought long and hard in this campaign, and he’s
fough t even longer and harder for the country he loves.(…) I
congratulate him, I congratulate Governor Pain for all they have
achieved, and I look forward to working with them to renew this
nations promise in the months ahead .

31
Through praising the defeated, Oba ma shows signs of being a great leader, thus
gaining the audience’s sympathy. The final words “months ahead ” are a reference
to the future.
Barack Obama describes Joe Biden, the Vice President -elect of the United States
as an ordinary man, trying to establ ish again a relationship of equality between
him and the representatives of his Party and the audience: “a man who
campaigned from his heart and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on
the streets of Scranton and rode with on that train home to Dela ware ”. By
employing an inversion, not naming the person until the end, Barack Obama
creates tension and maintains the audience’s interest and attention.
By thanking his family and using humour, Barack Obama wants to show that he is
like anyone else, a norm al family man, thus connecting with the people in order to
make them listen to what he has to say: “Sasha and Malia, I love you both more
than you can imagine, and you have earned the new puppy that's co ming with us
to the White House” . In this part of the speech, Obama also uses pathos to evoke
sympathy, by mentioning the grandmother who just died, but without being over –
sentimental. The final words “I am grateful tonight” show humility in front of his
public.
As the audience is the main focus of his spee ch, Barack Obama returns to it and
shows through phonetic, lexical and syntactic repetitions how people have
contributed to this victory. The repetition of the structure ” belongs to you ” or of
the alliterations “ hatched in halls” and “ began in backyards ”, “porches of
Charleston ” has the aim of bringing the audience back in and of proving and
persuading them that his campaign have started in their homes, not in the halls of
Washington. Through the repetition of “ dollars ” in “who dug into what little
savings they had to give five dollars and ten dollars and twenty dollars to the
cause.” Barack Obama shows how small actions can lead to great actions and
tries to incite his audience into future contribution.

32
The allusion to Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysberg address through the repetition “a
government of the people, by the people and for the people ” establishes again
Obama’s logos not only that connects him with the past and the American Way,
but it also helps him legitimize his claim to the presidency by quoting a very
famous and appreciated American President. The sentence “ This is your victory. ”
makes the transition from thanking and praising the people to making them aware
of the responsibility this victory brings to them.
2.2.2.4. Overcoming the C hallenges
In talking about the importance of the issues America faces, Barack Obama firstly
uses the inclusive “we” to persuade the audience that this is not a great problem
only for the common people, but for the elected President as well “For even as we
celebrate tonig ht, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the
greatest of our lifetime .”
Then, as a skillful orator, Obama marks the passing from one topic to another
through the alliteration “ celebrate – challenges ”. Finally, Obama summarizes the
main issu es in a three part list “ two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial
crisis in a century ”, only to persuade the audience later that there is hope in
overcoming these challenges. He further appeals to the pathos in talking about
“brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq(…) to risk their lives for us ”
and about “ mothers and fathers who will lie awake after the children fall asleep ,
and wonder how they’ll make the mortage or pay their doctors’ bills or save
enough for their child’s college educat ion.”, in order to emphasize again with an
anaphora the hope that all these issues have solutions: “ There’s new energy to
harness, new jobs to be created, new schools to build ”.
We consider that the enumeration of the challenges that America faces is only a
start point in Barak Obama’s try of persuading and inciting the people into taking
an action in solving these problems. Obama appeals to history in his informal oath
to the nation and uses a three -part list and alliteration to reproduce the heavy
proces s of defeating the impediments: “ I will ask you to join in the work of

33
remaking this nation, the only way it’s been done in America for 221 years –
block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand .”
Barack Obama persuades the people that th ey are the truly foundation of change
and he keeps reminding them this through repetition: “ It can’t happen without
you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice ”. A feeling of
inclusion is achieved through the inclusive “we” which unites the Republicans
and the people through the common values they share: “ the Republican Party (…)
– a party founded on the values of self -reliance, individual liberty, and national
unity. Those are values we all share (…) ”. Barack Obama’s appeal to logos is
obvious in his evocation of Lincoln in order to support the unity of his argument:
“As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours: <<We are not enemies,
but friends…>> <<Though passion may have strained, it must not break our
bonds of affection… > >”
Barack Obama appeals to pathos to gain the sympathy of those who did not
support him yet and of the foreigners: “ our stories are singular, but our destiny is
shared ”. However, through the adverbial of time “ tonight ”, he returns to his
supporters to prov e them that at the basis of America’s greatness, illustrated
through the metaphor “ America’s beacon still burns ”, lie the ideals that they
share: “ comes (…) from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty,
opportunity, and unyielding hope .”
2.2.2 .5. “Yes We C an!”
Barack Obama opens the last part of his speech with the story of Ann Nixon
Cooper, a 106 years old woman, a story which establishes his logos and which is
presented in a witty manner. He defines this woman’s image as a national figure
and characterizes her as a symbol for the America’s situation of the last one
hundred years and he associates to her through a simple characteristic “ the color
of her skin ”. As Ann Nixon Cooper has witnessed the radical changes in America,
Obama has seen the country through it darkest and he tries in his speech to
persuade the people that his campaign was the “ beacon ” for not just Ann Nixon

34
Cooper, but also for all America. He invokes the past through the allusions to
historical figures like Martin Luther King “we shall overcome” , to prove his
legitimacy to his claim of being the fulfillment of centuries ’ long struggle for
freedom.
Finally, as a true orator, Barack Obama embodies his ethos in the use of “Yes We
Can”, as a form to define the nation. This partic ular slogan, which has defined the
Obama campaign, is one of unification, hope and change. The presence of the
inclusive “we” makes the common man a part of the campaign and draws people
together in confronting the challenges. Then, Barack Obama concluding each of
the changes in America which Ann Nixon Cooper has witnessed with the
statement “ Yes We Can ” has the purpose of manipulating people into believing
that there is hope for them as well to pass through any issue that might rise in
America, because of the strong principles laying at its foundation. Through this
creed, Barack Obama also intends to incite people to action, to change.
The conclusion of the speech represents a final call to action, emphasizing on the
main thematic appeals of the discourse: change, hope and unity. Barack Obama
underlines that the significance of the victory lies in the people’s opportunity of
making a change through the anaphora “ this is ”: “This is our chance to answer
that call. This is our moment. This is our time.” and he ends his speech by
invoking God, in a traditional final blessing.
2.2.3. Second Presidential Inaugural Address
2.2.3.1. Speech Background
The Presidential Inaugural Address is the most important moment of the
ceremony which marks the beginning of a new fo ur-year term of the President of
the United States, even if the president is continuing for a second term. On
January 21, 2013, Barack Obama delivers his second Presidential Inaugural
speech, at the United States Capitol building, in which he tac kles the t hemes of
perseverance and unity of the United States, the future of America and he
rehearses the national values. This speech is another proof of Barack Obama’s

35
rhetorical mastery, since he employs most of his favourite rhetorical tricks in
order to ensure the people that their country will be under safe hands.
2.2.3.2. Uniting “W e”
In the Exodium, Barack Obama uses common rhetorical st rategy that politicians
use: the appellatives that address both specific categories of listeners and the
whole audience: “ Vice President Biden, Mr. Chief Justice, members of the United
States Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow citizens” . Through this
rhetorical scheme, Barack Obama manages to draw everybody’s attention so that
they focus on what he is going to say and he also shows his respect to the
important members of the audience, which he has enumerated and then to the
whole audience. Another possible interpretation of using this introductory
formula is that by putting together politicians and common people in a sentence,
Barack Obama tries to achieve his aim, of uniting people in their mission of
improving America.
The inclusive personal pronoun “we” , present throughout the speech more than
sixty times, creates a strong feeling of union, of collaboration, of an intimate and
equal relationship between the President and the people, thus persuading the
audience emotionally. Moreover, Obama uses other wor ds to strengthen the idea
of equality and alliance in people’s minds through the repetition under the form of
anaphora of the noun “together”: “Together we determined (…) Together we
discovered (…) Together we resolve (…)” , the repetition of the possess ive
pronoun “our” , to convey the idea that they share the same values and ideas:
“That’s how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national treasure –
our forests and waterways, our crop lands, and snow -capped peaks.” and the
repetition of “ you an d I”: “You and I, as citizens have the power to set this
country’s course. You and I, as citizens have the obligation to shape the debates
of our time”.
By conveying the idea of unity of America, of “ one nation and one people ”,
Barack Obama emphasizes the idea that only together they can overcome the

36
challenges and the enemies whose presence he signals through the alliterations
“the forces of fascism ” and “communism with muskets and militias” :
For the American people can no more meet the demands of today’s
world by acting alone than American soldiers could have met the
forces of fascism or communism with muskets and militias. No single
person can train all the math and science teachers we’ll need to equip
our children for the future, or build the roads and networks and
research labs that will bring new jobs and businesses to our shores.
Now, more than ever, we must do these things together , as one nation
and one people.
2.2.3.2. National Values in Intertextuality
In his Inaugural Speech, Barack Obama makes u se of another rhetorical device,
intertextuality, to establish his logos, ethos and pathos, the three main persuasive
tools of a rhetorical discourse.
First of all, he quotes from a document of tremendous importance, for the
American citizens, the Declar ation of Independence, which represents an
authoritative source and supports his arguments of America being a nation whose
unity was not represented by colour, religion or name, but it was based on
equality and liberty articulated in the constitution by t he founding fathers:
We hold these truths to be self -evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator w ith certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.
Pathos is also established by quoting this declara tion, as Obama evokes emotional
sense of nationalism among the Americans.
Then, Barack Obama goes further and supports his arguments about every citizen
being equal as they learnt from their founders , who were guided by t he historical

37
movements , through an enumeration of some well known historical events, which
could not be denied by the audience:
We, the people, declare today that the most evident truths – that all of
us are created equal – is the star that guides us sti ll; just as it guided
or forbears through Seneca Falls, and Selma, and Stonewall; just as it
guided all those men and women, sung and unsung, who left footp rints
among this great Mall (…)
Also, the purpose of the melodicity of the alliteration “ Seneca Fall s, and Selma,
and Stonewall” could be of attracting the attention of the audience on the
important events Obama makes reference to and who stand as a proof for his
arguments.
The biblical reasoning can also be part of the logos, as Obama used it to suppor t
his initiative of making the Americans responsible for taking care of the
sustainable energy: “That’s how we will maintain our economic vitality and our
national treasure – our forests and waterways, our crops lands and snow -capped
peaks. That is how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by God.”
In this example, Obama appeals also to the audience’s emotions, by addressing to
the believers of God who felt the duty to obey the God’s command.
Through the allusions to Abraham Lincoln: “ a governm ent of, and by, and for the
people” and to Martin Luther King: “ to hear a “King” proclaim that our
individual freedom in inextricably bound to the freedom of every soul on earth” ,
Barack Obama aligns himself with the historical figures, thus using ethos to
establish his character to the audience, by showing his knowledge and
understanding of the American history. Obama also uses another technique of
ethos to prove his credibility to his audience, by showing his awareness of the
controversial issues of the American society: “We will respond to the threat of
climate change, knowing that the failure to do so would betray our children and
future generations.”

38
2.2.3.4. A Balance of Rhetoric
This speech that Barack Obama delivers following his victory bears the m ark of a
balance of rhetoric illustrated through various devices as parallelism, three part
lists and antithesis.
Even though this particular rhetorical device has been less explored, a few authors
have made some observations related to it: “For Obama, the re is always a
transcendent place of agreement between two opposing theses” (Murphy: 2009),
which summarizes the orator’s rhetorical approach. Another concept which can be
related to the balanced rhetoric is “triangulation”, which could explain Barack
Obam a’s way of tackling issues in his speeches: “moving "above and between"
the traditional left -right dichotomy and presenting a third way for the voters'
consideration seems a key element of any rhetorical strategem based on balance
rhetoric.” (Andrew Mitchel l Bare: 2011).
The three part list is the first indicator of a balance of rhetoric whose main aim is
to convey a message and to convince the audiences. Obama’s Inaugural speech is
enriched with many three part lists like “empower our citizens with the skil ls they
need to work harder, learn more, reach higher”, “the commitments we make to
each other through Medicare and Medicaid and Social security”, “our national
treasure – our forests and waterways, our crop lands, and snow -capped peaks” ,
each of these hav ing a powerful, attention -grabbing effect on audiences. This
effectiveness consists in the sense of completeness: a list of two may seem
unconvincing, while a list of three seems to be comprehensive.
Antithesis is another powerful rhetorical device which lies at the heart of Obama’s
rhetorical strategy. By showing contrasts, the point being made is easier to
understand by the audience, as in the following examples from Obama’s Inaugural
Speech: “who won the peace and not just the war” , “who turned sworn en emies
into the surest of friends” , “half slave and half free” .

39
2.2.3.5. Persuading through Rhetorical Devices
In this speech, Barack Obama takes the easiest rhetorical device, repetition, to
another level, by using it in all forms and in a variety of combinations that gives
the speech a persuasive tone, almost impossible to hold back from exerting its
influence on people’s minds and behavior.
We have already tackled the purpose of some repetitions of pronouns like “ we” or
“our”, or “ you and I” or of the noun “ together ”. However, Barack Obama brings
into action alliterations, the repetition of sounds, like “that fidelity to our
founders” , “the forces of fascism ”, “muskets and militias ”, “common creed”. Due
to its auditory effects, the repetition of sounds makes the formulation of specific
ideas to be easily to remember, and thus the orator is sure that the beliefs he
conveys through his speech, stay longer on th e audience’s minds.
Repetition in Obama’s speech is also found under the form of epizeuxis which is a
“rhetorical figure that consists in the immediate repetition of the same word with
no other words intervening”.
(https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches ) In the following example: “(…)
together – Together we de termined that …” the crowding of words with an
unpleasant effect is avoided, manifesting instead a persuasive effect through
repetition.
Another aspect of Barack Obama’s speeches which distinguishes his oratorical
talent is the presence of metaphors, which make the discourse more attractive to
the ear, and also makes it more appealing and convincing and can be a proof of
the orator’s skills . For example, in the Inaugural Address, Obama employs
metaphors like “a never ending journey” , suggesting the continuity of the
political system, “ the star that guides ”, representing the founding creed of the
America and “powerful storms ” illustrating the seriousity of the issues America
faces. The presence of the epithets enriches the speech stylistically, making it

40
appealing and almost poetical: “ raging fires ”, “powerful storms ”, “enduring
strength ”.
2.3. Conclusions
As the title of this chapter says: Language manipulation at its best, Barack
Obama’s speeches proved to be great models of language manipulation. To sum
up the rhetorical analysis made throughout this chapter, these three particular
speeches have demonstrated Barack Obama’s rhetorical talen t, representing a
sample for the entire rhetorical literature Obama has created. From the beginning
up to the end, the entire speech respects the rhetorical arrangement as well as the
implication of the rhetorical devices, which we have proved through a mu ltitude
of examples.
The discourse is organized according to the rhetorical layout: exodium, narratio,
refutatio, confirmatio and peroratio. Obama also makes use of ethos, to gain
credibility, logos, to support his arguments and pathos, to appeal to the pe ople’s
emotions in order to persuade them. He also pays careful attention to the use of
circumstances of place, persons, time and issues. By mentioning important
personalities from the America’s past, Obama establishes his logos and makes his
speech more persuasive. He uses introductory formulas to create a closer
relationship with the audience and to show respect.
The most important part of the rhetorical analysis consists identifying the
rhetorical devices. Barack Obama proves to be a skillful orator not only by using
repetition, which is so frequent in other politicians’ speeches, but by employing
various rhetorical devices, making his speech almost poetical. He proves to be a
great speaker using not only simple words to deliver his speech, but also by using
metaphors to emphasize the meaning he tries to convey to the audiences.
These three particular speeches embody the greatest models for language
manipulation at its best, displaying an elevated vocabulary, complex sentences
and a great variety of rhet orical devices.

41

CHAPTER 3: UNCONVENTIONAL LANGUAGE
MANIPULATION: THE DONALD TRUMP PHENOMENON

3.1.: Brief Investigation into the Discourse of Donald Trump
Donald John Trump has made an entire world wonder about his victory after
winning the elections and becoming the 45th President of the United States on 6th
of November, 2017. Throughout the electoral campaign, in the debates or the
speeches he made, Trump has not proved great oratorical skills, but, despite this
fact, he has managed to persuade a certain typology of the electorate. The main
slogan during his electoral campaign has been ‘Make America Great Again ’.
The results show that in debates, Trump uses simpler vocabulary and sentences,
whereas in campaign speeches, sometimes the vocabulary is richer and the
sentences have a more complex structure (Yaqin Wang; Haitao Liu: 2018). The
style in his speeches is characterized as simple, pompous, repetitive language in a
rambling fashion, being more associated with a conversational style (Golshan,
2016). Thi s might have appealed to some people, because of the authenticity this
style expresses. Also, this sense of authenticity is rendered through jumping
between different topics, which is representative for each of us as part of our daily
communication, but wh ich is not to be expected from such a great authority, as the
President of the United States (Karl Simms: 2018). An important study realized
by the Boston Globe that made a comparative analysis of the grade level of
presidential candidates found that the c omplexity of Donald Trump’s language
equaled that of a fourth grader (Yaqin Wang; Haitao Liu, 2018).
In the campaign speeches, Trump appeals to some of the rhetorical devices,
repetition and hyperbole being his favourites. He also uses circumstances of
persons and places, as well as intertextuality, referring to Bible. An interesting
thing to compare with Barack Obama is Donald Trump’s lack of offering tributes

42
to the nation’s past greatness, either in the form of presidents or great historical
moments, loo king instead only to the future, therefore to himself as the President
of the United States.
Anyway, Trump manages to manipulate people, as it has been shown by the
electoral campaign’s results, becoming thus a genuine phenomenon. The
language he uses ref lects the fact that he is an unusual political speaker. He also
manages to influence the language through the so -called “trumpisms” (Karl
Simms: 2018), which we will later discuss in this study.
Considering thematic appeals, some of the most used in his speeches are:
immigration, economy, social policy and foreign policy, which have been the
main issues of rural White working -class people, hi s main supporters (Faber et al.:
2017; Hochschild: 2016). By concentrating on themes that were of great interest
for most of the electorate may partly account for his winning of the election.
Despite the vague rhetoric employed in Donald Trump’s speeches, a skill which
should be representative for every President, he managed to manipulate people
into believing him and voting for him and how he made this possible will be
tackled throughout this chapter.
3.2.: Sample Analysis: Public Speeches
3.2.1.: The Presidential Announcement Speech
3.2.1.1.: Framework of the S peech
On June 16, 2015, at Trump Tower in New York City, D onald Trump opens the
2016 presidential campaign by delivering his Presidential Announcement Speech.
He was one of the seventeen candidates for this title. However, given his non –
political record, he was not considered an appropriate candidate for the
presidency. But the broadcast of his announcement speech on national television,
as well as his fame as a showman gave him a broad audience for his message.
Through this speech, Trump sought to make himself a suitable political candidate
and he tried to manipu late the working class. He tackles themes like relationship

43
between America and the rest of the world as well as issues of National Security,
immigration, Islamic terrorism, unemployment, Obamacare and education.
3.2.1.2.: Simple Language – An Attention G rabber
What strikes many of the people, as well as the linguists, when they listen to
Donald Trump’s announcement speech, is the simplicity of the language he used.
After years of hearing Presidents talking in an elaborate, elevate and metaphorical
manner, the simple words and syntax have sounded atypical t o the audience.
However, despite different affirmations of this being Donald Tru mp’s real level of
talking, like a fourth -year grader, he might have a plausible reason for this: to
manipulate people.
Firstly, it is easy to notice the fact that Donald Trump mostly employs one –
syllable words. Accordingly to our analysis there are 4255 monosyllabic -words
out of 6398 words in this speech: “job” , “sun” , “moon” , “lie” , “true” , “drugs”
etc. The longest words he us ed are “environmentalist” , “congratulations” ,
“economically” , “simultaneously” . However, these are examples of words which
are comprehensible for everyone and thus, Trump manages to get his message
conveyed to all categories of people.
Secondly, the simpl e syntax is another feature of Donald Trump’s language style.
He uses the common structure: Subject+Predicate as in the following examples
from this speech: “They didn’t know the room was too big. ”, “Our country is in
serious trouble. ”, “We don’t have vict ories anymore. ”, “Free trade can be
wonderful.”, “We got a military that needs equipment all over the place.” etc.
These simple sentences function as an attention grabber: the audience tends to pay
more attention to a message put into an understandable form, especially when the
target audience tends to speak like this on a daily basis. Beside the short
sentence s, Donald Trump’s speech also contains some very long sentences which
sometimes lack coherence because of the speaker’s jumping from one idea to
another, making it difficult for the public to follow it: e.g. “ And in 19 — and I will
tell you this, and I said it very strongly, years ago, I said and I love the military,

44
and I want to have the strongest military that we’ve ever had, and we need it more
now than ever.”.
Another important language aspect related to Trump’s speech is the choice of
words. He uses ma ny negative words trying to convey negative images and thus
using the audience’s fru strations to his advantage, for example: “they’re killing us
economically”, “It’s a disaster” “two vicious murderers”, “We’re ready to start
shooting.”, “disastrous airport s” etc.
3.2.1.3.: The Persuasive Power of R epetition
This particular rhetoric device is considered a characteristic of Donald Trump’s
speeches, as he employs it every time and is present throughout the entire text. It
can also be said that Donald Trump manipulates people mostly through repetition,
using thus the easiest figure of speech to emphasise his ideas, to give structure to
the speech and make it memorable. Thus, after the discourse, the audience keeps
in mind mostly the repeated words or ideas, despite the incoherence of Donald
Trump’s speech, which w e will later discuss in our study.
In Donald Trump’s Presidential announcement speech there are a multitude of
repetitions and through each of these, Donald Trump wants to stress ideas and to
make them stay in people’s minds, thus to manipulate the audien ce. Because of
the richness of the repetitions present throughout this speech, we will analyse only
the most important ones which prove our statement.
Firstly, Trump employs the epizeuxis in his speech, as in the following examples:
I beat China all the t ime. All the time.
You have to be hit by a tractor, literally, a tractor, to use it, because
the deductibles are so high, it’s virtually useless. It’s virtually useless.
It is a disaster.

45
And I watch the speeches. I watch the speeches of these people, and
they say the sun will rise, the moon will set, all sorts of wonderful
things will happen.
He uses the immediate repetition of words or repetition to make them clearer in
the audience’s mind as in the first two examples and also to gain credibility in
front of the people, as in the third example.
Secondly, he uses repetition in an abusive manner when he starts talking about a
different topic, in order to make it memorable and to emphasize his perspective on
it, considering both the current situation, as wel l as his way of dealing with it. For
example, he begins his speech by talking about economy and through the
following repetitions, Trump manages to insert in simple sentences the topic and
his opinion about it: “And now they are beating us economically. Th ey are not our
friend, believe me. But they’re killing us economically.” In this example, it can
also be noticed a gradation of the negative images “beating ” and “killing ”,
through which Trump tries to stir the audience’s anger towards the current
situatio n.
Another favourite subject Trump tackles in this speech is about jobs and it can
easily be spotted through the repetition of the word: “ That’s right. A lot of people
up there can’t get jobs. They can’t get jobs, because there are not jobs, because
China has our jobs and Mexico has our jobs. They all have jobs.” By employing
repetition again, he presents his future plans regarding this subject, thus
succeeding to make a contrast with the current administration and him:
I will be the greatest jobs president that God ever created. I tell you
that. I’ll bring back our jobs from China, from Mexico, from Japan,
from so many places. I’ll bring back our jobs, and I’ll bring back our
money.
His vision on Obamacare is also straig htforwardly expressed through repetition:
“We have a disaster called the big lie: Obamacare. Obamacare. (… ) it’s
virtually useless. It’s virtually useless. It is a disaster.”

46
Trump also tackles the military subject, by emphasizing what others are doing, as
opposed to what is happening in America, in order to give the audience a sense of
the current situation in his vision, also explaining through repetition what he
thinks the causes might be:
Now they’re going militarily. They’re building a military isla nd in the
middle of the South China sea. A military island. Now, our country
could never do that because we’d have to get environmental
clearance, and the environmentalist wouldn’t let our country – we
would never build in an ocean. They built it in about one ye ar, this
massive military port.
Trump also uses repetition to announce his Presidency candidacy and to
emphasize it: “You know, all of these politicians that I’m running against now –
it’s so nice to say I’m running as opposed to if I run, if I run. I’m running. But all
of these politicians that I’m running against now, they’re trying to disassociate.”
Thirdly, Trump’s frequent use of “Believe me”, which usually appears after
saying something that is baseless or untrue, tends to make the speech sound more
trustworthy:
If the right person asked them, they’d pay a fortune. They wouldn’t be
there except for us. And believe me , you look at the border with
Yemen.
I would build a great wall, and nobody builds better than me, believe
me.
Reduce our $18 trill ion in debt, because, believe me , we’re in a
bubble.
As we have said earlier in our study, Donald Trump managed to make an impact
on the language through the so called ‘Trumpisms’ which are mainly a matter of
Trump’s style, rather than new words. ‘Believe me’ is the most common
“Trumpism”, representing for his supporters a sign of speaking like everyone else

47
in everyday speech. However, by repeating this discourse marker, the meaning is
quite the opposite: Trump can’t be believable if he has to tell his aud ience to
believe him all the time. Since the listeners think of this discourse marker as an
attention grabber, it means that Trump has achieved his goal, of manipulating
people.
3.2.1.4.: The Use of P ronouns: I – We – They
Despite other politicians who h ave been trying to unite the people through the use
of pronouns in their speeches, Donald Trump creates quite a different feeling by
employing these parts of speech in his announcement speech. One of the common
themes found in Trump’s speech is the dichoto my of winners and losers, strength
and weakness, a theme which is outlined through pronouns: we are weak,
foreigners are strong, they (the other politicians) are weak, Trump is strong.
(Robert McClay, 2017: 24)
Throughout the speech, Trump uses inclusive we when he refers to America and
its citizens. He associates this pronoun with negative attributes, actions and even
with possessions in order to manipulate the audience to believe that the fate of
America is getting worse :
Our country is in serious trouble.
We as country are getting weaker.
We’re becoming a third world country, because of our infrastructure,
our a irports, our roads, everything.
That’s when we become a country that’s unsalvageable.
We don’t have victories anymor e.
Thus Trump succeeds to manipulate people into adopting an angry attitude
towards those who have been in charge of the country’s wellbeing, simply by
repeating under a variety of forms only the negative aspects. By contrasting the
weak country with the s trong people, Trump manages to convey his argument

48
against the current leadership by implying that “we” are being improperly
utilized.
The foreigners are referred to by “they” and described as powerful, opposing the
weaker “we” , as in the following example s:
They all have our jobs.
They’ re not sending (us) their best.
They’re bringing those problems with us
They’re bringing drugs (to us).
They take our money.
But their leaders are much smarter than our leaders and we c an’t
sustain ourself with that.
Trump creates through these contrasts the image of an impotent America in
preventing the actions being done by the foreigners. However, Trump strengthens
the image of a weak America even through storytelling. The story of the
American car company Ford is intende d to draw the audience’s attention on the
foreigner’s threat: “All of a sudden, at the last moment, this big car manufacturer,
foreign, announces they’re not going to Tennessee. They’re gonna spend their $1
billion in Mexico instead. Not good ”.
Another con trast being made through pronouns is established between other
politicians and Trump. He presents the audience as weak in order to give himself
credit and to manipulate the audience that he will do better than them, mostly
because of his possessions, as he is insinuating that the politicians are motivated
by greed: “They’re controlled fully by the lobbyists, by the donors, and by the
special interests, fully ”.

49
What is interesting about Donald Trump’s speeches is that, unlike other
politicians, he employs v ery often the first person pronoun “I”, presenting the
strengths and actions that legitimize him as a candidate:
I think I am a nice person.
I kno w the negotiators in the world.
I hire people, they do a website.
I’ve done an amazing job.
I did a lot of great deals.
I’ve employed tens of thousands of peopl e over my lifetime.
By creating a contrast between the negative they and the positive I, Donald Trump
puts himself in a favorable position in front of the audience, presenting himself as
the best choice for the people.
3.2.1.4.: The Rhetorical Effect of H yperbole
Another rhetorical device Trump makes use of is hyperbole through which he
emphasizes particular ideas and makes them look of great importance in the
audience’s eyes.
He uses hyperbole to make negative things or actions look even worse, as in the
following examples:
But think of it, GDP below zero, hor rible labor participation rate.
We hav e a disaster called the big lie: Obamacare. Obamacare.
It’s virtu ally useless. It is a disaster.
The gravity of the things he presents increases through the use of hyperbole and
he also stirs the anger in the audience, manipulating them into believing his
words.

50
On the other hand, after establishing the negative things, he pictures him self as the
only positive person with positive characteristics and actions by magnifying as
well through hyperbole as we have noticed in the speech: “I will be the greatest
jobs president that God ever created. , I’m really rich., I think I’m actually a ve ry
nice person. ”
3.2.1.5.: Incoherence vs. A uthenticity
In the announcement speech, Donald Trump makes use of storytelling to establish
the logos and pathos, yet through this he also proves discontinuity in his
discourse. One particular aspect of the incoh erence of his speech consists in
interrupting his speech. For example, in his story about Ford, Donald Trump
begins with an idea and breaks in several times as in the following examples:
…one of the early things I would do, probably before I even got in –
and I wouldn’t even use – you know, I have – I know the smartest
negotiators in the world. I know the good ones. I know the bad ones. I
know the overrated ones. (…) So I would say, “Congratulations.
That’s good news. Le t me give you the bad news (…).
After I’m called by 30 friends of mine who contributed to different
campaigns, after I’m called by all of the special interests and by the –
the donors and by the lobbyists – and they have zero chance at
convincing me, zero – I’ll get a call the next day from the head of
Ford. He’ll say. “P lease reconsider”, I’ll say no.
Also, another characteristic of Donald Trump’s discourse is jumping from one
topic to another, which is an odd thing to do for a political discourse. This
particular feature can be seen through out the entire announcement speech as in the
following examples:
But actually I am. I think I am a nice person. People that know me,
like me. Does my family like me? I think so, right. Look at my family.
I’m proud of my family. By the way, speaking of my f amily, Melania,

51
Barron, Kai, Donnie, Don, Vanessa, Tiffany, Evanka did a gre at job.
Did she do a great job?
We have to repeal Obamacare, and it can be – and – and it can be
replaced with something much better for everybody. Let it be for
everybody. But much better and much less expensive for people and
for the government. And we can do it. So I’ve watched the politicians.
I’ve dealt with them all my life. If you can’t make a good deal with a
politician, then th ere’s something wrong with you.
This constan t interruption gives the audience the sense of authenticity, making the
speech looking like a daily conversation, as opposed as the type of discourse it
actually is: a political discourse.
3.2.2. President -Elect Victory Speech
3.2.2.1 Placing the Speech in a Background
On November, 9th 2016, Donald Trump respected the American Presidential
tradition of giving a victory speech. After a long electoral campaign, Donald
Trump’s victory speech, as well as his victory, surprised many people because of
its strikin g resemblance with the other Presidents’ victory speeches and because
of its apparent peaceful tone, in contrast with what he promoted in the electoral
campaign. Also, as we have said before, in this electoral speech, Donald Trump
employed a more elaborate d language, yet not enough to prove his presidential
rhetoric, as we will further demonstrate in this chapter.
3.2.2.2. Looking L ike a Traditional Victory Speech
The victory speech delivered by a newly -elected President is already a tradition in
the history of the United States of America and it looks like Donald Trump has
respected it. In most of the Presidents’ victory speeches it can be observed a
peaceful, unif ying and hopeful tone through which the winners of the biggest
position in the country are thankful to their adversaries, as well as to their
supporters.

52
Donald Trump begins his speech in the same peaceful tone: by congratulating his
opponent, Hillary Cli nton, trying thus to build new bridges, despite the constant
political fight during the electoral campaign:
(…) and I congratulated her and her family on a very, very hard –
fought campaign. I mean, she – she fought very hard. Hillary has
worked very long a nd very hard over a long period of time, and we
owe her a major debt of gratitude for her service to our country. I
mean that very sincerely .
Also, contrasting to other speeches, Donald Trump uses in his victory speech
more rhetorical devices, trying to ma ke it more elevate and worthy of being
considered a truly presidential speech. Firstly, he employs antithesis to convey the
idea that the Presidential administration will establish positive relationships with
other nations: “We will seek common ground, not hostility; partnership, not
conflict.” Secondly, Donald Trump uses hyperbole, under the form of exaggerated
statements he makes related to America’s future, so as the audience will get an
image of a triumphal America under Donald Trump’s presidency:
We’r e going to rebuild our infrastructure, which will become, by the
way, second to none. And we will put millions of our p eople to work as
we rebuild it.
We will double our growth and have the strongest economy anywhere
in the world.
America will no longer se ttle for anything less than the best.
Thirdly, Donald Trump uses the repetition under new forms. He uses alliteration,
not only to make the phrases memorable, but also to make the speech more
appealing for the audience:
(…) the unta pped potential in projects and in people all over the
world.

53
(…) an incredible and great movement, made up of millions of
hardworking men and wo men, who love their country and want a
better, brighter future for t hemselves and for their family.
The following alliteration is part of a three part -list: “Dream big and bold an d
daring.” Another type of repetition which appears in this speech is anaphora,
having the same effect of making an impact on the audience and thus,
manipulating them on the ide as conveyed by the speaker: “No dream is too big,
no challenge is too great. Nothing we want for our future is beyond our reach.”
Considering the language employed, not only that Trump uses more complex
words and phrases, but he also repeats many positive words to manipulate the
audience that his Presidency period will have mostly good aspects:
That is now what I want to do for our country. Tremendous potential.
I’ve gotten to know our country so well. Tremendous potential.
Our veterans are incredible peop le.
We’ll have great relationships. We expect to have great , great
relationships.
Despite of all these parts of Donald Trump’s discourse that make it look like a
traditional Presidential victory speech, there are many aspects which prove the
fact that even in this speech Trump’s language is rather unconventional, yet still
manipulative, through the way he employs the rhetorical devices, which we will
further prove in this study.
3.2.2.3. A Unifying and Hopeful Speech
Unlike the Announcement Speech, as well as other speeches, Donald Trump
discovers in the Victory speech the power of “we”. From the beginning of the
speech, he establishes one of the main themes he tackles: unity: “She
congratulated us – It’s about us – on our victory”. In our opinion, the choice of
this theme in his discourse not only accounts for a rather traditional speech, but it

54
also helps him in fixing the links with his audience, which he has broken through
separating himself in his previous speeches .
It can be observed the use of the inclusive personal pronoun “we”, adjectives,
nouns, verbs, collocations and phrases which transmit a unifying feeling, thus
manipulating people to believe Trump’s good intentions for America’s future:
Now it’s time for America to bind the wounds of division – have to get
together .
I say it is time for us to come together as one united people .
I pledge to every citizen of our land that I will be President for all of
Americans, and this is so important to me. For those who have chosen
not to support me in the past, of which there were a few people, I’m
reaching out to you for your guidance and your help so that we can
work together and unify our great country.
Working together, we will begin the urgent task of rebuilding our
nation and renewing the American Dream .
However, the exclusive “we” , referring to the Presidential Administration, in
association with the future tense and the present continuous help Donald Trump
to make promises regarding America’s future and thus del ivering hope to the
audience:
We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges,
tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals.
We’re going to rebuild our infrastructure (…)
And we will put millions of our p eople to work as we rebuild it.

55
3.2.2.4. Proving to b e an Unconventional Victory Speech
If the first part of Donald Trump’s Victory Speech consists in congratulating his
opponent and in conveying feeling of unity and hope, the second part will
consider thanking the supporters of the candida te.
Even though this part is common for a Victory Speech, Donald Trump leaves a
mark on this specific part of the speech, through the way he uses language to
thank them, and by inviting Reince Priebus to talk in front of the audience. This
proves Donald T rump’s skills of a showman, rather of a great political rhetorician,
but it also helps at, what we have already tackled in the previous subchapter,
giving the audience the sense of authenticity.
Donald Trump uses enumeration in this part of the speech, as well as repetition of
positive words to convince the audience of his supporters’ qualities. The rhetoric
questions through which Donald Trump wants to convey authenticity of the
speech prove the unconventionality of the speech:
And my brother Robert, my g reat friend. Where is Robert? Where is
Robert? My brother Robert – and they should be on this stage, but
that’s okay. They’re great. And also my late brother Fred, great guy.
Fantastic guy. Fantastic family.
To Melania and Don and Ivanka and Eric and Tiffany and Barron, I
love you and I thank you (…).
We have got tremendously talented people up here, and I want [to]
tell you it’s been – it\s been very, very special.
I want to give a very special thanks to our former mayor, Rudy
Giuliani. He’s unbelieva ble. (… )Where’s Rudy? Where is he? Rudy.
As we have already said, what strikes the most in his speech is Donald Trump’s
desire of calling Reince Priebus to talk in front of the audience, an uncommon
thing for a Victory Speech:

56
Reince, come up here. Where i s Reince? Get over here Reince. Boy,
oh, boy, oh, boy. It’s about time you did this right, eh? My god. Say a
few words.
Reince Priebus: No…
President -Elect Trump: Ah, c’mon! (…)
Reince Priebus: Ladies and gentlemen, the next President of the
United States – Donald Trump! Thank you. It’s been an honor. God
bless. Thank God.
In this part of the speech it can be noticed that Donald Trump returns to his
unconventional way of manipulating people through the easiest rhetorical device
repetition and through simple language, as the following examples illustrate:
Great brothers, sis ters; great, unbelievable parents.
This was tough. This was tough. This political stuff is nasty, and it’s
tough.
Senator Jeff Sessions. Where is Jeff? A great man. Another great man,
very tough competitor. He was not easy. He was not e asy.
Thus, despite t he Victory speech tradition inherited from one President to another,
Donald Trump succeeds to leave a mark of unconventionality through this speech
as well. Even though he generally follows the outline of a political speech, his
constant interventions, mea nt to be a sign of authenticity, as well as the simple
language and repetitions manipulate the audience.
3.2.3. Presidential Inaugural Address
3.2.3.1. What the Tradition Says
On January 20th, 2017, in Washington, D.C., it took place the inauguration of
Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States. Considering the structure
of Trump’s speech, it is classic and simple: exodium, narratio and digressio. Also,

57
the main themes he tackles in this particular speech have already been used in his
electora l campaign speeches: unity, economy, military issues, the dark past, the
bright future he builds through the promises he makes. Even though, at a first
glance, Trump’s Inaugural speech seems to follow the traditional outline, we will
further demonstrate th at in this speech, as well as in other speeches, Donald
Trump proves to manipulate people in unconventional ways.
As we have mentioned before, the Inaugural Address has become another
tradition in the history of American presidency, being also classified as a genre,
following a specific pattern. In order to prove that Donald Trump disobeys the
tradition of the Inaugural Address in many parts, we have to establish the
characteristics of this genre. Karlyn Kohors Campbell and Kathleen Jamieson list
in “Presi dents, Creating the Presidency: Deeds Done in Words” the three
elements of an Inaugural Address:
The presidential inaugural (1) unifies the people by reconstituting its
members as “the people”, who can ratify and witness the
ceremony;(2) rehearses communa l values drawn from the past; (3)
sets forth the political principles that will guid e the new
administration. (2008:31)
3.2.3.2. A Seemingly Rhetorical Speech
In the beginning of the speech, Donald Trump uses introductory formulas, as a
rhetorical device, to address the politicians, as well as the audience: “Chief Justice
Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama,
fellow Americans, and people of the world: Thank you.” However, Trump proves
his unconventionality in this address as well by thanking the people of the world,
which is odd because they did not have the chance to vote for him.
Another rhetorical element of a political speech which is found in Donald
Trump’s Inaugural Address is the reference to Bible: “The Bibl e tells us how good
and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity.” Through this
reference, Trump appeals to logos to support the theme of unity which he

58
develops in his speech. Also, Donald Trump uses circumstances of God to end his
speech, which is rather unusual for his speeches: “God bless you and God bless
America! Thank you, God bless America.”
3.2.3.3. Unity and Division
Most of the politicians who try to achieve the feeling of unity through their
speeches mostly employ the inclusive fi rst person plural personal pronouns “we”,
“us” and possessive pronoun “our”. The opposite of unity, division, is achieved by
using the second person and the third person personal pronouns “you” and “they”.
Through this speech, even though there are some in stances of unity, Donald
Trump mostly succeeds to create an atmosphere of division, which demonstrate
the fact that the speech does not follow the first rule of the inaugural genre, of
unifying people.
In the first part of the speech, Donald Trump creates the impression of a
traditional beginning of an Inaugural Address, by using the inclusive personal
pronoun “we” to involve the audience in the great mission they have in their
country’s future:
We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great natio nal effort
to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people.
Together we will determine the course of America and the world for
many, many years to come. We will face challenges. We will confront
hardship, but we w ill get the job done.
However, the phrase “but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and
giving back to you, the people.” separates Donald Trump from the rest of the
people, establishing thus, through the second -person pronoun “you” a verbal
barrier. Also, Donald Trum p creates another division throughout the speech,
between politicians and the American people, which helps him into building a
dark image of the past. Throughout the text in can be noticed a constant
separation, between the politicians, referred to as “the y” and the people, referred
to as “you”. By not using the personal pronoun “we”, instead of “you” in this

59
division, Donald Trump does not include himself in both groups. The following
example illustrates how Donald Trump conveys the idea of division throug h the
use of pronouns and antithesis:
For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards
of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished,
but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, b ut the jobs
left and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the
citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their
triump hs have not been your triumphs.
3.2.3.4. A Negative Past
As it was already noticed in Barack Obama’s Inaugural Speech, as well as in other
speeches, a considerable attention is given to the founding fathers of the United
States of America, as well as to the former Presidents who have left an imprint in
the count ry’s history.
In Donald Trump’s Inaugural Speech it can be noticed, not only that he does not
acknowledge the country’s ancestors, but he also avoids thanking the former
President Obama for his services to the country, which will help him in building
the image of a dark past. Instead of this, he only thanks him for the peaceful
transfer of power:
Every four years we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and
peaceful transfer of power; and we are grateful to President Obama
and First Lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this
transition. They have been magnificent. Thank you.
Thus, Donald Trump does not respect another rule of an Inaugural Address: that
of mentioning the communal values from the past. Instead, he establishes other
communal values, in relation with the future, like: strength, safety, wealth, pride
and greatness. (Felipe James Rea Rivera; 2017:21)

60
The image of a dark past is achieved through the negative terminology which
Donald Trump uses in the rhetorical devices. Ea ch of these is intended to
manipulate the audience that the previous political administration has left nothing
but a weakened America, in every possible area. Donald Trump employs
metaphors to create a powerful image in the audience’s minds:
But for too ma ny of our citizens, a different reality exists: mothers and
children trapped in poverty in our inner cities, rusted out factories
scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation.
We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength and
confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon . One by
one, the factories shuttered and left our shores .
Through the negative language under the form of metaphors and hyperboles,
Donald Trump constructs the pathos of his speech, to which he mainl y appeals to
in order to influence the emotions of the people and to stir their anger towards the
previous Presidential Administration:
This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.
(…) and the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have sto len so
many lives and robbed our country o f so much unrealized potential.
Donald Trump manages to convey the idea that the former rulers of the country
have left it broken through the enumeration of the problems America is left with,
through which he tries to persuade the audience on the importance and the
negativity of each issue:
For many decades we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of
American industry , subsidized the armies of other countries while
allowing for the very sad depletion of our mi litary. We’ve defended
other nations’ borders while refusing to defend our own, and spent
trillions and trillions of dollars overseas while America’s
infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay. We’ve made other

61
countries rich while the wealth, stre ngth and confidence of our
country h as dissipated over the horizon.
3.2.3.5. A Bright Future
In his speech, Donald Trump marks the passage from the dark past to the bright
future in the following sentence: “But that is the past and now we are looking
only to the future.” In this part he enumerates his political promises, thus he
respects the fourth element of an Inaugural Address.
It can be noticed that he uses only positive language to describe the Presiden tial
Administration under his lead, which he marks through the use of the future tense:
I will fight for you with every breath in my body, and I will never, ever
let you down. America will start winning ag ain, winning like never
before.
We will seek friend ship and good will with the natio ns of the world.
Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength.
Even Donald Trump’s favorite rhetorical device, repetition, occurs in this part of
the speech more frequently to leave a strong and positive image abou t what he
will do as the President of the United States of America. There can be noticed the
anaphora, the epiphora and the polyptoton which aim at drawing the audience’s
attention and marking important points in his speech:
From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land. From this
day forward , it’s going to be only America first . America first .
We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will
bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams.
We will get our pe ople off of welfare and back to work rebuilding our
country with American hands and American labor. We will follow two
simple rules: Buy American ; and hire American .

62
In the following phrase “Together we will make America strong again. We will
make America wealthy again. We will make America proud again. We will make
America safe again. And, yes, together, we will make America great again.”
Donald Trump uses repetition to emphasise his own communal values, which we
have already talked about. These values say more about Donald Trump’s
character, rather than about the country, thus, helping him to construct the ethos.
Also, Donald Trump establishes the logos using as arguments for these values the
Americans’ desire which he presents under the form of enumeratio n to point to
their importance: “Americans want great schools for their children, safe
neighborhoods for their families, and good jobs for themselves. These are just and
reasonable of righteous people and a righteous public, but for too many of our
citizen s, a different reality exists.”
3.3. Conclusions
Donald Trump has made himself a reputation as an unconventional politician,
mostly because of his lack of experience in this domain. This chapter has analyzed
the unconventionality of the language he used in his speeches which still had a
great impact on the audience, thus achieving its purpose of manipulation.
These three speeches: the Announcement Speech, the Victory Speech and the
Inaugural Speech illustrate the unusual rhetorical ways Donald Trump uses in
order to persuade people and they also create a clear distinction between his
speeches and other politicians’ speeches.
Donald Trump uses simple language to reach the minds of a specific type of
audience. The rhetorical device which characterizes Trump’s speeches is
repetition in its simplest forms, because the words and the phrases are said over
and over again are memorized faster by the audience. Trump also uses hyperbolic
words to describe either himself, or the people who support him.
Moreover, we hav e proved that Donald Trump uses the pronouns in a different
way from other politicians, adding thus another element to unconventionality of
his language manipulation. The inclusive “we” is rarely used, conveying mostly

63
the feeling of division between the n ations and between the American people and
the politicians. Donald Trump excludes himself both from the American people
and from the politicians group, using more than other politicians the first person
pronoun “I” to talk about his character, his wealth a nd his personal achievements.
There are many times in Donald Trump’s speeches when it can be noticed a break
in the phrase in which he jumps from one topic to another. In this chapter, we
have accounted this for the authenticity of the speech he wants to transmit to the
people in order to persuade them that his speech is original and that he is talking
from his heart to them.
In contrast with other politicians, Donald Trump does not praise the past, but
instead he uses only negative language to talk about it, in order to build the
arguments for the bright future he promises to bring. By giving the audience a
dark image of the past, he manipulates it to believe the promises he makes.
To sum up, most of Trump’s speeches present a break from the tradition, whi ch
has been respected by the former Presidents, through the unconventional language
he uses to manipulate the people into believing him.

64

General conclusions

The American writer, Philip Kindred Dick said that “The basic tool for the
manipulation of reality is the manipulation of words. If you can control the
meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words.” His
saying covers what we have talk ed about in the first chapter and thus, we c onsider
it illustrative for this part of ou r academic paper.
In the first chapter we talked about language as the main instrument politicians
use in order to gain their public’s attention, votes, loyalty. During the electoral
campaigns, people are curiously watching and listening to the speeches r endered
by the politicians and many of them don ’t know that those beautifully ‘ ornated’
speeches are meant to manipulate them, to make them believe that what the
speaker says is the truth and only the truth. The politicians do this by choosing the
right wo rds, the right rhetorical devices and by putting them in the right place.
However, our purpose in this work was not to judge the fact that politicians
manipulate people, but to analyze how they do it.
We have tackled the notion of political speech, which besid es language and
manipulation, was another important reference point for this study. The structure
of the political speech, as well as the rhetorical devices politicians use in order to
manipulate, were of great interest in the next two chapters.
On th e one hand, as the title of the second chapter says: Language manipulation
at its best , Barack Obama’s speeches proved to be great models of language
manipulation. To sum up the rhetorical analysis made throughout this chapter,
these three particular speec hes have demonstrated Barack Obama’s rhetorical
talent, representing a sample for the entire rhetorical literature Obama has created.
From the beginning up to the end, the entire speech respects the rhetorical

65
arrangement as well as the implication of the rhetorical devices, which we have
proved through a multitude of examples.
The discourse is organized according to the rhetorical layout: exodium, narratio,
refutatio, confirmatio and peroratio. Obama also makes use of ethos, to gain
credibility, logos, to support his arguments and pathos, to appeal to the people’s
emotions in order to persuade them. He also pays careful attention to the use of
circumstances of place, persons, time and issues. By mentioning important
personalities from the America’s past, O bama establishes his logos and makes his
speech more persuasive. He uses introductory formulas to create a closer
relationship with the audience and to show respect.
The most important part of the rhetorical analysis consists in the use of rhetorical
devic es. Barack Obama proves to be a skillful orator not only by using repetition,
which is so frequent in other politicians’ speeches, but by employing various
rhetorical devices, making his speech almost poetical. He proves to be a great
speaker using not on ly simple words to deliver his speech, but also by using
metaphors to emphasize the meaning he tries to convey to the audiences. These
three particular speeches we have chosen for analysis embody the greatest models
for language manipulation at its best, d isplaying an elevated vocabulary, complex
sentences and a great variety of rhetorical devices.
On the other hand, Donald Trump has made himself a reputation as an
unconventional politician, mostly because of his lack of experience in this
domain. In the th ird chapter we have analyzed the unconventionality of the
language he used in his speeches which still had a great impact on the audience,
thus achieving its purpose of manipulation.
These three speeches: the Announcement Speech, the Victory Speech and the
Inaugural Speech illustrate the unusual rhetorical ways Donald Trump uses in
order to persuade people and they also create a clear distinction between his
speeches and other politicians’ speeches.

66
Donald Trump uses simple language to reach the minds of a specific type of
audience. The rhetorical device which characterizes Trump’s speeches is
repetition in its simplest forms, because the words and the phrases are said over
and over again are memorized faster by the audience. Trump also uses hyperbolic
words to describe either himself, or the people who support him.
Moreover, we have proved that Donald Trump uses the pronouns in a different
way from other politicians, adding thus another element to unconventionality of
his language manipulation. The inclusiv e “we” is rarely used, conveying mostly
the feeling of division between the nations and between the American people and
the politicians. Donald Trump excludes himself both from the American people
and from the politicians group, using more than other polit icians the first person
pronoun “I” to talk about his character, his wealth and his personal achievements.
There are many times in Donald Trump’s speeches when it can be noticed a break
in the phrase in which he jumps from one topic to another. In this cha pter, we
have accounted this for the authenticity of the speech he wants to transmit to the
people in order to persuade them that his speech is original and that he is talking
from his heart to them.
In contrast with other politicians, Donald Trump does no t praise the past, but
instead he uses only negative language to talk about it, in order to build the
arguments for the bright future he promises to bring. By giving the audience a
dark image of the past, he manipulates it to believe the promises he makes. In
brief, most of Trump’s speeches present a break from the tradition, which has
been respected by the former Presidents, through the unconventional language he
uses to manipulate the people into believing him.
All things considered, this study has analyz ed the language manipulation
approaches in the political discourse : the rhetorical approach and the
unconventional approach. No matter the approach to using language chosen, both
politicians have achieved their purpose of manipulating.

67
Bibliography

Baldick, C. ( 2001) Concise Dictionary of Literary Terms . United States, Oxford
University Press Inc., New York .

Baranov, A.N.; Kazakevich, E. G. (1991) Parliamentary debates: traditions and
innovations, Modern political language (from ritual to metaphor) . Moscow:
Znanie.
Bloor, Meriel; Bloor, Thomas ( 2007 ) The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis:
An Introductio n. London: Hodder Arnold.
Campbell, Kalryn Kohrs; Jamieson, Kathleen (2008) Presidents, Creating the
Presidency: Deeds Done in Words. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
de Saussure, F. (1966 ) Course in General Linguistics . London: McGraw Hill .
Gheorghe Mihai ( 1998 ) Retorica tradițională și retorici moderne , București:
Editura ALL .
Mooney, A.; Evans B. (2015) Language, Society & Power An introduction New
York: Routledge .
Parshin, P. B. (1999) Concept of an idio -political discourse and methodological
bases of political linguistics . Moscow.
Schäffner C . (1996) ‘Editorial: Political Speeches and Discourse Analysis’ , in
Current Issues in Language and Society , Vol. 3, No. 3.
Sheygal, E. I. (2004) Semiotics of a political discourse . Moscow, Gnozis.
Van Dijk, Teun A. (1997 ) Discourse as Interaction in Society. Discourse as Social
Interaction, Vol 2. Ed. Teun A. van Dijk. London: Sage.
Vico, Giambattista (1996) The Art of Rhetoric , Amsterdam – Atlanta, GA: Rodopi
Widdowson, Henry G. (2004 ) Text, Context, Pretext. Critical Issues in Discourse
Analysis . Oxford: Blackwell.

68
Wodak , Ruth; Meyer, Michael (2009 ) Critical Discourse Analysis: History,
Agenda, Theory and Methodology. Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, eds.
Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.

Webliography

Andersen, Christian (2008) The Obama Phenomen – A comparative rhetorical
analysis [online], available at:
<<http://studenttheses.cbs.dk/bitstream/handle/10417/284/christian_andersen.pdf
>> [8 May 2018]
Anon, Manipulation through Words Rhetorical Devices in Political Speech es
[online] , available at:
<<https://www.scribd.com/document/267962121/Manipulation -through -Words –
Rhetorical -Devices -in-Political -Speeches >> [23 November 2017]
Aristotle, The Rhetoric , Book I, Part 1 [online] , available at:
<< https://ryanfb.github.io/loebolus -data/L193.pdf >> [27 November 2017]
Bare, Andrew Mitchell (2011), False Choices: Barack Obama’s Balance Rhetoric
[online], available at:
<<https://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/bitstream/handle/1808/8044/Bare_ku_0099M_1
1599_DATA_1.pdf;se >> [16 April 2018]
Coe, Kevin; Reitzes Michael (2010) Obama on the stump: features and
determinants of a rhetorical approach [online] , Volume 40, Number 3, available
at:
<<https://www.jst or.org/stable/23044916?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents >> [8
May 2018]
David Khemlani, M . (2014) Language, Power and Manipulation: The Use of
Rhetoric in Maintaining Political Influence [online] , available at:
<<https://www.academia.edu/8833432/Language_Power_and_Manipulation_The
_Use_of_Rhetoric_in_Maintaining_Political_Influence >> [27 November 2017]

69
Faber D., Stephens J., Wall is V., et al. (2017) Trump’s electoral triumph: Class,
race, gender, and the hegemony of the polluter -industrial complex . [online],
available at:
<< https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10455752.2017.1279867 >> [23
May 2018]
Fairclough, N. (1999) ‘ Global capitalism and critical awareness of language’.
Language Awareness [online] 8(2): 71–83, available at:
<<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.550.7025&rep=rep1
&type=pdf >> [27 November 2017]
Golshan , T. (2016) Donald Trump’s strange speaking style, as explained by
linguists. Vox, [online], a vailable at:
<<https://www.vox.com/2016/8/18/12423688/donald -trump -speech -style –
explained -by-linguists >> [15 June 2018]
Hart, P. Roderick (1997) Modern Rhetorical Criticism . Upper Saddle River:
Allyn&Bacon A Pearson Education Company, [online], available at:
<<https://sites.google.com/site/tebargcredti/modern -rhetorical -criticism -3rd-
edition -37995768 >> [1 May, 2018]
McClay, Robert (2017) Us and Them: A Descriptive Analysis of Donald Trump’s
Campaign Speeches , [online], available at:
<<https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college –
artslaw/cels/essays/appliedlinguistics/McClay2017.Trump -Speech -Discourse –
Analaysis.pdf >> [23 May 2018]
Murphy, John M. (2009), Political Economy and Rhetorical Matter [online],
Volume 12, Number 2, available at:
<<https://www.jstor.org/stable/41940433 >> [8 May 2018]
Obama , Barack (2007) Dreams from My Father. A Story of Race and Inheritance ,
Cannongate , Great Britain ,[online], available at:
<<https://www.google.com/url?q=http://library.aceondo.net/ebooks/HISTORY/D
reams_from_My_Father –
Barack_Obama.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHFgNnB3uurAEGnlNwqSCpwWtR3_g >>
[30 April 2018]

70
Riviera, Felipe James Rea (2017) A Generic Perspective on Trump’s Inaugural
Adress (2017) [online], available at:
<<http://arminda.whitman.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1409&context=theses
>> [13 J une 2018]
Rozina, Gunta, Karapetjana Indra (2009), The Use of Language in Political
Rhetoric: Linguistic Manipulation [online] , available at:
<<https://pdfs.sema nticscholar.org/406f/c2ff0be0e4d1aac5975a235fcfde57f254ee
.pdf>> [27 November 2017]
Simms, Karl (2018) One year of Trump: Linguistics expert analyses US
President’s influence on language , [online] available at:
<<https://news.liverpool.ac.uk/2018/01/19/one -year-trump -linguistics -expert –
analyses -us-presidents -influence -language/ >> [23 May 2018]
Tenorio Hidalgo, E., Critical Disc ourse Analysis, An overview . [online] , available
at:
<<https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/da71/df03b5646c841f50d1d47e688a3c8d870f
9d.pdf >> [27 November 2017]
Walker , D. (2004) ‘Can Cartoons Animate Voters?’ [online] BBC News , 17
March , available at:
<<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3513658.stm >> [27 November
2017]
Yaqin Wang; Haitao Liu (2018) Is Trump always rambling like a fourth -grade
student? An analysis of stylistic features of Donald Trump’s political discourse
during the 2016 election [online], vol. 20(3), available at:
<<http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0957926517734659 >> [10 May
2018]
Speeches
Obama, Barack (2004) Democratic National Convention Keynote Address
[online], available at:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2004/barackobama2004dn
c.htm
Obama, Barack (2008) President -Elect Victory Speech [online], available at:

71
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/convention2008/barackobamavictorys
peech.htm
Obama, Barack (2013) Second Presidential Inaugural Address [online], available
at:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barackobama/barackobamasecondina
uguraladdress.htm
Trump, Donald (2015) The Presidential Announcement Sp eech [online], available
at:
http://time.com/3923128/donald -trump -announcement -speech/
Trump, Donald (2016) President -Elect Victory Speech [online], available at:
http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/donaldtrumppresidentelectvictoryspee
ch.htm
Trump, Donald (2017) Presidential Inaugural Address [online], available at :
https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/donaldjtrumpinauguraladdress.htm