Article n°18- Rilale-Uac/ Volume 1, Issue n°1

Loading
loading...

Article n°18- Rilale-Uac/ Volume 1, Issue n°1

janvier 26, 2019 admin

ANALYSIS OF SPEECH ACTS IN DONALD TRUMP’S ACCEPTANCE SPEECH.

 

 

Crépin D. LOKO

Université d’Abomey-Calavi

lokocrepine1@yahoo.fr

 

TELECHARGER VERSION PDF

Résumé:

Cet article vise à effectuer une analyse pragmatique d’un extrait du discours d’acceptation que Donald Trump a prononcé lors de la Convention Nationale des Républicains le 21 juillet 2016. L’étude porte essentiellement sur l’identification et l’analyse des traits linguistiques des actes de langage (Austin 1962 et Searl 1969) décelés dans le langage politique de ce discours d’acceptation pour découvrir la manière dont Donald Trump a codé ses propres intentions et les attentes de son parti. L’identification des actes illocutoires indique la présence d’actes représentatifs, d’actes directifs, d’actes expressifs, d’actes exprimant des engagements et d’actes déclaratifs. L’interprétation des résultats révèle la prédominance d’actes représentatifs, ce qui montre que Trump a surtout exprimé ses convictions personnelles, d’une part, et a aussi affiché son engagement de vérité à conduire son parti à la Maison-Blanche, d’autre part. Les actes illocutoires directifs sont utilisés pour suggérer certaines solutions, tandis que les actes d’engagements sont utilisés pour signaler les défis de sécurité et de paix à relever une fois élus. Quant aux actes expressifs, ils reflètent l’état psychologique de Trump, pendant qu’il s’adresse au public lors de la convention. L’article conclut que l’étude des actes de langage facilite la compréhension du message contenu dans le discours du président Donald Trump.

Mots-clés: actes de langage, Convention Nationale des Républicains, pragmatique, discours politique, actes illocutoires.

 

Abstract:

This article aims at carrying out a pragmatic analysis of a selected extract from Donald Trump’s acceptance speech delivered at the Republican National Convention on July 21st, 2016. The study mainly focuses on the identification and the analysis of linguistic features of speech acts (Austin 1962 and Searl 1969) used in the political language of the acceptance speech to uncover the way Donald Trump has encoded his own intentions and his party’s expectations therein. The identification of illocutionary acts indicates the presence of representative acts, directive acts, expressive acts, commissive acts, and declarative acts. The interpretation of the findings reveals the dominance of representative illocutionary acts which shows that Trump has mainly expressed his personal beliefs, on the one hand, and displayed his truth engagement to lead his party to the White House, on the other. Directive illocutionary acts are used to suggest some solutions, while commissive acts are used to point out challenges of security and peace to be taken up once elected. As for expressive acts, they reflect Trump’s psychological state, while addressing the audience at the convention. The article concludes that the study of speech acts has made it easy to comprehend the message in President Donald Trump’s speech.

Keywords: Speech acts, Republican National Convention, Pragmatics, political speech, illocutionary acts.

  • Introduction and Literature Review

The use of language, be it written or spoken, makes the fundamental difference between human beings and all the other creatures. Communication is the means by which people pass a message across from a generation to the next. This sharing of message can pertain to the exchange of ideas, thoughts, feelings, desires, political convictions, etc., within specific contexts and occasions. The meanings, then, produced are influenced by aspects of those situations and /or contexts. In other words, we, language users, adapt our rhetorical devices to the different situations and occasions we are in. Such a flexibility of language makes Bloor and Bloor (2004) attest that using language is a dynamic process which can be studied with appropriate linguistic theories to increase our understanding of the linguistic system and of how it enables speakers or writers to produce and process coherent meaning (p.6). Linguistic investigation of meaning creation in context falls within the domain of pragmatics as advocated by Leech and Short (2007) who postulate that the pragmatic analysis of language is the investigation into that aspect of meaning which is derived not from the formal properties of words and constructions, but from the way in which utterances are used and how they relate to the context in which they are uttered.

Coming to the study of political speeches, Bloor and Bloor (2004) argue that the linguistic (pragmatic) analysis of text has many practical applications above and beyond knowledge about language for its own sake. It can help us to find out why some texts are more effective than other texts in terms of communication or persuasion. It can also help us to understand the nature of propaganda, the success or failure of some types of political speeches or how breakdowns in communication can occur (p.7).The pragmatic analysis of political speeches is meant to unveil not only the intentions of political actors, but also their world knowledge since their language is highly arranged to persuade and influence the electorate (Wiredu 1996, Bullok 2003, Skoniecki and College 2004, Akinwotu 2013). Such language deserves a great attention because it impacts the socioeconomic development of countries. The speech acts, which is an aspect of pragmatics, as devised by Austin (1962/1975), have been elaborated by Searl (1969/1979) with the categorization of the illocutionary force of each utterance. Thus, Searl’s model, the one adopted in the present study, embraces representative/assertive, directive, expressive, commissive, and declarative illocutionary acts. Though many scholars (Awonusi 1996, Opeibi 2003, Rudyk 2007,Ayeomoni and Akinkuolere 2012,Akinwotu 2013, and Koutchadé 2017) have devoted their works to the study of speech acts in political speeches of African as well as American past presidents, none of them has ventured in the study of political speeches by the American president Donald Trump. The present paper intends to fill in such a gap.

  • Theoretical Construct of Speech Acts

Language users, actually, use language to get things done. Things, in this context, can ranged from promising, betting, warning, naming, baptizing, swearing, daring, threatening, pledging, to nominating, etc. Searl (1969/1979) describes how such things can be done. In fact, the speech acts theory is concerned with the diverse social acts language users perform in making an utterance, i.e., the communicative purpose of the utterance (Fromkin, Rodman &Hyams,2014). Such a purpose is what Searl, technically, terms the illocutionary force of a speech act, which is nothing but the pragmatic force of the utterance. Austin (1969) classified speech acts into three components. First, the locutionary act is the act of saying something, the meaning of which resides within the propositional content/logical meaning of the sentence or the utterance (Syal and Jindal, 2015). Second, the illocutionary act which is an act performed in saying something, the performative meaning of the utterance. That is the speaker’s objective in making an utterance. The third, perlocutionary act is the effect the illocutionary force has upon the listener on his/her understanding. Certain circumstances or conditions, termed felicity conditions, must be obtained for a speech act to happen felicitously or happily. These conditions are nothing but the appropriate and essential societal contexts characteristic to a valid speech act (Mey, 2006). Kreidler (2002) sides with Mey (2006) when he says…several conditions are necessary, viz. the lexical content of the utterance must be appropriate, the social situation in which it occurs must be appropriate, the speaker must be sincere in what he says, and the hearer(s) accept the utterance as having that purpose.

As said in the introductory part, the present paper adopts Searle (1969/1979) classification of speech acts. A detailed account of this classification (Finegan, 2007; Saeed, 2007; Mey, 2006; Yule, 1996; Akogbéto & Koutchadé, 2014) includes.

  • Representatives or assertive commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition (i.e. asserting, claiming, reporting, etc.).
  • Directives count as an attempt to get the addressee to do something, i.e., to carry out an action (i.e. ordering, requesting, challenging, begging etc.).
  • Commissives commit the speaker to some future course of action (i.e., promising, threatening, offering…).They express what the speaker intends.
  • Declarations change the world through their utterance. Declarations bring about the state of affairs. These can be: blessing, firing, endorsing, nominating, baptisms, accepting, dismissing, etc.
  • Expressives state what the speaker feels. They express a psychological state (i.e., greeting, apologizing, welcoming, congratulating, etc.)

Moreover, a speech act can be direct or indirect. A direct speech act involves a direct relationship between a syntactic structure and a pragmatic function of the utterance, whereas an indirect speech act focuses on an indirect relationship between a structure and a function. Indirect speech acts such as requests presented in an indirect way are generally considered to be gentle or more polite than direct speech acts regarding some complex social assumptions (Yule 2010).It can be inferred from the foregoing that the linguistic form of such speech acts does not overtly reflect its communicative purpose.

  • Practical Analysis of Speech Acts of the Corpus.
    • Information on the Data for the Study.

The data used in the present study are nothing but the acceptance speech Donald Trump has delivered at the Republican National Convention on July 21st, 2016. This was the speech he delivered accepting his nominations as the presidential candidate of his political, i.e., party the Republican Party. The speech under study is a spontaneous one, i.e., delivered orally, which justifies the occurrence of some shortcomings as well as that of the omission of some lexical items. In other words, the language of the speech was not formal or highly prepared as seen in the full version of the speech made available on the internet and retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12253426.After the identification and the analysis of the speech acts along with a descriptive design, the study has followed quantitative and qualitative analytical approaches.

 

  • Statistics of Speech Acts and Comment on the Frequencies

The data are from Donald Trump’s acceptance speech and they have segmented and numbered for a methodic and ordering purpose. After their identification, the different category of speech acts has been counted and tabulated as summarized in Table 1 below:

 

Table1 Statistics of Speech Acts

Acts                                                               Frequency                            Percentage
Representative                                            97                                           55.4%
Directive                                                      13                                           07.4%
Commissive                                                            36                                           20.6%
Expressive                                                   25                                           14.3%
Declarations                                                            04                                           02.3%
Total                                                             175                                         100%

 

The above table informs the reader about the distribution of speech acts within the corpus understudy. Indeed, representative speech acts are overtly predominant. They rank first in the speech: [97/175, i.e., (55.4%)]. This thus reveals that the speaker, Donald Trump, is greatly committed to the truth of the utterances he has produced in his acceptance speech. Commissive speech acts rank second: [36/175, i.e., (20.6%)]. The important rate of Commissives indicates that the speaker is really committed to perform future actions. Expressive speech acts come third: [25/175, i.e., (14.3%)]. Their presence in the speech illustrates the vibrant expression of Donald Trump’s attitudes, feelings, and psychological state with reference to some ongoing facts in/around the US. As for Directive speech acts, they rank fourth: [13/175, i.e., (07.4%)]. Their presence in the speech insinuates that Trump is intended to get his addressees to do something. Finally, the Declarative acts rank fifth: [04/175, i.e., (02.3%)]. The very low occurrence of Declaratives indicates Trump has slightly produced few utterances which bring about a change in the states of affairs and in the world, as well. Thus, the different features identified in the corpus make it available to scrutinize the illocutionary force of each speech act within all the utterances Donald Trump has produced in the next subsection.

 

  • Analytical Results of Speech Act Categories

For the sake of precision, the distribution of the speech acts and the sentence numbers in which they occur are summarized and presented in Table 2 below:

Table2 Distribution of Speech Acts in Sentences

Speech Acts Category Sentence Numbers
Representatives 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 22, 23, 27, 29, 30, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 53, 54, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 63, 65, 66, 67, 69, 71, 72, 73, 76, 78, 82, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90, 92, 95, 98, 100, 101, 102, 103, 106, 107, 108, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 124, 129, 130, 131, 132, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 149, 150, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 160, 167,168, 169, 170, 171
Directives 24, 70, 77, 105a, 145, 146, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164, 173, 174
Commissives 8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 20, 21, 25, 26, 46, 52, 64, 89, 91, 93, 94, 96, 97, 104, 105b, 112, 120, 121, 123, 125, 133, 134, 143, 144, 147, 148, 157, 158 , 165, 166, 172
Declarations 19, 28, 31, 32
Expressives 1, 2, 3, 6, 42, 45, 55, 62, 68, 74, 75, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 99, 109, 110, 111, 122, 126, 127, 128, 151
Total 175

 

The counting of the different numbers in the above table confirms the figures and percentages of the different speech acts in the previous subsection. Let’s now turn to the discussion of the hidden meanings suggested by the findings.

  • Discussion of the Findings

From the above table 2, Representatives, Commissives, and Expressives have occurred with important numbers of sentences contrary to Directives and Declaratives. This remark can be explained by the fact that the selected corpus is a speech of acceptance with the specific purpose of expressing gratitude, pledging, persuading, informing, and promising a brighter future to the audience, i.e., the party delegate, on the one hand, and the entire US, on the other, in order to have the majority’s support. For a systematic understanding, let us discuss the findings derived from each of the acts in the data.

  • Representative Speech Acts

Representative speech acts are the most frequent illocutionary act in the data representing 55.4% of the total utterance acts performed therein. As mentioned in the theoretical framework section, Representative speech acts are used to commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition. In other words, the pragmatic intention of such utterances includes asserting, stating, claiming, reporting, announcing, and describing. Respective of the situational context of their utterance, some of the Representatives are indicated by the use of assertive verbs, while others are inferred from the meanings of the sentences. Let us consider the following sequences of sentences from the speech of acceptance:

4– we — I say we because we are a team — would have received almost 14 million votes, the most in the history of the Republican Party? (Rep) 5-And that the Republican Party would get 60 percent more votes than it received eight years ago. (Rep)[…] 11-Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation. (Rep) 12-The attacks on our police, and the terrorism in our cities, threaten our very way of life. (Rep)13– Any politician who does not grasp this danger is not fit to lead our country. (Rep) 14-Americans watching this address tonight have seen the recent images of violence in our streets and the chaos in our communities. (Rep) 15-Many have witnessed this violence personally. Some have even been its victims. (Rep)

To start with, Trump points to his party as a team with all the party delegates as the members. Then, he is making his audience realize the major votes they have received comparing this to the one the Republican Party has received eight years before. He claims this key detail before painting the socio-political realities of the US at this preciseperiod. Phrases such as our convention occurs, the attacks on our police…. threaten, does not grasp this danger, have seen recent images of violence, and have witnessed this violence intensely provide description for the situation of fear and insecurity prevailing in the country. As for the case of most of the other sentences evoking the Representative speech acts, the illocutionary force of the utterances is that of description. In some cases, the illocutionary force of the sentences is that of stating what the situation is through the verbs and expressions like cannot afford (22), are holding their convention (23), These are the facts (27), Homicides last year increased (29), and That’s the largest increase (30),more than 2,000 have been the victims of shootingsalmost 4,000 have been killed (33), The number of police officers killed (34), illegal immigrantsare tonight roaming free (35), The number of new illegal immigrant familiesexceeds (36), and they are being released (37),to quote but a few. In stating, Trump, immensely, makes reference to the decreasing socio-political stability of the United States. He proceeds step by step in displaying the diverse challenges of security, unity, poverty, and peace in order to prove himself committed to the truth of what he is saying. Doing so, with the help of the aforementioned assertive verbs, Donald Trump has implicitly succeeded in inspiring his audience by convincing them that he strongly understands the real problems the United States are suffering from and he has plans to tackle them one by one as revealed by his intentions in Commissive speech acts.

  • Commissive Speech Acts.

Commissive speech acts account for 20. 6% in Table 1 and occur in (8, 9, 10, 16, 17, 20, 21, 25, 26, 46, 52, 64, 89, 91, 93, 94, 96, 97, 104, 105b, 112, 120, 121, 123, 125, 133, 134, 143, 144, 147, 148, 157, 158 , 165, 166,  and 172) as revealed by table2. In fact, these Commissive acts, express the speaker’s intention to carry out future actions. Such acts include promising, pledging, offering, vowing, and threatening as well. Here, are some examples from the data.

8-Together, we will lead our party back to the White House, and we will lead our country back to safety, prosperity, and peace. (Com) 9-We will be a country of generosity and warmth. (Com) 10-But we will also be a country of law and order. (Com)[…] 16-I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon — and I mean very soon come to an end. (Com) 17-Beginning on January 20th 2017, safety will be restored. (Com)[…]20-It is finally time for a straightforward assessment of the state of our nation. (Com) 21-I will present the facts plainly and honestly. (Com) […]143– When I am president, I will work to ensure that all of our kids are treated equally, and protected equally.(Com) 144– Every action I take, I will ask myself:(Com) […] 157– No good. And we’re going to stop it. (Com) 158-As your president, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology. (Com)

In these sentences, one can see some of the different future actions the speaker, i.e., Donald Trump, is intended to do. First, he performs acts of promising or vowing to lead not only his party back to the White House, but also the entire United States to political stability without violence. These above utterances embed elements of prediction which are encoded with the verbs will lead, will be, and will have. The modal auxiliary, will, here, captures a pre-emptive futurity, using Dunmire (2005)’s words, of the speaker’s actions or intentions. Second, Donald Trump, through the repetitive use of the expressions I will do, I will be, I will present, and I will restore, in the other sentences, performs the illocutionary acts of promising to do something to better the future of his fellow citizens. In actual fact, Trump, indirectly, refers to his upcoming good leadership and determination to overcome the different upsetting situations. Speaking in such a way influences the audience’s perception to accept him as the best candidate who has good intentions towards them and their nation. It should be recalled that the situational context of the speech is that of hopelessness or unhappiness caused by the presence of illegal immigrants causing Islamic terrorism, violence, and economic crises in the US. Consequently, the intention of Donald Trump in his speech of acceptance is to convince the audience of his capability of turning things around in the whole United States’favour by providing them with new and sustainable solutions if he were given the opportunity to be elected The president of the US.

  • Expressive Speech Acts

Expressive acts are of the category of directive illocutionary acts. They reveal the psychological state of the speaker about the state of affairs in the speech. These account for 14.3% and have been identified in (1, 2, 3, 6, 42, 45, 55, 62, 68, 74, 75, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84, 99, 109, 110, 111, 122, 126, 127, 128, and 151). In the first four sentences, i.e., (1, 2, 3, 6), Trump expresses his thankfulness and exhilaration about his nomination as the presidential candidate of his party through the use of illocutionary phrases humbly and gratefully accept your nomination and would have believed to display a psychological feelings of fulfillment toward his party delegates. Also, Trump has referred to the expressive illocutionary force in (42, 62, 68, 74, 75, 79, 80, 81, 83, 84,109, 110, 111, 126, 127, 128, and 151)to show compassion to Lady Sarah’s family and the other American officials including the US ambassador and his staff in Libya whose lives have been lost in terrorist attacks or simply because politicians fail to enforce laws in the country. For example, Sarah Root is actually a 21-yearold lady who has been assassinated by a border-crosser the day after the lady graduates from college with a 4.0 grade point average. The anger of Trump is that such a killer has been released without further ado. Killings and brutalities like this, frequently, happen in Dallas, Georgia, Missouri, Wisconsin, Kansas, Michigan, and Tennessee against civilians, police, and law enforcement officials as well.

Besides, Trump has also used expressive acts in (45, 55, 99, and 122) to show himself concerned with the economic inconsistency the US is going through. In (45) he is questioning the economy of the US when he says our economy. In(55) he is calling on the attention of the audience to the fact that President Obama would have doubled the national debt to more than $19 trillion, and growing when the Household incomes are down more than $4,000 since the year 2000.So, he performs an expressive speech act by referring to all the Americans in terms of we in order to make them understand that their collective contribution is important since they are all embarked on the same fight. In the last two sentences of this category, i.e., (99 and 122), Trump is inspiring his listeners to continue to support him by forcing their conviction and showing his pride towards their support by saying believe me and I am proud to have at my side.

  • Directive Speech Acts

According to Table 2, directive speech acts occur in (24, 70, 77, 105a, 145, 146, 159, 161, 162, 163, 164, 173, and 174). They are the type of speech acts through which speakers try to get the hearers to do something. This includes acts of commanding, requesting, condemning, warning, urging, and begging. Directive acts are few in the data accounting for 07.4% of the total number of acts. Some of them are realized through the use of Whquestion or with the help of the auxiliary do or let’s while the major part is realized through the use of the modal must in the utterances. In (24, 70, 77, 145, 161, and 174), Trump performs the directive acts of commanding, requesting, urging, and disagreeing. He is commanding his other members, in an ironic way, to go to the Democrats’ convention if they want to hear carefully-crafted lies. Then, he is appealing to them to evaluate the awful record of Hillary’s administration within four years before vividly urging Americans in an inclusive fight against terrorism. He finally shows his warning against any nation that has been compromised by terrorism.

In (105a, 146, 159, 162, 163, 164, and 173), Trump, carefully, uses the modal must within the expression we must to call for a collective involvement and the collaboration of every single American to take up the challenges the United States are facing in terms of a better living condition for all, the rapid destruction of ISIS and the stamping out of Islamic terrorism, and the immediate suspension of immigration from any nation compromised by terrorism. He, firmly, insists on the abandonment of the Hillary’s failed-policy since this has brought nothing but huge damages and devastations inflicted upon the US by radical Islamists.  Throughout the predominance of the modal must in the directive acts, one can infer that Donald Trump is urging his fellow citizens to help him to infuse the right and new change for the happiness of Americans.

  • Declarative Speech Acts.

Declarative speech acts are only 4 and account for 02.3% of the selected speech. The performance of declarative acts brings about a change in the world. These include acts of endorsing, declaring, appointing, naming, dismissing, accepting, nominating, baptizing, and applying and so on. Their very few numbers in the speech confirm the assertion made by Akinwotu (2013) who advocates that “Declarative acts are not common features of acceptance speeches” (p. 49)Examples of declarative speech acts occur in (19, 28, 31, and 32) where the illocutionary forces are endorsing and declaring.

In (19 and 28), Trump is endorsing Obama’s government with the responsibility to defend the lives of its citizens which provides insurance for the audience to further support him in winning the election. In (31 and 32), Trump makes declarations about some facts regarding the state of the nation in terms of killings to let his audience assume that he can handle the situation of insecurity in the whole country. All these are meant to reinforce the audience’s trust in the candidate.

 

  1. Conclusion

The present study has analysed the speech of acceptance delivered by Donald Trump using the speech acts theory. Speech act analyses have unveiled how Trump has disclosed his real driving force and the aspirations of his political party and that of the entire USA as well. The study aimed at carrying out a pragmatic analysis in this selected extract from Trump to show how he has succeeded in using language to do things therein. First, the study has investigated the structural organization of the language, the implied meaning and the pragmatic force/functions of the utterances Trump has produced in the speech. Second, it has analyzed them, respective of the socio-political and economic contexts of USA at the time Trump was delivering this speech. Then, it has come up with the findings that confirm the occurrence of illocutionary acts that convey Trump’s intentions as a good leader to save the US and to make America great again regarding the different security and economic challenges at stake.

The analysis has revealed that the present speech of acceptance of nomination is characterised by a predominance of representative/assertive, Commissive expressive, acts while directive and declarative acts are very low. Also, the analysis has revealed that Trump has, directly, used as language to assert, convince, promise, and persuade, his listeners within appropriate social contexts.

 

Reference

Akinwotu, S. A. (2013). A Speech Act Analysis of the Acceptance of Nomination Speeches of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Chief M.K.O. Abiola. English Linguistics Research. 2(1), 43-50.

Akmajian et al. (2010).Linguistics: An Introduction to Language and Communication. (6th ed). New Delhi: PHI Learning Private Limited.

Akogbeto, P. & Koutchadé, I. (2014). “Pragmatic Analysis of Amma Darko’s Beyond the Horizon”. Multi Fontaines. 1(1), 55-71.

Austin, J.L. (1975). How to Do Things with Words. (2 ed). Oxford: Clarendon Press

Austin, J.L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. London: Clarendon Press.

Ayeomoni, M. O. & Akinkuolere, O. S. (2012). A Pragmatic Analysis of Victory and Inaugural Speeches of President Umaru Musa Yar‟Adua. In Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(3), 461-468

Awonusi, V.O. (1996). Politics and Politicians for Sale: An Examination of Advertising in English in Nigeria’s Political Transition Programme. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia xxx a(108-129).

Bloor, T. & Bloor, M. (2004). The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach. (2nd ed.) London: Arnold.

Bullock, D.R. (2003). The Iraq discourse of President George W. Bush: Reconstructing the Soviet-style Threat, justifying American and manifesting unipolar world-view. [Online]Available: http://uscpublidiplomacy.org/pdfs/Dennis_Bullock_ thesis.pdf.

Donald Trump’s acceptance speech delivered at the Republican National Convention on July 21st, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2016/7/21/12253426

Dunmire, P. (2005). Pre-empting the Future: Rhetoric and Ideology of the Future in Political Discourse. In Discourse and Society 16 (4: 489-513)

Finegan, E. (2007). Language: Its Structure and Use. (5th edn). Boston: Thomson Wadsworth

Fromkin, V.,  Rodman, R., & Hyams, N.(2014). An Introduction to Language. (10thed.).USA: Cencage International Offices.

Koutchadé,  I.  S. (2017). Analysing Speech Acts in Buhari’s Address at the 71st Session of the UN General Assembly. In International Journal of Applied Linguistics& English, Literature, Vol. 6; N°3, pp. 266-233

Kreidler, C. W. (2002). Introducing English Semantics. Taylor & Francis Group, London and New York

Leech, N. G. & Short, H. M. (2007). Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Guide to English Fictional Prose (2nd ed.). London: Longman.

Mey, J. L. (2006).Pragmatics: An Introduction. (2nd ed). Australia: Blackwell Publishing.

Opeibi, B.O. (2003). A Discourse Analysis of the use of English in the 1993 Presidential Election Campaigns in Nigeria. An Unpublished PhD Thesis. Lagos

Rudyk, I. (2007). Power Relations in President Bush’s State of Union Speech. In The International Journal of Language, Society and Culture 23:68-76. [Online] Available: http://www.edu.utas.edu.au/users/tle/JOURNAL//issues/2007/23-7.pdf.

Saeed, J. I. (2007). Semantics. (2nd ed). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Searle, J.R. (1979). Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J.R. (1969). Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Skoniecki, S.F and College, E. (2004). Tear Apart this Speech! A Burkean Analysis of Ronald Reagan’s “Tear this wall” Speech. Young Scholars in Writing: Undergraduate Research Writing and Rhetoric 2:18-28. [Online] Available: http://www.bk.psu.edu/Document/Academics/REARAPARTTHISSPEECH.pdf.

Syal, P.& Jindal, D. V. (2015). An Introduction to Linguistics : Language, Grammar, and Semantics.(2 ed.). Dheli: PHI Learning Private Limited.

Wiredu, J.F. (1996). The Style of Political Communication: The Nigerian Experience in the 1979 Elections. In Legon Journal of Humanities.Vol.9, (57-80):

Yule, G. (2010). The Study of Language. (4th ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

 

Appendix

The identification of speech acts is carried out according to the following keys:

Rep =  Representative, Dir = Directive, Exp = Expressive, Com = Commissive, Dec = Declaration.

1-Friends, delegates and fellow Americans: (Exp) 2– I humbly and gratefully accept your nomination for the presidency of the United States. (Exp) 3-Who would have believed that when we started this journey on June 16, last year, (Exp) 4– we — I say we because we are a team — would have received almost 14 million votes, the most in the history of the Republican Party? (Rep) 5-And that the Republican Party would get 60 percent more votes than it received eight years ago. (Rep) 6-Who would have believed it? (Exp) 7-The Democrats on the other hand, received 20 percent fewer votes than they got four years ago, not so good. (Rep) 8-Together, we will lead our party back to the White House, and we will lead our country back to safety, prosperity, and peace. (Com) 9-We will be a country of generosity and warmth. (Com) 10-But we will also be a country of law and order. (Com)

11-Our convention occurs at a moment of crisis for our nation. (Rep) 12-The attacks on our police, and the terrorism in our cities, threaten our very way of life. (Rep)13– Any politician who does not grasp this danger is not fit to lead our country. (Rep) 14-Americans watching this address tonight have seen the recent images of violence in our streets and the chaos in our communities. (Rep) 15-Many have witnessed this violence personally. Some have even been its victims. (Rep) 16-I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon — and I mean very soon come to an end. (Com) 17-Beginning on January 20th 2017, safety will be restored. (Com)

18-The most basic duty of government is to defend the lives of its citizens. (Rep) 19-Any government that fails to do so is a government unworthy to lead. (Dec) 20-It is finally time for a straightforward assessment of the state of our nation. (Com) 21-I will present the facts plainly and honestly. (Com) 22-We cannot afford to be so politically correct anymore. (Rep) 23-So if you want to hear the corporate spin, the carefully-crafted lies, and the media myths — the Democrats are holding their convention next week. (Rep24-Go there. (Dir)

25-But here, at our convention, there will be no lies. (Com26-We will honor the American people with the truth, and nothing else. (Com) 27-These are the facts: (Rep28-Decades of progress made in bringing down crime are now being reversed by this administration’s rollback of criminal enforcement. (Dec) 29-Homicides last year increased by 17% in America’s fifty largest cities. (Rep30-That’s the largest increase in 25 years. (Rep)

31-In our nation’s capital, killings have risen by 50 percent. (Dec) 32-They are up nearly 60 percent in nearby Baltimore. (Dec) 33– In the president’s hometown of Chicago, more than 2,000 have been the victims of shootings this year alone. And almost 4,000 have been killed in the Chicago area since he took office. (Rep)

34-The number of police officers killed in the line of duty has risen by almost 50 percent compared to this point last year. (Rep) 35-Nearly 180,000 illegal immigrants with criminal records, ordered deported from our country, are tonight roaming free to threaten peaceful citizens. (Rep) 36-The number of new illegal immigrant families who have crossed the border so far this year already exceeds the entire total of 2015. (Rep) 37-They are being released by the tens of thousands into our communities with no regard for the impact on public safety or resources. (Rep)

38-One such border-crosser was released and made his way to Nebraska. (Rep) 39-There, he ended the life of an innocent young girl named Sarah Root. (Rep) 40-She was 21 years old and was killed the day after graduating from college with a 4.0 grade point average. (Rep) 41-Her killer was then released a second time, and he is now a fugitive from the law. (Rep42– I’ve met Sarah’s beautiful family. (Exp) 43-But to this administration, their amazing daughter was just one more American life that wasn’t worth protecting. (Rep)44– One more child to sacrifice on the altar of open borders. (Rep)

45– What about our economy? (Exp) 46-Again, I will tell you the plain facts that have been edited out of your nightly news and your morning newspaper: (Com) 47– Nearly four in 10 African-American children are living in poverty, while 58% of African-American youth are now not employed. (Rep) 48– 2 million more Latinos are in poverty today than when the president (Obama) took his oath of office eight years ago. (Rep) 49– Another 14 million people have left the workforce entirely. (Rep)

50– Household incomes are down more than $4,000 since the year 2000.  That is 16 years ago. (Rep) 51– Our trade deficit in goods reached — think of this — our trade deficit is $800 hundred billion dollars.  Think of that. $800 billion last year alone. (Rep) 52– We will fix that. (Com) 53– The budget is no better. (Rep) 54– President Obama has almost doubled our national debt to more than $19 trillion, and growing. (Rep) 55– Yet, what do we have to show for it? (Exp) 56– Our roads and bridges are falling apart, (Rep) 57– our airports are in third world condition. (Rep) 58– And 43 million Americans are on food stamps. (Rep) 59-Now let us consider the state of affairs abroad.(Rep)60-Not only have our citizens endured domestic disaster (Rep). 61-But they have lived through one international humiliation after another. One after another. (Rep)

62-We all remember the images of our sailors being forced to their knees by their Iranian captors at gunpoint. (Exp) 63-This was just prior to the signing of the Iran deal, which gave back to Iran $150 billion and gave us absolutely nothing. (Rep) 64-It will go down in history as one of the worst deals ever negotiated. (Com) 65-Another humiliation came when President Obama drew a red line in Syria and the whole world knew it meant absolutely nothing. (Rep)

66-In Libya, our consulate, the symbol of American prestige around the globe was brought down in flames. (Rep) 67-America is far less safe and the world is far less stable than when Obama made the decision to put Hillary Clinton in charge of America’s foreign policy. (Rep) 68-I am certain it is a decision he truly regrets. (Exp) 69– Her bad instincts and her bad judgment, something pointed out by Bernie Sanders, are what caused the disasters unfolding today. (Rep) 70-Let’s review the record. (Dir) 71-In 2009, pre-Hillary, ISIS was not even on the map. (Rep) 72-Libya was stable.(Rep) 73-Egypt was peaceful. (Rep) 74-Iraq had seen a big reduction in violence.(Exp) 75– Iran was being choked by sanctions.(Exp) 76-Syria was somewhat under control. (Rep)

77– After four years of Hillary Clinton, what do we have? (Dir) 78-ISIS has spread across the region and the entire world.(Rep) 79– Libya is in ruins, and our ambassador and his staff were left helpless to die at the hands of savage killers.(Exp) 80– Egypt was turned over to the radical Muslim Brotherhood, forcing the military to retake control. (Exp) 81-Iraq is in chaos. (Exp) 82-Iran is on the path to nuclear weapons.(Rep) 83-Syria is engulfed in a civil war and a refugee crisis that now threatens the West.(Exp) 84– After 15 years of wars in the Middle East, after trillions of dollars spent and thousands of lives lost, the situation is worse than it has ever been before. (Exp)

85-This is the legacy of Hillary Clinton: Death, destruction and terrorism and weakness. (Rep)

86– But Hillary Clinton’s legacy does not have to be America’s legacy. (Rep) 87-The problems we face now — poverty and violence at home, war and destruction abroad — will last only as long as we continue relying on the same politicians who created them. (Rep) 88– A change in leadership is required to produce a change in outcomes.(Rep)

89-Tonight, I will share with you for action for America.(Com) 90-The most important difference between our plan and that of our opponents, is that our plan will put America first. (Rep) 91-Americanism, not globalism, will be our credo. (Com)

92-As long as we are led by politicians who will not put America first, then we can be assured that other nations will not treat America with respect, the respect that we deserve. (Rep) 93– The American people will come first once again.(Com)

94– First, my plan will begin with safety at home which means safe neighborhoods, secure borders, and protection from terrorism.(Com) 95– There can be no prosperity without law and order.(Rep)

96– On the economy, I will outline reforms to add millions of new jobs and trillions in new wealth that can be used to rebuild America. (Com)

97– A number of these reforms that I will outline tonight will be opposed by some of our nation’s most powerful special interests.(Com) 98-That is because these interests have rigged our political and economic system for their exclusive benefit. (Rep) 99– Believe me. (Exp) 100-It is for their benefit. For their benefit. (Rep)

101– Big business, elite media and major donors are lining up behind the campaign of my opponent because they know she will keep our rigged system in place.(Rep) 102-They are throwing money at her because they have total control over every single thing she does.(Rep) 103-She is their puppet, and they pull the strings. (Rep) 104-That is why Hillary Clinton’s message is that things will never change. Never ever. (Com)

105a-My message is that things have to change and they have to change right now. (Dir) 105b-Every day I wake up determined to deliver a better life for the people all across this nation that had been ignored, neglected and abandoned. (Com)

106– I have visited the laid-off factory workers, and the communities crushed by our horrible and unfair trade deals. (Rep) 107-These are the forgotten men and women of our country, and they are forgotten, but they will not be forgotten long.(Rep) 108-These are people who work hard but no longer have a voice. I am your voice. (Rep)

109– I have embraced crying mothers who have lost their children because our politicians put their personal agendas before the national good. (Exp)

110– I have no patience for injustice, no tolerance for government incompetence. (Exp) 111-When innocent people suffer, because our political system lacks the will, or the courage, or the basic decency to enforce our laws, or worse still, has sold out to some corporate lobbyist for cash I am not able to look the other way. (Exp112– And I won’t look the other way. (Com)

113– And when a Secretary of State illegally stores her emails on a private server, deletes 33,000 of them so the authorities can’t see her crime, puts our country at risk, lies about it in every different form and faces no no consequence — I know that corruption has reached a level like never ever before in our country.(Rep)

114– When the FBI director says that the Secretary of State was « extremely careless » and « negligent » in handling our classified secrets, I also know that these terms are minor compared to what she actually did. (Rep) 115-They were just used to save her from facing justice for her terrible, terrible crimes. (Rep)

116– In fact, her single greatest accomplishment may be committing such an egregious crime and getting away with it, especially when others who have been far less have paid so dearly. (Rep)

117– When that same Secretary of State rakes in millions of dollars trading access and favors to special interests and foreign powers, I know the time for action has come. (Rep)

118– I have joined the political arena so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people that cannot defend themselves. (Rep)

119-Nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it. I have seen firsthand how the system is rigged against our citizens, just like it was rigged against Bernie Sanders. He never had a chance. (Rep)

120– But his supporters will join our movement, because we will fix his biggest issue: Trade deals that strip our country of jobs and the distribution of wealth in the country.(Com)

121– Millions of Democrats will join our movement, because we are going to fix the system so it works fairly and justly for each and every American.(Com)

122– In this cause, I am proud to have at my side the next Vice President of the United States: Governor Mike Pence of Indiana. And a great guy. (Exp123– We will bring the same economic success to America that Mike brought Indiana, which is amazing.(Com) 124– He is a man of character and accomplishment, he is the right man for the job. (Rep)

125– The first task for our new administration will be to liberate our citizens from the crime and terrorism and lawlessness that threatens their — our communities. (Com)

126– America was shocked to its core when our police officers in Dallas were so brutally executed. (Exp) 127– Immediately after Dallas, we have seen continued threats and violence against our law enforcement officials.(Exp) 128– Law officers have been shot or killed in recent days in Georgia, Missouri, Wisconsin, Kansas, Michigan and Tennessee. (Exp)

129– On Sunday, more police were gunned down in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.(Rep) 130– Three were killed, and three were very badly injured. (Rep) 131– An attack on law enforcement is an attack on all Americans.(Rep)

132– I have a message to every last person threatening the peace on our streets and the safety of our police: (Rep) 133– When I take the oath of office next year, I will restore law and order to our country. (Com)

134– I will work with, and appoint, the best prosecutors and law enforcement officials in the country to get the job properly done. (Com) 135– In this race for the White House, I am the law and order candidate. (Rep)

136– The irresponsible rhetoric of our president, who has used the pulpit of the presidency to divide us by race and color, has made America a more dangerous environment than frankly, I have ever seen and anybody in this room has ever watched or seeing. (Rep)

137– This administration has failed America’s inner cities.(Rep) 138-Remember, it has failed America’s inner cities.(Rep) 139– It’s failed them on education.(Rep) 140– It’s failed them on jobs.(Rep) 141– It’s failed them on crime.(Rep142– It’s failed them in every way and on every single level.(Rep)

143– When I am president, I will work to ensure that all of our kids are treated equally, and protected equally.(Com) 144– Every action I take, I will ask myself:(Com) 145– Does this make life better for young Americans in Baltimore, Chicago, Detroit, and Ferguson who have really come in every way, have the same right to live out their dreams as any other child in America? (Dir)

146– To make life safe in America, we must also address the growing threats from outside the country.(Dir) 147– We are going to defeat the barbarians of ISIS.(Com) 148-And we are going to defeat them bad. (Com)

149– Once again, France is the victim of brutal Islamic terrorism.(Rep)150– Men, women and children viciously mowed down.(Rep)151– Lives ruined.(Exp)152– Families ripped apart, A nation in mourning.(Rep)153– The damage and devastation that can be inflicted by Islamic radicals has been proven over and over.(Rep)154– At the World Trade Center, at an office party in San Bernardino, at the Boston Marathon, and a military recruiting center in Chattanooga, Tennessee. And many other locations.(Rep)

155– Only weeks ago, in Orlando, Florida, 49 wonderful Americans were savagely murdered by an Islamic terrorist. (Rep)156-This time, the terrorist targeted LGBTQ community.(Rep)

157– No good. And we’re going to stop it.(Com)158-As your president, I will do everything in my power to protect our LGBTQ citizens from the violence and oppression of a hateful foreign ideology.(Com)159– (you must) Believe me.(Dir)160– And I have to say as a Republican, it is so nice to hear you cheering for what I just said. Thank you.(Rep)

161– To protect us from terrorism, we need to focus on three things. (Dir)

162– We must have the best, absolutely the best, gathering of intelligence anywhere in the world.(Dir)The best.

163– We must abandon the failed policy of nation- building and regime change that Hillary Clinton pushed in Iraq, Libya, in Egypt, and Syria.(Dir)

164– Instead, we must work with all of our allies who share our goal of destroying ISIS and stamping out Islamic terrorism and doing it now, doing it quickly. (Dir)165– We’re going to win. (Com)166– We’re going to win fast. (Com)167– This includes working with our greatest ally in the region, the state of Israel.(Rep)

168– Recently I have said that NATO was obsolete.(Rep)169– Because it did not properly cover terror.(Rep)170– And also that many of the member countries were not paying their fair share.(Rep)171– As usual, the United States has been picking up the cost.(Rep)172– Shortly thereafter, it was announced that NATO will be setting up a new program in order to combat terrorism. A true step in the right direction.(Com)

173– Lastly, and very importantly, we must immediately suspend immigration from any nation that has been compromised by terrorism until such time as proven vetting mechanisms have been put in place.(Dir)174– We don’t want them in our country. (Dir)

 

Author

Leave A Comment

Résoudre : *
46 ⁄ 23 =


Layout mode
Predefined Skins
Custom Colors
Choose your skin color
Patterns Background
Images Background