30
CHAPTER 3
POLITICAL DISCOURSE
3.1. Introduction
This section is a presentation of the theoretical framework that has been chosen for
the political speech analysis undertaken in this study. Numerous studies have been con-
ducted in this regard, thus the pivotal ones will be illustrated. Some of them are centered
on political discourse analysis, such as Lischer, Hansen and Metcalf
120
, others on the
speaker’s personality such as Ross, and finally on the emotional appeal such as Shunnaq
and El Zu’bi.
Other studies are more comprehensive in terms of covering different rhetorical as-
pects employed by the same speaker, for example, Al Osaimi, Al Rawabdeh and Ander-
sen, in their analysis of late King Faysal, King Abdullah, Obama and Hillary Clinton’s
political speeches, opted for adopting a more general approach, by examining various
rhetorical aspects
121
.
According to Aristotle’s teachings, invention may be examined based on three kind
of proofs: logical, emotional and ethical. As far as the logical proof is concern, Toul-
min’s model of argumentation
122
(data, warrant and claim) has been adopted. Starting
from the results of the studies mentioned earlier, this research aims to verify whether the
same results may be inferred for the two Arab female speakers under examination when
delivering speeches in the English language.
Afterwards, light will be shed on political discourse features, with special regard to
Arabic political speeches.
Conclusively, the two speakers’ rhetoric will be compared to investigate to which ex-
tent the orators’ background may represent an influence factor on the linguistic and cul-
tural level.
120
Lischer, Hansen and Metcalf, in H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi.
121
Al Osaimi, Al Rawabdeh and Andersen, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 22.
122
Toulmin, in H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi.
31
3.2. Features of Political Speeches
As a result of the numerous research studies analyzing the rhetorical language em-
ployed in political speeches, it can be agreed that politicians make large use of rhetori-
cal strategies in order to persuade their audience.
According to Beard, such strategies include using emotive language, argumentation,
gaining trust in the face of the audience, mastering soundbites, and playing stylistically
on figurative language, in order to appeal the hearers’ minds.
123
The following section will explore which are the main studies that focus on figura-
tive language in political discourse.
3.2.1. Emotiveness
As mentioned above, emotive language is a key feature in political discourse. As
demonstrated by Lischer, Mahadin, Al Osaimi, Lim, El Zu’bi, Hansen, Al Rawabdeh,
Andersen and Westen, affectional language is employed in order to move the audience’s
emotions and, thus establishing a sense of solidarity to the public
124
.
For instance, Lim has demonstrated how the contemporary American presidential
rhetoric highly relies on the emotional aspect
125
.
In this perspective, it has been differentiated between two ways to arouse the audi-
ence’s emotions: the direct appeal and indirect appeal to the audience’s emotions, like
telling stories and asking rhetorical questions.
3.2.2. Direct Appeal to the Audience’s Emotions
Analyzing Obama’s speech on healthcare, Andersen proved that the former USA
President’s main strategy to appeal to the audience’s emotions was by evoking patriot-
ism and hope
126
.
123
Beard, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 23.
124
Lischer, Mahadin, Al Osaimi, Lim, El Zu’bi, Hansen, Al Rawabdeh, Andersen and Westen, in H.
Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 23.
125
Lim, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 23.
126
Andersen, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 23.
32
In King Faisal’s political speech analysis, it has been observed that arousing feelings,
like courage, confidence, love, friendship, shame, pity, and soon was the preferred way
to persuade the audience
127
.
Whereas as a result of the study of King’s Abdullah speeches, it has been interesting-
ly noticed that he used to adapt his appeal according to their addressees
128
.
According to Al Rawabdeh’s observations on the issue, a more logical and less con-
crete language was adopted, for instance before a business audience, such as that of the
Colombia Business School, while a mixture of both rational and emotional appeal was
preferred in addressing, for instance a religious public.
129
3.2.3. Indirect Appeal to the Audience’s Emotions
3.2.3.1. Telling stories
Storytelling represents a further strategy featuring politicians’ speech style. Many
have studied the convincing effect of this technique. Holloway, Jamieson, Stuckey and
Gardner. Andersen
130
, for instance, focused on the US presidential campaign.
In this context, in both Obama and Hillary Clinton the tendency to tell emotive sto-
ries during the 2008 Democratic Party presidential campaign was not rare. In addition, it
has been noted that they underlined the gaps of the health care system with the aim of
presenting themselves as able to put an end to such failures
131
.
Similarly, Lim agreed by defining the US presidential campaign as an “anecdotal”
one
132
. More specifically, he analyzed the lexical items mostly used, as he was able to
prove that narration verbs such as “say” and “tell”, frequently employed by storytellers,
were the main one. He also noted this device increasingly featuring the twentieth-
century speech. In this context, he refers for instance to the phrase pronounced by Nixon
in which he explicitly asks for avoiding abstract words, preferring the anecdotal frame:
“Never give me a naked quote. Put it in a little story”.
133
127
Al Osaimi, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 23.
128
Al Rawabdeh, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 24.
129
Al Rawabdeh, Ibidem.
130
Andersen, in H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi, p. 24.
131
Andersen, Ibidem.
132
Lim, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 24.
133
Lim, Ibidem.
33
3.2.3.2. Rhetorical Questions
Another largely adopted strategy to stir the audience’s attention is asking rhetorical
questions. It is a strategy which still remain under-researched. Quirk, Greenbaum,
Leech & Svartvik, Quirk Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvikand Wales
134
are included
among the few investigating this issue.
A rhetorical question may be defined a question for which no answer is expected, as
it is clear and undeniable. Indeed, its main function is to reinforce a statement, often a
negative one. In other words, a positive rhetorical question means asserting something
negative and, conversely a negative rhetorical question means stating something posi-
tive. It clearly is a strategy aimed at the pursuit of specific goals.
From Al Osaimi’s study resulted that the late King Faisal used rhetorical questions
with the aim of stimulating the audience
135
. Likewise, Atkinson observed how Abraham
Lincoln, Winston Churchill, and Margaret Thatcher made large use of this kind of strat-
egy to capture the audience’s attention
136
.
3.2.3.3. Argumentation
Argumentation entails a crucial aspect of political discourse, as it is well-known that
only those who present solid argumentations are able to persuade the audience.
However, the argumentative techniques adopted by speakers are various: an argu-
ment from statistics, an argument based on religious sources such as the Holy Qur’an,
Hadiths of the Prophet MOHAMMAD and the Bible, relationship contraries, quoting
authorities, an argument by enthymeme or what is called a formal argument, an argu-
ment from example, an argument by case, deduction, induction and causal reasoning.
A more detailed discussion of argumentation and argument types will be provided in
the next chapter. The type of argument is chosen based on factors such as topic, situa-
tion and audience. Mahadin asserted that “the structure of argumentative texts relies
134
Quirk, Greenbaum, Leech & Svartvik, Quirk Greenbaum, Leech, & Svartvikand Wales, in H. Ali
Amaireh, Ivi.
135
Al Osaimi, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 25.
136
Atkinson, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 25.
34
chiefly on how the speaker understands the outlook and attitudes of the audience”
137
. In
other words, it may be inferred that each text may be oriented to a specific target audi-
ence that will determine the type of argument
138
.
In Andersen’s study, it has been noted that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama
in their speeches on healthcare adopted the same arguments: relationship contraries and
statistics
139
. This was aimed at convincing the audience that they are the ones who will
improve the healthcare system. Gardner asserted that Margaret Thatcher was a master in
argumentation, considered her great ability in structuring strong arguments.
In the current research study, it will be investigated which type of arguments are
adopted by Queen Rania and Queen Noor for convincing the audience.
3.2.3.4. The Personality of the Speaker
In this section, special attention will be paid to the speaker as at the center of the
communicative process. In this regard, numerous studies have been conducted on the
role of the speaker’s personality in political speeches.
It has been commonly observed how credibility, trustworthiness, sincerity, experi-
ence, good intentions towards the audience and the tendency to identify themselves with
the audience represent all common features of the speaker’s attitude towards the public.
In Ross’s analysis of the Egyptian President Anwar El Sadat, it has been noted that he
portrayed himself “as a religious person who shared virtuous values with an Israeli au-
dience”
140
.
While Al Osaimi explained that the late King Faisal’s use of conciliatory strategies
determined his ethos as being moderate and marked by tolerance
141
. According to Al
Rawabdeh, King’s Abdullah goodwill and commitment for achieving peace in the re-
gion was reflected in his speeches. However, he was claimed to identify with the audi-
ence
142
. For instance, at the inaugural address for the Saban Centre at Brookings, King
Abdullah displayed his ethical appeal to the audience, as follows:
137
Mahadin, in H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi.
138
Mahadin, Ibidem.
139
Andersen, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi.
140
Ross, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi.
141
Al Osaimi, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi.
142
Al Rawabdeh, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 27.
35
The incremental negotiating model has run its course. Now more than ever, people need
to see results, real security, viable independence, and a future of hope. A peace that res-
onates with both the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, independent of the will of leaders.
A peace that once again focuses on timely, practical results. Skeptics might argue that
this not possible, given the hardening that has emerged in public opinion on both sides.
To these I respond, that if today’s crisis has made the divisions deeper, it has also made
the issues clearer than ever before.
143
Likewise, from Andersen’s research, it has been noticed how the former President
Barack Obama was currently portraying himself as a moral person with good intentions
towards all people. This was, for instance, aimed at filling his gap of knowledge on the
topic of healthcare.
On the other hand, Andersen underlined that conversely to Obama, Hillary Clinton
made clear references to her experience and achievements in this field
144
. Thus, this is a
clear demonstration of the speech as a reflection of the speaker’s ethos. What is more, a
further strategy employed by orators in their speeches in order to reinforce the speaker’s
image and to establish a relation with the audience comprehends the use of inclusive
pronouns, like the possessive pronoun “our” and the first-person pronoun “we”.
Fairclough, Zupnik, Pennycook, Beard and Proctor & Su are included among the re-
searchers that investigate the use of inclusive pronouns in political discourse and agreed
on the fact that this contributed to establish a certain solidarity between the speaker and
the listeners
145
.
Andersen found that both Clinton and Obama used the inclusive pronoun “we” in
their speeches. However, it has been argued that Clinton, conversely to Obama, was not
always consistent in the use of personal pronouns. On the contrary, Obama has been
claimed to use the inclusive pronoun also when the first-personal pronoun I was to be
employed.
146
143
Al Rawabdeh, in H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi, p. 27.
144
Andersen, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 27.
145
Fairclough, Zupnik, Pennycook, Beard and Proctor & Su, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 27.
146
Andersen, Ibidem.
36
3.2.3.5. Using Figurative Language
Another typical trait featuring political discourse is the use of figurative language.
Such a choice is mainly aimed at capturing the audience’s attention and, consequently at
influencing them.
More relevantly, it represents a rich source of study for rhetorical analysts. It is true
that most studies on political discourse are focusing on figurative language, namely fig-
ures of speech such as metaphors, parallelism and metonymy. Interestingly, the choice
of figures of speech is apparently linked to the issue under discussion, as well as to the
general context of interaction.
Andersen’s study, for instance demonstrated that both Obama and Clinton preferred
the use of antithesis and parallelism
147
. Specifically, Obama also adopted other figures
of speech such as symploce, which is “a cohesive figure that links the parts of a sen-
tence, so they appear as a united whole”
148
, as exemplified in what follows: “Amy is
right. This is not who we are. This is not who we are. And this is not who we have to
be”
149
.
Looking at Martin Luther King’s speech I have a dream, for instance it has been ob-
served that one of the most frequently used figures of speech are both metaphor and par-
allelism. However, in this discourse King’s metaphorical language was inspired to the
King James Bible, as exemplified in “the dark and desolate valley of segregation”
150
.
What makes the King’s speech significant, is also the fact that its words are not mere
rhetoric; they call people to action and aim to create an impact, by raising people’s
awareness about their freedoms and rights.
Summing up, as affirmed by Thompson, political discourse without metaphors are
like “a fish without water”
151
.
Metonymy represents another figure of speech which largely used in political
speeches. Edelman, Cockcroft & Cockcroft and Chantril & Mio stated that it is a figure
of speech that can contribute to a simplification of information, by making it clearer to
the audience.
152
147
Andersen, in H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi, p. 27.
148
H. Ali Amaireh, Ivi, p. 28.
149
Andersen, Ibidem.
150
Hansen, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi.
151
Thompson, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi.
152
Edelman, Cockcroft & Cockcroft and Chantril & Mio, in H. Ali Amareih, Ivi, p. 29.
37
Another largely adopted rhetorical strategy is named contrastive pairs, also called an-
tithesis by Greek and Roman writers. Specifically, they consist of two parts, often op-
posing one another; in addition, sometimes they involve repetition for creating a desired
impact.
Ricevi informazioni sui nostri servizi, sulle offerte e non perdere news e consigli su università e lavoro.
