الهجوم والدفاع في المناظرات الرئاسية الامريكية : دراسة تداولية == Attack and Defense in American Presidential Debates:A pragmatic study
Author name:
اميمه عبد الرزاق ابراهيم
Supervisor name:
منال جاسم محمد
General topic:
Foreign Languages
Specific topic:
English - Language
Degree:
Master
University:
University of Baghdad - Ibn Rushd College Of Education For Human Sciences - Department Of English Language
Language:
English
University location:
Baghdad
Key words:
- Attack
- defense
- presidential debates
- Biden
- Trump
First pages:
T108257 - p.pdf
Abstract:
ABSTRACT The current study is concerned with a pragmatic study of attack and defense acts that are used by Presidents Donald Trump and Joe Biden in the American Presidential Debate in 2020. The attack is an attempt to harm or defeat someone, and it means that the speaker or attacker does not like or disagree with the other opponent. On the contrary, defense means a person responds to an attack of his or her opponent. After an attack, the president either negates or fact-checks claims made by his opponents or tries to set the record straight. Such reactions of presidents to attacks are sometimes referred to as defending, and they are designed to refute accusations made by rivals. The debate is being watched and heard by the audience so that presidents employ their attacks to persuade both the audience and the opponent of their beliefs, opinions, and attitudes. Presidents also use defense to know the reaction of the audience, whether they are satisfied with their words and policies or not. This study aims to fill the gap and reduce its negative consequences. Attack and defense acts are important phenomena and they have negative effects as well as positive effects. The study is expected to answer the following questions: What are the pragmatic aspects of attack and defense used in the political debates of American presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump? What are the reasons behind attack in the political debates? How do attack and defense acts of both presidents convey, directly or indirectly? What are the most frequent strategies of attack and defense utilized by the two presidents to formulate their speeches? The study aims to identify the usage of attack and defense acts in the American Presidential Debate in 2020 and focuses on the pragmatic analysis of attack and defense concerning illocutionary acts and impoliteness strategies. It also aims to identify the negative impact of an attack and the positive impact of defense and whether the presidents are succeeded in their defense against the attacker or not. In light of the above mentioned aims, the study hypothesizes that: first, both presidents utilize attack and defense acts as helpful tools to achieve specific purposes. Second, direct speech acts are more frequently used in the acts of both presidents than indirect speech ones. Third, President Trump uses attack and defense acts more than Biden. Fourth, the strategies of impoliteness used more frequently by Donald Trump than Joe Biden. Lastly, Trump is more prepared and disciplined than Biden during the debate. To achieve the aims of the study and verify the validity of the hypotheses, an eclectic model is adopted based on two models consisting of Searle’s (1975) "speech acts" and Culpeper’s (2005-2011) "impoliteness strategies". Before analyzing the data, the difference between attack-defense acts, the debates, and previous studies presented under the title theoretical framework. Then, a quantitative and qualitative research analysis with an overview of the collected data and biography of Trump and Biden are presented under the title methodology. The results of the study reveal that there are pragmatic aspects of language that can affect the usage of attack and defense acts in political debates of Trump and Biden like eye contact, facial expressions, and body language. The analysis also shows the acts of attack and defense which are identified to express the function of acts performed by both presidents. It has been noticed that both presidents Trump and Biden perform their acts directly to convey their beliefs, attitudes, and opinions towards each other's policy. Also, they use direct language to represent the factual, supportive and informative nature of the attacker or defender. Furthermore, the results of the analysis reveal that Donald Trump is the real master of impoliteness, but Biden, even when challenged with Trump's attacks directed at his family, frequently smiles, laughs, and shakes his head while closing his eyes. Both of them impose their presence and influence on the audience who watch them and attract their attention to the issues that they discuss during the debate.
Summary:
f8ef5c170e.pdf
References:
f26007f51d.pdf
