INTRODUCTION
Rationale of the study
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary approach that examines the connections between language use and the social and political contexts in which it occurs While CDA encompasses a wide range of research areas, political discourse is a prominent sub-discipline Despite numerous studies in this field, it remains a rich area for exploration, as political activities such as policy-making, speeches, and debates continuously shape society and influence citizens' well-being Notably, the analysis of presidential campaign speeches has gained significant attention from linguists, as candidates strategically invest in crafting their messages to sway public opinion during critical moments (Ivie & Giner, 2009; Savoy, 2018; Le et al., 2017).
Candidate speeches are crucial in election campaigns, providing insights into the direction of the candidate's agenda and helping supporters understand their role in the campaign According to Benoit (2007), these speeches serve as direct communication between the candidate and the public Additionally, the nature of this communication can be influenced by other formats, such as interviews and debates, which differ in their communicative style (Fairclough, Cortese, & Ardizzone, 2007).
The campaign announcement speech is the first time for every candidate to formally introduce himself to the electorates as the contender for presidency
Establishing a strong public identity is a crucial initial step for candidates, as it fosters a shared connection with the community This shared identity enhances leadership and followership throughout the campaign, allowing candidates to resonate more effectively with their audience.
Elizabeth Warren, the Democratic senator from Massachusetts since 2012, is recognized as one of the party's most liberal figures Her presidential campaign emphasizes addressing critical issues facing the working class, including minimum wage and student debt Warren attributes many social and economic problems in the U.S to political corruption driven by large corporations, advocating for progressive reforms in the political system if elected as the 46th President This progressive stance distinguishes her from other Democratic candidates who hold more moderate views on key issues.
Previous Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) studies on presidential campaigns primarily focus on the ideologies of elected presidents and nominated candidates, with limited attention given to primary candidates from each party This research aims to address this gap by specifically examining Senator Warren's choice of language, marking the first study to explore this aspect.
Exploring Senator Warren's ideologies as expressed through her linguistic choices in her campaign announcement speech is essential, as it highlights her key visions and policies for her presidential bid.
Objectives and research question
Basing on CDA approach and Fairclough’s (2001) framework, the study aims at:
Analyzing the lexical and grammatical features, and the structure of the discourse
Analyzing the ideologies of Senator Warren presented in the discourse through the lexical and grammatical features, and the structure of the discourse
With the aforementioned objectives, the study attempts to answer the following questions:
What are Senator Warren’s ideologies presented in the discourse?
How are these values realized in terms of the lexical and grammatical features, and the structure of the discourse?
Scope of the study
The written text of the presidential campaign announcement speech by Senator Elizabeth Warren on February 09, 2019, at Lawrence, Massachusetts will be analyzed
This study exclusively examines the linguistic features of discourse, intentionally avoiding a political science analysis Nonetheless, it acknowledges that socio-political elements are inherently woven into the ideologies expressed by the speaker.
Significance of the study
This study focuses on political discourse, specifically examining the language utilized in U.S presidential campaigns It aims to explore the linguistic strategies of Senator Elizabeth Warren, a topic that has yet to be analyzed in depth.
Structural organization of the research
The content of the research is organized into five following parts:
- Chapter 1 (Introduction) includes the rationale, the research questions, the scope of the study, and the significance
- Chapter 2 (Literature Review) is composed of a theoretical overview of Critical Discourse Analysis, its relationship with Hallidayan’s Systemic Functional Linguistics, and a review of previous literature on American political discourse
- Chapter 3 (Methodology) offers a description of data, clarifies the methods used in the research and describes the data analysis procedure
- Chapter 4 (Findings and Discussion) answers the two research questions
- Chapter 5 (Conclusion) briefly mentions the results of the study, delineates the limitations and recommendations for future study
LITERATURE REVIEW
Overview of CDA
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) emerged in the 1970s, marking a shift in linguistic research from structural to functional aspects of language As noted by Fairclough and Wodak (1997), CDA examines language use within its socio-political context, viewing language as a form of social practice Fairclough (1992) emphasizes that being critical involves uncovering hidden connections and causes, as well as advocating for interventions that support those disadvantaged by societal changes.
Ideologies consist of evaluative values that guide social perception and interaction, encompassing political beliefs and institutional practices Language serves as the physical manifestation of ideology, making it crucial for the study of ideological frameworks In the context of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), ideology plays a significant role in establishing and perpetuating unequal power relations.
According to van Dijk (1993), “power involves control, namely by (members of) one group over (those of) other groups Such control may pertain to action and
Cognition plays a crucial role in how powerful groups can restrict the actions of others while also shaping their thoughts Modern power, exercised through persuasion, dissimulation, or manipulation, has the capacity to alter others' mindsets for personal gain According to Thomas and Wareing (2004), language is a vital tool through which power is expressed and realized This highlights how the interests of dominant societal groups, particularly politicians, are often advanced through linguistic means.
The aims of CDA research are summarized as follows:
Critical Discourse Analysts aim to uncover the subtle construction of texts that convey specific, potentially indoctrinating viewpoints These covert expressions evade direct scrutiny, enabling a phenomenon described by Kress as a 'retreat into mystification and impersonality.'
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) explores the intricate relationships between knowledge, power, and ideology in discursive processes, highlighting how discourse contributes to the maintenance and abuse of power It examines the dialogical struggles that arise when certain discourses are privileged over others, leading to the marginalization of alternative perspectives.
Main approaches to CDA
2.1.1 Discourse-historical approach by Ruth Wodak
Ruth Wodak has been largely associated with the discourse-historical approach (hereafter DHA)
Reisigl and Wodak (2009) outline ten principles of Discourse-Historical Analysis (DHA), emphasizing its interdisciplinary nature and problem-oriented approach DHA uniquely combines various theories and methods, while also incorporating fieldwork and ethnography to enhance research depth and context.
The research employs a recursive approach, oscillating between theory and empirical data, while examining various genres, public spaces, and the intertextual and interdiscursive relationships among them It emphasizes the importance of historical context in interpreting texts and discourses, acknowledging that categories and analytical tools are not static While "grand theories" provide foundational insights, "middle-range" theories offer a more effective theoretical framework Furthermore, the significance of applying research findings and effectively communicating them to the public is highlighted.
DHA mainly focuses on political discourse, especially those concerned with discrimination or racism (Wodak & Meyer, 2009)
2.1.2 Socio-cognitive approach by Teun van Dijk
Teun van Dijk's socio-cognitive approach (SCA) emphasizes the critical role of cognition in analyzing discourse, communication, and interaction, highlighting the connections between the mind, discourse, and society (van Dijk, 2009) Grounded in social representation theory, SCA views discourse as a complex social phenomenon encompassing linguistic, action-oriented, interactional, and cultural dimensions (Wodak & Meyer, 2009; van Dijk, 2009) Consequently, the analysis of texts involves examining both their production and reception processes.
2.1.3 The dialectical-relational approach by Norman Fairclough
Fairclough is famous for his dialectical-relational approach (hereafter DRA) in doing CDA The heart of the DRA can be summarized as follows:
Fairclough defines Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as the examination of the interconnected relationships between semiosis, which encompasses language, and various aspects of social practice His methodology in CDA alternates between emphasizing structural elements and the dynamics of action.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) involves three key stages: description, interpretation, and explanation As outlined by Fairclough (2001), the description stage focuses on the linguistic features of the text, while interpretation examines the relationship between the text and its interaction, viewing the text as a product of a specific process Finally, the explanation stage explores the connection between interaction and the broader social context.
Different approaches to ideology and power manifest distinct focuses, with Wodak and van Dijk emphasizing explanation and interpretation processes, while Fairclough prioritizes linguistic analysis Wodak’s Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) integrates historical context and socio-political backgrounds, enabling the exploration of diachronic changes in discourse genres beyond mere linguistic features Utilizing van Dijk’s Socio-Cognitive Approach (SCA) allows researchers to examine the mental representations of discourse producers and the ideologies prevalent in society Fairclough’s Dialectical-Relational Approach (DRA) facilitates the analysis of relationships within discourse structures at micro, meso, and macro levels, connecting discourse to broader social elements This comprehensive approach aids in understanding the complex interactions between semiotic and non-semiotic factors that shape social, political, and economic conditions.
This study emphasizes the linguistic properties of the text to uncover and interpret the hidden ideologies present within it To achieve this, it adopts Fairclough’s Discourse Representation Analysis (DRA) as its theoretical framework.
2.2 The review of Fairclough’s DRA framework
2.2.1 The stages of doing CDA from the DRA
There are three stages in the framework: description, explanation, and interpretation
To describe the text, the researcher needs to answer the following guiding questions concerning vocabulary, grammar, and text structure as follows:
A Vocabulary a What experiential values do words have?
- What classification schemes are drawn upon?
- Are there words which are ideologically contested?
- Is there rewording or overwording?
- What ideologically significant meaning relations (synonymy, hyponymy, antonymy) are there between words? b What relation values do words have?
- Are there markedly formal or informal words? c What expressive values do words have? d What metaphors are used
10 e What experiential values do grammatical features have?
- What types of processes and participants predominate?
- Are processes what they seem?
- Are sentences active or passive?
- Are sentences positive or negative? f What relation values do grammatical features have?
- What modes (declarative, interrogative, imperative) are used?
- Are there important features of relational modality?
- Are the pronouns “we” and “you” used? If so, how? g What expressive values do grammatical features have?
- Are there important features of expressive modality? h How are sentences linked together?
- What logical connectors are used?
- Are there complex sentences characterized by coordination or subordination?
- What means are used for referencing inside and outside the text?
C Textual structures i What interactional conventions are used?
- Are there ways in which one participant controls the turns of others? j What larger-scale structure does the text have?
The definition of some jargons in the guiding questions (Fairclough, 2001, pp 96-109) as follows:
Classification scheme: a particular way of separating facets of reality based on a specific ideological representation of that reality
Ideologically contested words: words that have various meanings, which share a common core
Rewording: an existing, dominant, and naturalized, wording is being systematically replaced by another one in conscious opposition to it
Overwording: an unusually high degree of wording, often involving many words which are near synonyms
Euphemistic word: a word which is substituted for a more conventional or familiar one as a way of avoiding negative values
Metaphor: a means of representing one aspect of experience in terms of another Nominalization: a process converted into noun (or a multi-word compound noun)
A complex sentence combines simple sentences through coordination and subordination Coordination occurs when the component simple sentences hold equal importance, whereas subordination involves a main clause accompanied by at least one subordinate clause Understanding these structures enhances sentence variety and clarity in writing.
Interpretation involves blending textual elements with the interpreter's insights (Fairclough, 2001, p 135) This process utilizes member resources (MR) and discourse features as cues to engage the interpreter's MR effectively The interpretation procedure can be visually represented in a summarized figure.
Figure 1: The procedure of the stage of interpretation (Fairclough, 2001, p 136)
This stage demonstrates that discourse is integral to social practice, illustrating how it is influenced by social structures and its potential to either uphold or transform them (Fairclough, 2001, p 135) Social structures shape the mediating role of MR, which in turn influences discourse; conversely, discourse can reinforce or alter MR, affecting the social structures Thus, understanding this relationship involves recognizing discourse as a component of social struggle within a framework of power relations.
Explanation encompasses two key dimensions: the social effects of discourse and the social determinants of discourse These dimensions are analyzed across three levels of social organization: Societal, Institutional, and Situational.
Figure 2: The procedure of the stage of explanation (Fairclough, 2001, p 136)
2.2.2 Systemic Functional Linguistics in CDA
In the description stage of linguistic analysis, Fairclough utilizes Halliday's systemic functional linguistics (SFL), which focuses on the functional aspects of grammar and language This approach systematically examines the relationship between the texture of texts and their social context Furthermore, SFL considers texts as a valuable foundation for analyzing both the content present in the texts and what may be absent or omitted.
Halliday’s SFL model suggests that there are three simultaneous kinds of meanings expressed in clause structures namely Ideational meaning, Interpersonal meaning, and Textual meaning (Eggins, 2004, pp 58-59)
This study analyzes transitivity, mood, and modality within the Ideational and Interpersonal meanings to address the inquiry from "e" to "f" outlined in the description stage.
The Ideational meaning involves interpreting real-world experiences and representing various elements such as people, places, and things (Halliday, 1994) This meaning is further divided into two sub-functions: the logical function and the experiential function.
The logical function deals with the connection among ideas in a combination of clauses (Halliday, 1994) Consequently, it can only be explored when there is more than one clause in a sentence
The experiential function explains the “content meanings of ‘what/ who did what to what/ whom’” (Thompson, 2014, p 91) This metafunction is grammatically structured in a configuration called Transitivity (Matthiessen & Halliday, 1997)
The transitivity system explains the experience using a set of process types, which can be categorized as follows:
(i) The Material process is the “processes of material doing which express the notion that some entity physically does something – which may be done to some other entity” (Gerrot & Wignell, 1994, p 55)
(ii) The Mental process refers to the happening inside the human brains
According to Thompson (2014), the mental process can be divided into four subcategories: perceptive processes, which involve the senses such as seeing and hearing; emotive or reactive processes, which encompass feelings; cognitive processes, which include deciding, knowing, and understanding; and desiderative processes, which pertain to wanting.
Review of previous studies
American political discourse has been a subject of study for CDA researchers They mostly pay attention to texts made by the presidents
A major topic of concern scholars have investigated is the persuasion strategies used by politicians, especially by the president (see, e.g., Aschale, 2013;
Dastpak & Taghinezhad, 2015; Kazemian & Hashemi, 2014) In these studies, the authors used Fairclough’s framework and Hallidayan’s SFL as the methodology
Scholars have increasingly focused on the identity of politicians, as highlighted in studies by Boyd (2009), Post (2009), and Moustafa (2015) These researchers employed either Fairclough’s framework or van Leeuwen’s Social Actor Network framework to analyze political identities.
Numerous studies have analyzed former President Barack Obama's speeches, including Wang's (2010) examination using Halliday's Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) theory The analysis reveals that Obama employs various linguistic features, such as colloquial language, to minimize ambiguity and frequently uses the pronoun "we" to foster solidarity with American citizens Furthermore, he predominantly utilizes material processes to highlight governmental actions and outline future initiatives Additionally, his use of present simple tense and modal verbs effectively instills confidence in the populace.
In his analysis of President Obama’s inaugural address, Horvarth (2009) applies Fairclough’s framework and highlights the themes of pragmatism, liberalism, inclusiveness, and acceptance of religious and ethnic diversity To effectively convey his message of unity and inclusiveness, Obama strategically repeats key phrases such as “we” and “our nation.”
Research on President Donald Trump's language reveals that he often employs simple terms like "friends," "delegates," and "fellow Americans" to create a sense of closeness with his audience His speeches predominantly feature declarative clauses, showcasing his authoritative influence over the public Additionally, Trump frequently uses the conjunction "but" to contrast his administration with the previous one, labeling the former administration as the "out-group" unable to assist America, while positioning his own government as the "in-group" poised to rescue the nation.
In a study by McClay (2017) using Leeuwen's Social Actor Network framework, it is revealed that President Trump, in his campaign speeches, consistently distances himself from the previous Establishment and foreigners, portraying them as weak and detrimental to America He suggests that the Establishment's failures have led to America's decline, while foreigners are depicted as gaining strength at the expense of American citizens By manipulating the power dynamics among various social actors, Trump legitimizes his ideologies and reinforces his presidential authority under the banner of "America first." This rhetoric fosters a discourse rife with racism, paranoia, and xenophobia, fueled by misleading claims about immigrants and his political opponents.
Most research on American political discourse utilizes Fairclough’s Discourse Representation Analysis (DRA) to reveal underlying ideologies and power dynamics However, there has yet to be a critical examination of Senator Warren's language usage This study seeks to fill that gap in the existing literature.
Chapter summary
This chapter has presented the fundamental information concerning CDA and discussed previous studies about American political discourse through various methods in doing CDA
METHODOLOGY
Sampling
1.1 The choice of the text
Among all the speeches Senator Warren has made during her campaign, her presidential campaign announcement speech was selected because her core ideas and ideologies are presented
1.2 Description of the context of the speech
According to Song (2010), understanding the context is crucial for analyzing discourse, as it aids in interpreting the meanings of utterances In Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), context is vital during the interpretation and explanation phases, revealing the motivations behind the linguistic choices made by text producers and their potential effects on the audience.
Every four years, American citizens over eighteen have the right to vote for their president, with the next election scheduled for November 3rd, 2020 Following their loss to Donald Trump in 2016, the Democratic Party has initiated its campaign for the White House, with candidates vying for the nomination to challenge Trump Among the contenders is Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, who has emerged as one of the top four candidates in the Democratic race, according to the Monmouth University Polling Institute (2019).
19 risen to the second place, after former Vice President Joe Biden (The Economist/YouGov Poll, 2019)
Many social issues are pressing concerns for Americans, particularly the minimum wage, as approximately 25% of the workforce earns less than $10 per hour, placing them below the federal poverty line (Amadeo, 2019) This wage issue, combined with tax inequality, exacerbates challenges for citizens, especially the middle class, affecting their ability to afford housing (Aurand et al., 2019), healthcare (Orentlicher, 2018), and higher education (Hoffower & Akhtar, 2019).
Since his inauguration in 2017, President Donald Trump has implemented various laws and policies, many of which are controversial The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 aimed to stimulate economic growth but primarily benefited large corporations and wealthy individuals, resulting in lower tax rates for them while diminishing essential social welfare programs like health insurance (Gale et al., 2019) Furthermore, under the Trump-appointed National Labor Relations Board, key worker protection policies, including those against forced arbitration, have been repealed, leaving workers in a more precarious situation (Hamaji et al., 2019).
Before her political career, Elizabeth Warren served as a law professor at Harvard University, focusing on commercial and bankruptcy law Elected as the senator for Massachusetts in 2012, she played a key role in establishing the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau during the Obama administration, advocating for consumer rights against financial corporations.
The key idea of Senator Warren’s campaign is to bring more power towards working people and away from rich people and big corporations With regards to
Senator Warren has introduced several bold proposals to address pressing social issues in the United States, including raising the minimum wage to $15 per hour, implementing "Medicare for All" for all American citizens, making college tuition free, and increasing taxes on the wealthy These initiatives stand out as unique among other Democratic presidential candidates (Yglesias, 2019; J.F., 2019).
1.2.3 Situational context of senator Warren’s presidential campaign announcement speech
Elizabeth Warren officially launched her presidential campaign before a crowd of around 3,500 at Everett Mill in Lawrence, Massachusetts, a historic site where workers famously fought for higher wages and against child labor in 1912 In her speech, Senator Warren emphasized this powerful narrative, weaving the story of these determined workers throughout her address to inspire her audience and highlight her commitment to fighting for the working class.
Senator Warren addressed a diverse audience of American citizens as the sole speaker, limiting opportunities for audience interaction Despite this, she effectively communicated the central theme of her speech through various methods, ensuring that listeners could grasp a shared understanding of the main topic.
The primary purpose of the speech is for Senator Warren to gather support from American citizens for her presidential campaign.
Data collection procedure
The analysis is based on the transcript of Senator Warren's presidential campaign announcement speech, sourced from Mass Live The accuracy of the transcript was verified by cross-referencing it with the video recording from the reputable news outlet C-SPAN.
Data analysis procedure
The study is attached to the approach of Fairclough and is conducted through some basic stages as follows:
In the initial stage of analysis, a comprehensive textual description of Senator Warren's speech will be conducted, focusing on its lexical and grammatical features as well as the overall structure of the discourse This examination aims to uncover the underlying ideologies present in her rhetoric.
In the second stage – interpretation, questions related to situational context will be discussed to explore how ideologies and powers are imbedded in the speech
In the final stage of analysis, a detailed interpretation will reveal how ideologies and power dynamics are expressed through the linguistic features of the chosen text This speech will be examined as an integral component of social processes.
The research utilizes investigator triangulation, as proposed by KhosraviNik (2008), for data triangulation This method involves collaboration between a Political Science Ph.D candidate from Boston College and a senior American citizen, who will serve as co-interpreters during the triangulation phase.
This chapter has presented and discussed sampling, which includes the context of the speech – a key part the analysis of a discourse, data collection, and data analysis procedures
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The realization of Senator Warren’s ideologies through the lexical, grammatical features,
1.1 The realization of Senator Warren’s ideologies through the lexical features of the discourse
1.1.1 The experiential values of lexical features a Classification scheme:
Senator Warren highlights two contrasting realities: the ongoing struggles between average American citizens and the wealthy elite since 1912, and the issues stemming from the current administration compared to her vision for a more equitable government.
In her speech, Senator Warren highlights the stark conflicts between everyday Americans and the wealthy, using powerful negative language to convey the struggles faced by workers She opens with a poignant reference to the hardships endured by laborers in Lawrence in 1912, illustrating their plight with phrases like "made so little money" and describing how they "were forced to crowd together in dangerous tenements and live on beans and scraps of bread."
“Children were forced to operate dangerous equipment.” (line 10), “lost hands, arms, and legs” (line 11), “One of every three adult mill workers died” (line 12), and so on
Then, Senator Warren depicts the conflicts between these workers and their bosses as follows:
The workers’ fight for the better in
How rich people suppressed these workers
… hammered out their demands (line
… did more than improve their own lives They changed America (line 42-
… spread rumors and fear about the strikers (line 32)
… paid a guy to plant sticks of dynamite around town so he could frame the workers as a violent mob (line 33-34)
Table 1: The conflicts between workers and their rich bosses in Lawrence in 1902
Workers faced severe mistreatment, leading to cramped living conditions and hunger, as well as a high risk of physical harm due to poor working environments In response, they united to demand better benefits, but their employers initially resisted and fabricated evidence to depict them as a violent mob The wealthy elite further suppressed the workers by controlling government actions Despite this oppression, the workers demonstrated resilience and unity, ultimately achieving their demands and securing the benefits enjoyed by workers today Senator Warren illustrates that, despite the harshness of their bosses, collective action empowered workers to reclaim their rights and improve their working and living conditions.
Since 1912, many Americans have faced various forms of inequality, with the wealthy wielding significant power in the nation This ongoing disparity is highlighted by several examples presented in the text.
The lives of the majority of
The lives of the rich and powerful
… millions of American families are also struggling to survive… (line 55-
Hard working people are up against a small group… (line 58)
… the path to economic security had gotten tougher and rockier for working families, and even tougher and rockier for people of color (line 92-94)
… middle class squeeze… millions of families can barely breathe (line 114)
This disaster has touched every community in America (line 116)
… grow richer and more powerful
… wanted to be richer – regardless of who got hurt (line 100)
… a small group that holds too much power, not just in our economy, but also in our democracy (line 58-59)
… lobbied Washington and paid off politicians to tilt the system just a little more in their direction (line 101-102)
… break the rules and pay no price
The rich and powerful use fear to divide us (line 277)
Table 2: The contrasts between the majority of Americans and the wealthy now
Inequality remains a critical issue in American society, where the wealthy disproportionately benefit at the expense of the majority Senator Warren's campaign centers on exposing the injustices faced by working-class Americans and advocating for their rights She calls on the working class to unite, drawing parallels to the labor movements of 1912, to forge a better future Furthermore, Warren highlights racial inequality as an ongoing challenge, emphasizing her commitment to addressing these systemic issues.
Senator Warren aims to broaden her support base by engaging individuals from diverse racial backgrounds, who have often been overlooked in political campaigns and consequently marginalized in democratic processes (Solomon et al., 2019) By successfully encouraging these communities to participate in the electoral process, she could gain a substantial competitive edge over her opponents.
The second set of reality is about the problematic current administration and Senator Warren’s desirable administration demonstrated through the following examples:
… rules in our country have been rigged against other people… (line
The Trump administration is the most corrupt in living memory (line 181)
a rigged system that props up the rich and the powerful and kicks dirt on everyone else (line 67-68)
… immigration system that lacks common sense (line 166)
… change the rules so that our government, our economy, and our democracy work for everyone (line
… clean up Washington End the corruption (line 180)
… take power in Washington away from the wealthy and well-connected…
Our movement won’t be divided by our differences It will be united by the values we share (line 286-287)
… we’re all in the fight to build an America that works for everyone (line
Table 3: The current problematic administration and Senator Warren’s desirable administration
Senator Warren critiques the current administration, highlighting its favoritism towards wealthy Americans and employing superlatives to underscore the failures of President Trump She distinguishes between "rigged," indicating dishonest arrangements, and "broken," reflecting a severely damaged political system In response, she proposes solutions to the administration's issues, using assertive verbs like "clean up" and "take on" to demonstrate her commitment Warren calls for unity among American citizens to rebuild the nation, positioning herself as a competent presidential candidate capable of addressing both the administration's shortcomings and the broader challenges posed by financial corporations This approach fosters hope for a fairer economy and government under her leadership, appealing to her supporters and potential voters.
The term “people of color” has been utilized in American legal documents since the 19th century, originally referring specifically to black or African Americans (Malesky, 2014) Today, it encompasses individuals of African, Hispanic, Native American, Asian, or Pacific Island descent Despite this broader definition, the phrase is often still interpreted primarily as referring to African Americans due to its historical context This is illustrated by references to legal discrimination against families of color, highlighting the enduring disparities in homeownership rates between white and black Americans.
Senator Warren emphasizes the connection between "people of color" and "African Americans," highlighting a division between white and black Americans Her focus on African Americans reflects their historical marginalization and struggles against slavery and discrimination While positioning herself as an ally for African American rights, she also acknowledges other sub-groups, such as Latinos and Native Americans, to promote a sense of inclusivity among non-white Americans in her campaign.
In her speech, Senator Warren repeatedly uses numerous synonymous and near synonymous phrases to describe rich American citizens, which are:
In America, the wealthy and well-connected individuals, often referred to as the rich and powerful, dominate the landscape of big businesses and Wall Street These rich Americans have gained the most from our country, solidifying their status at the very top of the economic hierarchy The influence of these rich guys and the elite class shapes policies and opportunities, highlighting the significant divide between the affluent and the rest of society.
In the United States, a small percentage of the population holds significant wealth, wielding considerable economic influence through their dominance of Wall Street, the world's foremost financial center, as well as substantial political power.
However, to amass wealth, giant corporations and banks owned by these people trick people This notion is signified through the words “scam”, “cheat”, and
“rig/ rigged” repeated throughout the speech
The direct consequence of such fraudulent actions is on the financial stability which is manifested through the phrases “caught in the squeeze”, “go broke”,
“middle-class squeeze” and “barely breathe”
Senator Warren’s speech highlights her commitment to addressing the economic and societal issues caused by wealthy individuals controlling large corporations This focus aligns with her long-standing career as a lawyer and politician, where she has consistently identified and tackled these problems Her unwavering stance builds voter trust, showcasing her competence in key areas and her ability to maintain a clear focus without abrupt shifts in her views, which could disrupt the political landscape.
1.1.2 The relational values of vocabulary
In her speech, Senator Warren employs a limited number of formal terms, notably using "declare" to officially announce her candidacy and clarify her position within the Democratic Party's campaign She also incorporates legal terminology like "charged" and "convicted," highlighting her background as a former law professor at Harvard University Furthermore, she utilizes political jargon, including "constitutional amendment" and "voter suppression," to emphasize her expertise and the significance of these issues in her campaign.
The concept of "partisan gerrymandering" illustrates her extensive knowledge of legislative processes and the current challenges within the political system during her tenure as a senator from Massachusetts These strategies highlight her competence and authority, reinforcing her qualifications for the presidency if appointed.
Senator Warren's speech prominently features phrasal verbs, which are characteristic of informal communication and serve to bridge the gap between her and her audience, enhancing the expressiveness of her messages This choice reflects her awareness of her supporters, particularly college graduates, who represent a crucial demographic for her presidential campaign By avoiding overly formal language, she connects with a broader audience, as polls indicate that college graduates make up less than 40% of American citizens Moreover, the use of phrasal verbs like "clean up" and "root out" injects a sense of urgency into her call for political change, motivating her supporters to join her vision for America.
Chapter summary
This chapter analyzes Senator Warren's ideologies by examining the lexical, grammatical, and structural elements of her presidential campaign announcement speech, while also incorporating discussions in appropriate sections.