Power of Persuasion: Analysis of U.S. Presidents' and European Leaders’ Discourse
محورهای موضوعی :Rasha Mohammed Abd Aljabar Alkhlel 1 , Atefesadat Mirsaeedi 2 , Muna Mohammed Abbas Alkhateeb 3 , Mehdi Vaez Dalili 4
1 - Department of English Languages, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
2 - Faculty of Foreign Languages, Khorasgan (Isfahan)
3 - Department of English, Faculty of Foreign Languages, University, Babylon, Iraq
4 - Department of English, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
کلید واژه: Persuasion, Political Discourse, Rhetoric, Aristotle’s Three Appeals, Elaboration Likelihood Model, Multilateralism, Public Speaking, Comparative Analysis,
چکیده مقاله :
The paper critically explores the persuasive strategies applied by U.S. Presidents and European leaders in their public speeches, with a focus on internal and external affairs. Through corpus-based discourse analysis of speeches delivered over the course of two decades, this study undertakes a close examination of convergence and divergence of the rhetorical styles, guided by a synthesized framework consisting of Aristotle's Three Appeals—ethos, pathos, logos—the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), and Fairclough's Three-Dimensional model. Its findings shed light on striking differences in how U.S. presidents and European leaders approach persuasion, reflecting cultural, political, and historical influences unique to each context. While U.S. presidents tend to focus on a balance of ethos, pathos, and logos in their speeches, leaders from Europe tend to focus more on consensus building and collective identity, guided by their commitment to multilateralism and institutional cooperation. This study has also brought to light the ways in which each of these groups have their rhetorical strategies moderated, influenced, or otherwise constrained by domestic pressures, international diplomacy, and historical legacies. The comparative approach gives insight into the role of political discourse in the formation of public opinion, policy guidance, and international relations management.
The paper critically explores the persuasive strategies applied by U.S. Presidents and European leaders in their public speeches, with a focus on internal and external affairs. Through corpus-based discourse analysis of speeches delivered over the course of two decades, this study undertakes a close examination of convergence and divergence of the rhetorical styles, guided by a synthesized framework consisting of Aristotle's Three Appeals—ethos, pathos, logos—the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM), and Fairclough's Three-Dimensional model. Its findings shed light on striking differences in how U.S. presidents and European leaders approach persuasion, reflecting cultural, political, and historical influences unique to each context. While U.S. presidents tend to focus on a balance of ethos, pathos, and logos in their speeches, leaders from Europe tend to focus more on consensus building and collective identity, guided by their commitment to multilateralism and institutional cooperation. This study has also brought to light the ways in which each of these groups have their rhetorical strategies moderated, influenced, or otherwise constrained by domestic pressures, international diplomacy, and historical legacies. The comparative approach gives insight into the role of political discourse in the formation of public opinion, policy guidance, and international relations management.
Beasley, R., & Lunney, M. (2023). Analysis of U.S. presidential rhetoric during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Political Communication, 35(1), 24-38.
Fairclough, N. (2023). Language and power: An analysis of political discourse. Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2024). Introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge.
Hehnen, J., & Fabbrini, S. (2022). Global democracy and security in the rhetoric of U.S. and European leaders. Political Studies Review, 20(2), 109-125.
Kakabadse, A., & Kakabadse, N. (2021). Leadership ethos and legitimacy in U.S. presidential discourse. Leadership Studies Journal, 15(3), 210-229.
Meyer, J. (2022). European multilateral rhetoric in times of crisis: A discourse analysis. European Journal of Communication, 37(4), 489-504.
Moffitt, B. (2023). Populism in European political discourse: Rhetorical shifts and populist pressures. Politics & Society, 51(2), 192-214.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (2023). The role of discourse analysis in examining political rhetoric. Discourse Studies, 19(3), 237-256.
Schmidt, H., & Merkel, A. (2023). European economic discourse and the use of rhetorical strategies. European Political Science Review, 15(2), 123-138.
Thompson, J., & Schmidt, K. (2023). Comparative analysis of Aristotle’s Three Appeals in political discourse. Rhetoric and Public Affairs, 18(4), 512-530.
Wodak, R. (2021). The rise of populism and its rhetorical impacts on European political discourse. European Journal of Sociology, 62(3), 317-335.
Zarefsky, D. (2020). The use of ethos in U.S. presidential crisis rhetoric. American Journal of Rhetoric, 44(2), 95-110.
Zheng, L. (2023). Multilateralism in the rhetoric of European leaders. Global Political Communication, 9(1), 78-94.
