Rhetoric-Linguistic Analysis of Argumentation in Political Discourse

Abstract

This paper delves into the fascinating world of argumentation in language, aiming to provide an in-depth analysis of argumentation strategies utilized in political speeches, to uncover the techniques employed by public figures to persuade, influence, and shape public opinion. This research examines the linguistic and rhetorical devices prominent in political discourse. By dissecting speeches from political contexts, the study reveals how politicians construct and present their arguments to advance their agendas. Through the exploration of persuasive language and emotional appeal, this paper offers insights into the art of rhetoric in the realm of politics. The findings highlight the intricate interplay between language, power, and public discourse, ultimately contributing to a nuanced understanding of the role argumentation plays in shaping political landscapes. The study aims at analyzing how the Toulmin model is used in conjunction with emotional appeal in political speeches, specifying the effect of the social relationships between the speaker and the audience on the way arguments are constructed and presented, and identifying the effects of the goals of the speech on the way arguments are constructed and presented. The data of the study includes YouTube videos of politicians` speeches. The study uses a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods to identify and analyze the method of arguing that is used, the strategies used to persuade the audience, and the rhetoric used to influence their effectiveness. The findings of the study show that the effectiveness of this arguing act is influenced by a number of factors, including the credibility of the speaker, the strength of the argument, and the social relations and common ground between the participants. The study also finds that emotional appeal is used to sway public opinion and advance political agendas.