ECOLOGY OF DONALD TRUMP’S POLITICAL SPEECHES

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/philspu/2025.9.8

Keywords:

emotions, emotive ecolinguistics, political discourse, communicative strategies, lexical and stylistic means, communicative goals, ecological/non-ecological communication

Abstract

The article deals with the ecological presentation of information in the speeches of the 45th/47th President of the United States, Donald Trump. It is focused on the identification of factors contributing to the ecological or non-ecological nature of his political discourse. Particular attention is given to the communicative strategies employed by the politician and their potential for manipulative influence on the audience. The lexical and stylistic devices that shape the emotional state of recipients are also explored. The research is based on the analysis of Donald Trump’s inaugural addresses and campaign speeches during televised debates. The research considers the pragmatic potential of lexical and stylistic means used by the speaker, assessing their effectiveness in achieving communicative goals. The criteria for ecological communication proposed by K. Taranenko are used to define non-ecological discourse elements as those negatively affecting the communicants’ emotional state. Several factors contributing to the non-ecological nature of Trump’s speeches have been identified. It was found that the main non-ecological strategies used in the politician’s speeches include accusations, threats, factual manipulation, criticism, and the denigration of opponents. However, alongside these non-ecological elements, ecological strategies fostering positive emotional engagement and appealing to fundamental values such as the ‘American Dream’, ‘patriotism’, ‘security’, ‘freedom’, ‘equality’, ‘justice’, ‘faith in God’ etc. have also been identified. Through an analysis of illustrative material, numerous lexical and stylistic devices that increase emotional pressure by manipulating the patriotic sentiments of the audience have been observed. Ultimately, it is concluded that while non-ecological strategies allow for the fulfillment of communicative objectives, a detrimental impact is exerted on recipients, which may lead to significant socio-political consequences.

References

Киселюк Н. П., Бондар Т. Г. Екологія сучасної мас-медійної комунікації (на матеріалі англомовного медійного дискурсу). Наукові записки Національного університету «Острозька академія»: серія «Філологія». Острог, 2024. Вип. 21(89). С. 16–19.

Маслюк А. М. Вплив емоційних станів на розвиток особистості. Психологічний часопис. № 2 (6), 2017. С. 57–69.

Пасинок В. Г. Еколінгвістичні аспекти у фокусі риторики, стилістики та культури мовлення. Вісник Харківського національного університету імені В. Н. Каразіна. Серія : Іноземна філологія. Методика викладання іноземних мов, 2016. Вип. 81. С. 6–13.

Тараненко К. B. Принципи екологічної медіакомунікації під час пандемії. Актуальнi питання гуманiтарних наук. Вип 33, том 2, 2020. С. 168–173.

Тараненко К. В. Явище лінгвоцинізму з позицій еколінгвістики. Український смисл : науковий збірник. Дні- про, 2019. С. 113–121.

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/the-inaugural-address/ (дата звернення 20.02.2025).

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/harris-trump-presidential-debate-transcript/story?id=113560542 (дата звернення 20.02.2025).

https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/news-65541778 (дата звернення 20.03.2025).

Published

2025-04-29

Issue

Section

SECTION 1 LINGUISTICS