We Need to Help America Again

Introduction

Riddled with judgement fragments and passive voice, Donald J. Trump's speeches during the 2022 election cycle read at a fourth-grade level. Only despite his inability to communicate clearly co-ordinate to conventional academics and grammarians, Donald J. Trump is President of the United States of America. Nearly one-half of the American population believes in him, believes in his ideas, and believes in what says. What virtually Trump's advice style works for him? And what well-nigh his rival's communication way—Hillary Clinton'due south—fails her on the national phase?

Embedded into Trump's language are tools for capturing the American audience's attention long plenty for him to challenge the status quo and simultaneously escape the responsibility of explaining how he plans to fix the said status quo. In this mode, his unproblematic sentences, informal register, hyperbole, linking verbs, passive vox, and vague pronouns work to his reward. Trump'due south communication mode creates a vision of a relatable and energetic Trump presidency for the American people.

By contrast, the complex, formal, tame, abstract, and hopeful aspects of Clinton'due south language neglect her. Though, I'm sure, Clinton'southward linguistic tendencies are useful for communicating to foreign dignitaries and crafting nuanced policies, they do non translate to as broad of an audience as Trump's; they less effectively grab and hold American's attention, and they fail to defend the condition quo from Trump's attacks. Clinton's advice style creates a vision of a detached and sluggish Clinton presidency.

The Linguistic Proficiency of Donald Trump

Trump's closing statement in the third presidential debate of the 2022 election is a perfect case of his natural language when speaking directly to the American people. Explaining the context of the candidates' closing statements to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, moderator Chris Wallace says:

You had not agreed to closing statements, but it seems to me in a funny way that might brand information technology more than interesting because you lot haven't prepared closing statements. So I would like for each of you lot to take—and we're going to put a clock upwardly—a minute as the last question, in the terminal argue, to tell the American people why they should elect you to be the next president.

Trump had no forewarning of the endmost argument he was prompted to give (unless Wallace was lying, of course). Moreover, Wallace'due south question orients Trump toward not Clinton, or the moderator, but toward the American citizens watching at home. After Clinton gave her closing statement ("reaching out to all Americans, Democrats, Republicans and independents" to stop Trump), Trump responded:

She's raising the money from the people she wants to control. Doesn't piece of work that way. Only when I started this campaign, I started information technology very strongly. Information technology's chosen Brand America Nifty Again. Nosotros're going to brand America great. We have a depleted armed forces. Information technology has to be helped. It has to be fixed. We take the greatest people on World in our military. We don't take care of our veterans. Nosotros take care of illegal immigrants, people that come into our country illegally, amend than nosotros accept care of our vets. That can't happen. Our policemen and women are disrespected. Nosotros demand law and order, but we demand justice too. Our inner cities are a disaster. You lot go shot walking to the store. They accept no pedagogy. They have no jobs. I will do more than for African-Americans and Latinos that she can do for x lifetimes. All she'due south washed is talk to the African-Americans and to the Latinos, but they get the vote then they come back, they say "we'll meet you in four years." Nosotros are going to make America stiff once more and we are going to make America bang-up over again and it has to start now. We cannot take 4 more years of Barack Obama, and that'south what you become when you get her.

The short, simple sentences, informal vocabulary, and hyperbole of Trump's argument ensure that it appeals to a broad audience with potentially brusk attention spans. Consider the phonological makeup of his closing statement: 92% (18/217) of the words he uses are two or fewer syllables. And excluding his repetitions of proper nouns like "America" and "Latinos," merely x words in his argument have three or more syllables. Overall, Trump shortens phrases and uses contractions to reduce the number of syllables in the slice. What could be "The United States" shortens to "America"; what could exist "It does non piece of work" translates into "doesn't work"; and what could exist "exercise not" and "she has" become "don't" and "she'due south." This sort of simplicity is besides present in his lexicon: His register is remarkably informal in this argument and void of political jargon for a presidential debate, which appeals to a broad audience. When relating Hilary Clinton to Banter Obama, for instance, instead of maxim that the two people are "similar," or that the two people have "like policies" or "dispositions," he says that Barrack Obama is "what you become when y'all get her." Trump'south vocabulary continues the theme of simplicity through repetition. Rather than vary his give-and-take selection, for instance, he says the words "strong" and "swell" and "America" several times over.

Besides contributing to the relatable, I-could-have-a-beer-with-him effect of Trump'south short, elementary vocabulary is the hyperbole of the slice, which grabs his listeners' attention. Consider how he refers to the military machine, for example: "We have thegreatest people on Earth in our war machine" (emphasis added). For the piece, the abstract superlative "the greatest" is non enough to strongly convey the quality of military persons for Trump; thus, he puts "the greatest" on a concrete, planet-sized scale: "World." Consider also his exaggerations when talking nearly marginalized communities: "You become shot walking to the store. They have no education. They have no jobs. I volition practice more than for African-Americans and Latinos that she tin can practice for ten lifetimes." In this utterance, he evokes a gunshot, deals only in absolutes ("no"), and places the topic (marginalized communities) in the context of not one, but x human lifetimes. For example, rather than sayingmarginalized communities alive in communities with high crime rates,he brings his listeners into an extreme, concrete case: existence shot by a gun. When Trump talks about the jobs and educational level of marginalized communities, his language implies that not 1 person who is African American and Latino has a chore or has attended school: "noeducation," "no jobs." Finally, disparaging Clinton'south skills within the context of i human lifespan is not enough for the piece to convey the magnitude of Trump's set on; instead, he says that Clinton's skills are inadequate over the scope of ten human lifetimes. These examples of Trump's hyperbole explain his ability to capture the attention of his audience: Almost of what he refers to is larger than life itself.

Past taking choice words and phrases that connote corruption and chaos and equating them to existing institutions with primarily linking verbs, Trump's slice effectively challenges the status quo. When referring to Hillary Clinton, Trump chooses content words like "control" and "coin." When referring to the state of the country, he chooses content words like "depleted," "illegal," "disrespected," and "disaster." His apply of derivational affixes such asil– anddis– convey a fallen state—a condition quo ofun-greatness—which sets him up to later on associate himself and his vision of the country with the promising content words "strong" and "great."

These contrasting content words would not have every bit strong of an consequence on his audience without his syntactic style. By repeatedly using auxiliary and linking forms of the verbbe—in contrast to active verbs— he connects the concept of disorder to the condition quo. For instance, instead of commenting about a specific aspect of "inner cities" or the "armed forces", he says: "Our inner citiesare a disaster" and "Our policemen and womenare disrespected" (emphasis added). These simple sentences that link inner cities and police officers todisaster anddisrespect ignore nuance and multiple perspectives; they reduce complex issues to unproblematic, absolute descriptors and convey that the state of the wedlock is "bad" (to infringe another word from Trump's dictionary).

In addition to challenging the status quo, Trump employ of passive voice, paired with vague pronouns, allows him to escape the responsibility of explaining how the reality he describes actually functions, or what steps are possible for improving that reality. Consider the following strings of sentences. String i: "We accept a depleted military. Information technology has to exist helped. It has to be fixed." In cord i, the auxiliary wordbeis followed by the by participles "helped" and "fixed"—Trump never indicates, even so, who or what type of procedure will help or fix the military. This passive construction allows him to build credibility by pointing out a trouble (funding the armed forces) without taking on the responsibility of offer whatever actual solutions.

String 2: "They have no teaching. They accept no jobs. I will practice more than for African-Americans and Latinos than she tin can do." Here, again, Trump points out a trouble (minority communities have difficulties obtaining an education and finding employment). His syntax sets him up to demonstrate how to prepare this problem:I volition do "X" for African Americans and Latinos, he could say. Only instead of inserting his plan for how he intends to solve issues for minorities, he employs the vague pronounmore. This vague pronoun communicates to his audition that he knows how to address hard issues in order, without placing him with the responsibility of articulating his program of action. What will he do?More than Clinton.The vague pronounmore communicates that whatever he will do will be benign becausemorecarries with it a positive melancholia meaning.

The Linguistic Failure of Hillary Clinton

How does the rhetoric of a thirty-twelvemonth politician fail in comparison to language used by a existent-estate developer with no political experience? A closer wait at Clinton'south response to Wallace in the same context, under the exact aforementioned constraints as Trump during the tertiary debate, explains Clinton'southward rhetorical failure: Patterns in Clinton's language translate to a smaller audience and less effectively hold Americans' attention. Moreover, her linguistic communication associates her with the disparaged status quo, rather than defends the condition quo from Trump's attacks. Her statement, just moments before Trump:

Well I would like to say to everyone watching tonight that I'thousand reaching out to all Americans, Democrats, Republicans and independents, because we need everybody to assist brand our state what it should be, to grow the economic system, to make it fairer, to brand it piece of work for everyone. We need your talents, your skills, your delivery, your free energy, your ambition. Yous know, I've been privileged to see the presidency upwardly close, and I know the crawly responsibleness of protecting our country and the incredible opportunity of working to endeavor to brand life ameliorate for all of you. I have made the cause of children and families, actually, my life'southward work. That'due south what my mission will be in the presidency. I will stand for families against powerful interests, confronting corporations. I will exercise everything that I can to make certain that you have skilful jobs with ascension incomes, that your kids accept good educations from preschool through higher. I hope y'all will requite me a hazard to serve as your president.

In dissimilarity to Trump'south accessible—albeit choppy—language, Clinton's longer sentences, more formal vocabulary, and underwhelming adjectives appeal to a smaller audition and longer attending spans. Trump fires off sentences like a automobile gun in his allotted time, uttering twenty to the audience in total. By contrast, Clinton easily the audition simply eight sentences to consider. Within these sentences, 92%  of Trump'due south words are one or two syllables, but eighty-vi percent of Hillary's words meet the same criteria.  In contrast to the mere 10 words that reach 3 or more syllables (excluding proper nouns) in Trump's 217-word response, twenty-ane of Hillary's 171 are three or more. The phonological makeup and length of Trump's sentences simply accept less energy heed to.

Clinton'due south sluggish—albeit clear and well-idea-out—communication style continues into her syntax: While Trump consistently shortens phrases with ix contractions, Hillary keeps longer phrases and uses but four contractions in her piece. Both candidates accept the same ratio of complex to unproblematic sentences—roughly xx-five percent—only the length of their sentences is drastically dissimilar: I reason that Trump is able to fire off so many sentences is because his utterances are short—some not being complete sentences at all, but rather fragments, such equally: "Doesn't work that way." Trump's three longest sentences are thirty, twenty-three, and twenty-one words respectively; his shortest is just 3 words. In contrast, Hillary's sentences are all complete sentences, which read like a slow-moving stream in comparison to the rapid-fire phrases said past Trump. Her three longest sentences reach forty-eight (20-viii per centum of her passage!), 30-seven, and twenty-8 words respectively; her shortest is triple the size of Trump's shortest sentence at 9 words in total: "That's what my mission will be in the presidency." Although Clinton's longer sentences effectively group her thoughts and present them to the audition in cogent packages (an appeal to Logos, perchance), they require the audience to assimilate a larger number of ideas and connections between ideas per sentence than Trump'due south short sentences. In issue, the method in which Clinton groups ideas requires fewer, only longer, spans of attention than does Trump's method.

As well contributing to Clinton'due south failure to sustain her audition's attention is her abstruse word option, underwhelming hyperbole—and her rhetoric of hope, which saddles her listeners with challenging, complicated responsibilities to consider rather than uncomplicated solutions. Clinton says in her perhaps to the lowest degree abstruse utterance: "I will stand up up for families confronting powerful interests, confronting corporations. I will do everything that I can to make sure that you accept good jobs with rising incomes, that your kids have expert educations from preschool through higher." Compare Clinton's calm, even-tempered words in this string of sentences "proficient jobs," "kids," "instruction," and "preschool" to the words that color Trump'southward lexicon: "disasters," "boldness," and "depletion." Information technology'south not a stretch to say that Clinton's words would fit well into brochures at a doc'southward role, the DMV, or a nursing home, while Trump's words read instead like breaking news banners (an appeal to Pathos, perhaps) on CNN or Flim-flam.

As equally lukewarm as Clinton's use of nouns is her apply of adjectives, which—in contrast to Trump—remind Americans about the slow, challenging, and circuitous work the president (and the citizens by association) face up during the side by side term. Have the following sentence as an example: "I know theawesome responsibility of protecting our state and theincredible opportunity of working to endeavour to brand life ameliorate for all of you" (emphasis added). Whereas Trump'southward hyperbole succeeds with its concrete and larger-than-life contexts—e.g. "on Earth," and "in ten lifetimes"—Clinton fails to capitalize on the hyperbolic value of the adjectivescrawly andincredible by relating them to abstract, underwhelming contexts. She says theawesome "responsibleness of protecting" and theincredible "opportunity of working." The hyperbolic adjectiveawesomeclashes with the mundane wordsresponsibility andresponsibilities: daily items on a bank check-list; unexciting, unglamorous work that Clinton must do to address issues as president. Paired withopportunitiesof working, the adjectiveincredibleis no more effective at grabbing the American audition's attention. While Trump talks almost single-handedly solving disasters in his speech, Clinton hands the audience a different picture of her presidency: the opportunity of doing work, a lot of piece of work—calling to mind responsibilities like burial her head in paperwork, listening to advisors, making decisions with no articulate outcomes, and searching for solutions that may or may non exist.

On a morphological level, Clinton'due south language fails about tragically. Whereas Trump's response in the debate focuses on disparaging the status quo of the United States, the future-oriented verbs in Clinton's response connect her to the status quo and instruct citizens to piece of work toward progress. Clinton'southward active verbs in the present and time to come tense—will, brand, demand, stand, do,andgive—do non betoken to bug worth fixing about the status quo, nor do they defend the status quo against Trump'southward attacks. Rather Clinton'southward language skirts effectually the status quo by calling citizens to deed: "We demand everybody to help make our country what it should exist … We need your talents, your skills, your commitment, your free energy, your ambition … You know, I've been privileged to see the presidency up shut." Hither, instead of building credibility past stating specific points about the condition quo she sees as inadequate for the country, Clinton asks the audience to help her make the country "what information technology should be." This vague linguistic communication—what it should be—only supports Trump'south call for citizens to brand the land "nifty" (another vague promise) and fails to push back confronting Trump'south assessment of the status quo.

Clinton makes her linguistic blunder worse by reminding the audience that she is a office of the failing status quo: she has "seen the presidency up close." Have this utterance in the larger context of Trumps passage: In dissimilarity to Trump'due south message—which explains to the American audience why they should be angry about the status quo—Clinton's message reminds the audition that she is a role of the inadequate status quo and that they, like her, have a lot of work to practice over the next four years.

Conclusion

I reason Donald J. Trump is President of the United States is his off-the-gage rhetorical ability. Academics can signal to the fact that Trump's response in the 3rd argue tin can be read at a fourth-grade level and that Clinton's response reads at a 10th-grade level; they can scoff at Trump'south sentence fragments, his reliance on passive vocalisation, and his inability to articulate articulate, logical plans. But his communication style proved effective in the pursuit of the highest office in the United states of america and will continue to testify effective now that he has reached that office.

Every bit long as Trump is speaking directly to Americans—without any sort of mediated analysis—Trump's language elicits feelings from the American public that he is poised to solve the ills of the U.s.. Though his unconventional advice fashion may appear to exist a weakness, it legitimizes Trump as a relatable and capable leader.

Works Cited

 "Full Transcript: Tertiary Presidential Fence 2016." Pol. N.p., due north.d. Web: https://www.politico.com/story/2016/x/total-transcript-third-2016-presidential-debate

---

History and Honors

Sandy, UT

Warren loves to play soccer, read books, and have meaningful discussions—which is exactly why he loves Westminster. A senior history major in the Honors program, captain of the men'southward soccer team, and a Presidential Ambassador, Warren does his best to stay involved on campus. He works as a inquiry assistant and consultant in the Westminster Writing Center. Off campus Warren enjoys taking mid-twenty-four hour period naps and traveling as much equally possible. What Warren values most equally ASW Clubs President is the opportunity to facilitate dialogue between passionate student leaders.

Chris LeCluyse's Directed Study: History and Structure of the English Language

palmerbrev2001.blogspot.com

Source: https://westminstercollege.edu/student-life/the-myriad/how-to-communicate-to-america-again.html

Share this post