A LINGUISTIC STYLISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE CAMPAIGN SPEECHES OF TWO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IN THE 2011 GENERAL ELECTIONS
ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE ABSTRACT OR
CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE INFORMATION BELOW.THANK
YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN GET THE COMPLETE
PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000 ONLY. THE FULL
INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS
PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
A LINGUISTIC STYLISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE CAMPAIGN SPEECHES OF TWO PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IN
THE
1.0
PREAMBLE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter contains the
background to the study, a brief profile of the presidential candidates in this
study, a brief over view of political campaigns in Nigeria, statement of the
problem, research questions, aim, and objectives of the study, justification of
the study, scope, and delimitation of the study. Therefore, this chapter
provides an insight into the study.
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE
STUDY
The ability to communicate
effectively is the hallmark of all known politicians wherefore the use of
English as an international language has made more people aware of the immense
power of words in politics and communication.
Thus, Kamalu and Agangan
(2007:35) state that language plays an important role in manifesting political
wills and accompanying political actions; this is the case with political
campaign, especially in Nigeria where campaign affects the electorate who are
on the receiving end. Language is therefore used in a unique way; to achieve
set goals and objectives. Consequently, campaign speeches are largely dependent
on language which is the focus of this study.
Language provides the individual with a tool
for the exploration and analysis of his conceptual ideas and this is what has
distinguished and given man his unique position in the world. This is why Isa
(2004:1) maintains that one of the most important functions of human language
is its role as a means of communication or interaction between members of the
society. She further notes that language helps man to establish social
relations and other forms of networks which only language can facilitate and
which obviously makes man superior to other animals lacking in the
instrumentality of language.
Sapir (1927:7) in Abaya (2009:195), Oladayo (2011:38),
and Anifowoshe (2006:11) define language as purely non-instinctive method of
communicating ideas, emotions, and desires by means of a system of voluntarily
produced symbols. According to Harris (1979:53) language is the means by which
political ideas are transmitted to the community and that the strength of
language in politicking are enormous.
However, language conveys
different kinds of information relating not only to the speaker’s beliefs but
also his identity and relationship with his listeners and hearers which
re-enforce that language is vital to human experience. In other words, language
serves as an important tool through which effective interaction, mobilization
for national development and transformation are achieved.
Hence, Ayeni-Akeke (2008:
83), submits that “political life, like other aspects of social existence, is
made possible by the ability to communicate.” He argues that “communication
underlies the dynamics of political life.” In order to buttress this view, Pie
(1978:2) in Joshua (2003: 109), points out that “politics exists not only to
push parties and candidates but covers also the pushing of ideas and point of
view.” So, politics involves a series of connected activities designed to bring
result. These include: campaign, advertising, canvassing, lawn sign, and so on.
Behind these bits and pieces of political power games, is language which ‘is an
important aspect to political campaign and an interesting vessel of post
election communication’ (patriorstatesman).
The language
of political campaign speeches usually comprises of the use of foreign phrases
known as political jargons, three part statements, use of rhetorical questions
and pronouns to influence and impress the target audience. There is a large use
of quotations and adequate use of repetitions. The mode is manipulative,
persuasive and the language is ideologically embedded. (myspeechlab.com)
The inability
of the electorate to grasp the extent to which politicians use language in
order to manipulate, persuade and deceive them into winning their vote is the
concern of this study. This is because understanding a language could be
difficult without examining fully how such a language is being put to use.
Hence, Amodu (2010:1) observes that for a long time, particularly from the
early 40s to the late 70s, the study of language concentrated more on the
language form, at the expense of how language functions as the case is in
functional linguistics and pragmatics. He goes on to say that scholars are
gradually shifting ground from paying attention on language structure to
studying how language can be functionally used in the society especially if the
language has been developed. This reveals that interest in language for
communication should be viewed as a good step forward from the narrower and
still popular focus on language as grammar. This is not to undermine the
importance of the study of language structure but it is an acknowledgement of
the fact that the study of how language is being used is now receiving a
greater attention and in a new dimension.
By studying language in
circumstances where all its functions and variations are taken into
consideration, it is possible to learn more about how perceptions, convictions,
and identities are influenced by language. More so, words and expressions are used or omitted to
affect meaning in different ways. In political speeches during election
campaigns, ideas and ideologies need to be conveyed through language so that
they are agreed upon by the receivers as well as by others who may read or hear
parts of the speech afterwards in the media. Thus, citizens of democratic
countries have the option to go to the ballot boxes on election days and vote
for one person or one party. Whether their decision goes along with a political
conviction or not, it is most likely based on communication through language.
Black, (2005) in Kulo,(2009:1) states that within all types of political
system, from autocratic, through oligarchic to democratic, leaders have relied
on the spoken word to convince others of the benefits that arise from their
leadership. The study attempts to unravel the features of language that are
peculiar to the speeches of the presidential candidates using the linguistic
stylistic approach.
Aristotle in Anifowose and
Enemuo (1991:1) mentions that “man is by nature a political animal.” By this,
he means that the essence of social existence is politics and that two or more
men interacting with one another are invariably involved in a political
relationship. Therefore, it is evident that both language and politics
intersect at the point of interaction. Similarly, Merk (1967:13) cited in
Anifowose and Enumuo (1991:1) argues that politics is the “art of influencing,
manipulating, and controlling others; which are all indubitable functions of
language in verbal communication.
Moreover, political
speeches are composed by a team of professional speech writers, who are
educated in the use of persuasive language. Beard, (2001:18) in Kulo (2009:1)
throws more light, that adding rhetorical devices to a pre-composed speech may
be of crucial importance to election results. He adds that a political speech
is not necessarily a success because of correctness or truth rather politicians
use language in presenting valued arguments to achieve their aims of winning
votes. To examine the most prominent linguistic/stylistic features of language
is a cardinal focus of the research.
1.2 A BRIEF PROFILE OF THE CONTESTANTS.
Many presidential
candidates publicly declared their intentions but we shall look at two for this
study.
General Muhammadu Buhari
was born on December, 1942 in Daura, Katsina state in the North West zone, Nigeria.
He became Nigeria’s Head of State on December 31, 1983. He was over thrown on
August 27, 1985. His administration introduced the “War Against Indiscipline”
(WAI) campaign which, despite its highhandedness, it still landed to have
created the most orderly conduct in both public and private life of the country
since independence.
Before becoming head of
state, Buhari had been chairman of the Nigerian National Petroleum Cooperation,
minister of petroleum and natural resource and governor of north eastern state
of Nigeria. He was also chairman of Petroleum (special) Trust Fund under
General Sani Abacha; since 2003, Buhari has sought to become Nigeria’s civilian
president, without success. He contested in the 2003 and 2007 presidential
elections under the platform of the All Nigerian People’s Party, losing out on
both occasions to the Peoples Democratic Party candidates. He fell out of the
leadership of the All Nigerian People’s Party and succeeded in pulling out with
him some of the supporters of the party which formed the Congress for
Progressive Change. He was ratified as the presidential candidate of the party
in 2011 elections. He declared that CPC is ready “to get the PDP off the backs
of Nigerians and hammers on the need for change. (starAfrica.com/en/news)
Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan
was born on Nov 20, 1957 in Otuoke, Bayelsa state south-south zone, Nigeria. He
is a Ph.D. holder in hydrobiology and fisheries. He was appointed as Science
Inspector of Education; Rivers state Ministry of Education between 1983 and
1993. He took up employment as a lecturer in the State College of Education. He
was appointed Assistant Director of the defunct Oil Mineral Producing Areas
Development Commission. His desire to better the lot of the people motivated
him to go into politics in 1998. Simplicity, charisma, quiet strength, and
determination made him an ideal running mate to chief D.S.P, Alamieyeseigha on
the Bayelsa PDP gubernatorial ticket. They won the elections and he served as a
deputy governor from 1999 to 11, December 2000. But on 12, December 2005, he
became the substantive governor of
Bayelsa state. After that, fate once again beckoned on him to a higher height.
As he was busy preparing for a re-election as a state governor, the PDP,
nominated him as a running mate to the presidential candidate, Alhaji Umaru
Yar’Adua. On May 29, 2007; he was inaugurated as Nigeria’s Vice- President.
In February 9, 2010, Dr.
Jonathan assumed office as Nigeria’s Acting President by virtue of a National
Assembly’s resolution empowering him following President Yar’Adua’s long
absence for Medical attention in Saudi Arabia. Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan was
sworn in on May 6, 2010 as President, Commander-in-chief of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria.
In April, 2011 the
incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan was re-elected as President,
Commander-in-chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and with a
transformation agenda. (http://www.goodluckjonathanfor2011.com)
1.3 AN OVERVIEW OF POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS IN
NIGERIA
A campaign is a series of
actions that are intended to achieve a particular result, especially in
politics or business. Oota (2011:1) adds that campaigns are exciting events
where oratory is on display and love shared though sometimes thugs and other
violent characters may be out to unleash mayhem on innocent party supporters.
The Nigerian saga of
political campaigns, which has great bearing on our contemporary situation, has
its roots in the pre-independence era with the formation of political parties.
Appadorai (2003:282) states that a political party is an organised group of
citizens who hold similar political opinions and who work to get control of the
government in order that the policies in which they are interested may be
carried into effect. Since the Pre-Independence and First Republic of 1959 and
1964 respectively, political parties have participated in political campaigns
which prepared them for the general elections. But, political parties have had
their ideological differences, which were reflected in their manifestos.
Mohammed J. (2004:144-145), (Ogbodo, 2011:109), (Mohammed, A. 2004:143).
Thereafter, other
successive elections in Nigeria were the 1979, 1983, 1993, 1999, 2003, 2007 and
2011. Each of these elections was not without vibrant political campaigns by
the various parties that aspired to rule the country. Some of these were
transition elections organized by military regimes that had to hand over power
to a democratic civilian government (1979,1993 and 1999) while the elections
held in 1964, 1983, 2003, 2007 and 2011 were organized by incumbent civilian
governments whose offices and positions were also in contest. (Sekibo, 2010),
(Ogbodo, 2011:140).
In the 2011 elections
which is the period under study, there were 63 political parties but a total of
54 submitted candidates for various elective positions (Ogbodo, 2011:162) and (Corcoran
2011). This is against the 9 political parties that participated in the 1959
and 1964 general elections. However, this set the stage for a tougher
presidential campaign, for no fewer than 21 political parties presented
candidates for the elections. Prominent among the 21 political parties are:
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), Action
Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Labour Party (LP),
Democratic People’s Alliance (DPA), and All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA).
This, therefore, made the political atmosphere in Nigeria to become undoubtedly
charged and political campaigns took centre stage. Ogbodo, (2011:162) observes
that instead of parties competing to better the lot of the electorate, it has
become warfare with each party trying to defeat and if possible eliminate the
opponents.
The contest for who
occupies the exalted office of the President and Commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is certainly democratic (Oota,
2011:1). However, one of the major avenues which the electorate’s minds were
prepared for the elections was through the political campaigns of these various
presidential candidates. This was also the same avenue whereby these
presidential candidates sold their party manifestos and (also) made their
campaign promises to the electorate. The people then took out time to watch
their candidates exhibit their understanding of the economy, security and their
welfare in terms of programmes and policies.
1.4 TYPES OF CAMPAIGNS
There are different kinds
of campaigns, some of which are political campaign, advertising campaign, and
military campaign.
Political campaign is
vote-seeking activities: a series of events, for example rallies and speeches
that are intended to persuade voters to vote for a specific politician or party
(Encarta 2009). Also, Ayeni-Akeke, (2008:83) adds that political campaign is an
important exertion in presenting or marketing a candidate for an elective
office. In other words, it is an organized effort which seeks to influence the
decision making process within a specific group. The message of the campaign
contains the ideas that the candidate wants to share with the voters. The
message often consists of several talking points about policy. These points
summarize the main idea of campaign and are repeated frequently in order to
create a lasting impression with the voters. The objective of every campaign
speech is to convince the electorate that they have the blueprint for tackling
the numerous challenges facing the country. For example, in Nigeria issues like
power generation and distribution, job creation, the nation’s general economic
revival, industrial development, repositioning of the education sector, revival
of health sector delivery, security situation in the land and the fight against
corruption featured prominently as they indeed dominated the campaign speeches
of the presidential candidates. As such, language use in political campaigns
has certain characteristics which differentiate it from other varieties of
language use. For instance, certain words are repeated, the objective being to
condition the minds of the electorate. However, it is noted that some of the
features of language use are without timelines and specific strategies for
actualization.
Talking point is a
succinct statement designed to persuasively support one side taken on an issue.
Such statements can either be free standing or created as retorts to the
opposition’s talking points and are frequently used in public relations,
particularly in areas heavy in debate such as politics and marketing
(Wikipedia).
However, in many
elections, the opposition party will try to get candidate “off message” by
bringing up policy or personal questions that are not related to the talking
points. Most campaigns prefer to keep the message broad in order to attract the
most potential voters. Unfortunately, a message
that is too narrow can alienate voters or show the candidate down with
explaining details. For example in the 2008 American presidential election John
McCain originally used a message that focused on his patriotism and political
experience. “Country First”; later the message was charged to shift attention
to his role as “The Original Maverick” within the political establishment.
Barack Obama ran on a consistent, simple message of ‘change’ throughout his
campaign. In other words, if the message is created carefully, it will assure
the candidate victory at the polls.
In addition, in modern
politics, the most high profile political campaigns are focused on candidates
for head of state or head of government, often a President or Prime-Minister
(Wikipedia). This was the situation in Nigeria in the 2011 presidential
campaign.
Kessel, (1998:79) observes
those substandard differences that exist between nomination politics and
electoral politics. He says nomination campaigns are aimed at getting delegates
but electoral campaigns are aimed at winning votes and are party wide and
nationwide. This takes off fully after the acceptance speech, division is put
aside, and the party is transformed into a victory rally. He further explains
that the presidential candidate is joined by the vice presidential candidate,
and both are joined by their families. Other party leaders, those who have held
key positions and others who have sought the nominations themselves, make
appearances at the presidential campaigns to symbolize the party wide support
to be given the nominee.
Also important is that
campaign in politics has assumed a complex dimension in recent years due to the
major breakthrough in Information and Communication Technology (ICT). Unlike
the campaigns in the past, advances in media technology have streamlined the
process, thereby giving candidates more options to reach even larger groups of
constituents with very little physical effort.
This claim is further
supported by Oota, (2011:1) that in advanced democracies, particularly in the
United States of America, oration and conduct at debates and rallies are some
of the benchmarks used to gauge the popularity of all those seeking political
offices. Suffice it to say that packaging of campaigns in terms of slogans and
contacts are also the main key in advanced democracies and this window of
popularity and acceptability was well explored by the current president of the
USA, Barack Obama through his grassroots mobilization of the people. We can say
that to some extent the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party,
PDP in Nigeria, Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan employed a similar campaign
pattern, as in the neighbour to neighbour campaign advertisement and the
frequent sophisticated electronic campaign.
Advertising campaign is
another form of campaign which is similar to political campaign in terms of its
language use. It is a planned and organized series of actions intended to
achieve a specific goal, especially fighting for or against something or
raising people’s awareness of something. Wright (1983:8) remarks that
advertising is a powerful communication force and a vital marketing tool
helping to sell goods and services, image and ideas. Similarly, Roderick
(1980:4) defines advertising as “a message specified by its originator, carried
by a communication system intended to influence and/or inform an unknown
audience.
However, military campaign
tends to address a series of military or terrorist operations taking place in
one area over a period, intended to achieve a specific objective. It is related
to the political campaign in terms of military coup speeches and military heads
of state’s speeches as the purpose is political and having some elements of
political language (Abaya 2008:2).
Finally, there is a common
thought unit on the definitions of political, advertising, and military campaigns
that is geared towards achieving a specific goal. The study of the presidential
campaign speeches is concerned with the political campaign speech types, to
seek votes.In particular, the linguistic stylistic analysis of the speeches of
the presidential candidates of the two opposing parties, Goodluck Ebele
Jonathan of Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Gen. Muhammadu Buhari Rtd. of
Congress for Progressive Change (CPC), will be carried out.
1.5 STATEMENT OF THE
RESEARCH PROBLEM
Political campaign speeches are one of the
major avenues through which the contestants vying for the various political
positions in their parties and the government of the country win votes. The
speeches of these candidates are conveyed through the most effective tool of
communication which is language, to achieve their objectives. Apart from making
attempts to garner vote and to canvass for supports, political aspirants try to
make themselves understood by their listeners. Often times, misconceptions
arise because of the electorate’s level of education, their linguistic background,
and the complex nature of language; these phenomena at times result in the
aspirants loss of massive support, as the major tool the aspirants rely on is
language. In view of this, there is the need to critically examine the speeches
of the presidential aspirants in the 2011 election in Nigeria; since meanings
are not just in the lexical entities that make up a sentence but to a very
large extent, determined by the syntactic casing that houses an utterance and
the context of the expression. Furthermore, Leckie-Tarry (1995:5) observes that
understanding language must take into account not only the nature of the text,
but also the discursive processes by which text is produced and interpreted in
this regard, the speeches. Bearing this in mind, the study seeks to investigate
the structure/nature of the campaign speeches that generated the specific
semantic configuration that emerged and the contexts that enhanced this meaning
outcome which was directed at achieving specific goals (objectives) by these
politicians.
This study is therefore an
attempt to answer the following questions:
a.
How does the language use
of these presidential candidates reflect their idiosyncratic nature?
b.
What role does context
play in these presidential campaign speeches and how do the speeches vary in
different contexts?
c.
Which rhetorical and linguistic
devices are most prominent in these presidential campaign speeches?
d.
What common
linguistic/stylistic traits are prevalent in these speeches?
1.6 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF
THE STUDY
It is an indubitable fact
that campaign speech is an important tool employed by politicians to express
views and feelings to the public with the sole intention of reshaping and
redirecting the electorates’ opinions to agree with their manifesto. Hence,
campaign speeches are generally full of persuasion, manipulation, deception,
lies, hyperbole, and ambiguity which are conveyed through a deliberate choice
of words.
This study examines the
presidential campaign speeches of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) flag
bearer, Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan and the Congress for Progressive Change
(CPC) flag bearer, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (rtd) in the 2011 elections. It
critically examines these presidential speeches within the scope of linguistic
stylistics. Specifically, the research intends to achieve the following objectives:
a. To show that the
language use of these presidential candidates reflect their idiosyncratic
nature.
b. To project that context
plays a dominant role in presidential campaign speeches.
c. To critically explore
the rhetorical and linguistic devices that are prominent in these presidential
campaign speeches.
d. To determine the common
linguistic/stylistic features or traits that are prevalent in the speeches of
these candidates.
1.7 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE STUDY
Nigeria has witnessed one
civilian government after the other since independence and the campaign
speeches made by the various presidential candidates helped to determine who
ruled the country at each point in time. However, the electorate was not
cognizant of the linguistic stylistic significance of the campaign speeches.
Therefore, there is need for this study to broaden their understanding of the
varying linguistic stylistic features of the speeches. Its findings are of
benefit to students of language and those who want to take part in politics, to
re-awaken the consciousness of Nigerian politicians to the use of language and
suggest a better way of using language to carry people along. The study is
significant to the extent that though several researches have been carried out
in pragmatics, critical discourse analysis
and linguistic stylistic analysis of political speeches in such areas as
the language of politics, propaganda in politics, the language of political
campaigns in the print media, military coup speeches, advertisement and
religion, just to mention a few, hardly is there any of such research effort
specifically on linguistic stylistic analysis of Nigerian presidential campaign speeches of 2011 elections.
1.8 SCOPE AND DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY
This research does not
constitute a linguistic stylistic analysis of the campaign speeches of the 21
presidential candidates that contested the 2011 elections but, focuses on the
candidates from two major opposing parties namely: Dr. Goodluck Ebele Jonathan,
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and General Mohammed Buhari rtd; Congress for
Progressive Change (CPC). The choice of these parties is based on the fact that
these major parties (PDP, CPC,) have
captured the majority of the electorate in the country, though CPC is more of a
regional party, however, the PDP has a national outlook.
The study looks at the
2011 elections so as to make the research more current and reliable. The focus
of this work is the linguistic stylistic study of the campaign speeches. It is
difficult to study all the campaign speeches of the presidential candidates. As
a result, the study has been restricted
to some selected speeches in the north-west and north –central zones. A
total of eight (8) speeches for both candidates are examined in this research. Relevant
portions of the selected speeches are extracted and analysed from the
perspective of the adopted linguistic framework, which is the systemic
functional linguistic approach.
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT
WORK
PLEASE, print the following
instructions and information if you will like to order/buy our complete written
material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT
MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate
amount (#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1)
Your project topics
(2)
Email Address
(3)
Payment Name
(4)
Teller Number
We
will send your material(s) after we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account
Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account
Number: 0046579864
Bank:
GTBank.
OR
Account
Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account
Number: 2023350498
Bank:
UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
https://projectmaterialsng.blogspot.com.ng/
https://foreasyprojectmaterials.blogspot.com.ng/
https://mypostumes.blogspot.com.ng/
https://myeasymaterials.blogspot.com.ng/
https://eazyprojectsmaterial.blogspot.com.ng/
https://easzprojectmaterial.blogspot.com.ng/
Comments
Post a Comment