بررسی تطبیقی فنّ بیان سیاسی در سخنرانی رؤسای جمهور ایران و آمریکا

زبان سیاسی، زبان پیچیده و مملو از راهبردهای گوناگون در جهت متقاعد کردن آرای عمومی است. از جملۀ عمده‌ترین راهبردهای زبانشناسی که در زبان سیاسی مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار می‌گیرد، بحث فن‌ّبیان سیاسی است. لذا هدف اصلی پژوهش حاضر تحلیل مقوله فن‌ّبیان در بستر گفتمان سیاسی دو جامعۀ زبانی متفاوت از دیدگاه برد (2000) است. مسئلۀ اصلی پژوهش، تبیین شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌های راهبردهای فن‌ّبیان سیاسی به کار رفته توسط دو رئیس‌جمهور ایران و آمریکا در جهت تلاش برای کسب قدرت، اقناع سازی و جلب موافقت مخاطبانشان است. بدین منظور داده‌ها، به شیوۀ کتابخانه‌ای گردآوری و به روش تحلیلی مورد بررسی قرار داده‌ایم تا به این پرسش‌ها پاسخ دهیم که هر دو رئیس‌جمهور در جهت تلاش برای جلب موافقت شنوندگان و اقناع آنان چگونه از زبان استفاده می‌کنند؟ شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌های فن‌ّبیانی دو رئیس‌جمهور چگونه است؟ نتایج پژوهش حاکی از آن است هر دو رئیس‌جمهور از راهبردهای جفت متقابل، تکرار و لیست سه‌گانه، نقش‌های گوناگون ضمایر، نمود افعال و نکته‌گزینی بهره می‌برند. عمده‌ترین راهبردی که روحانی به کار می‌برد کاربرد ضمایر به طرق مختلف و رایج‌ترین راهبرد ترامپ به کارگیری تکرار است. استفاده و پرهیز از قیاس نیز دیگر جنبۀ افتراق در کلام سخنرانان یادشده است. به طور کلی پژوهش حاضر گویا و مبیّن این حقیقت است که از رهگذر بررسی ابزارهای فن‌ّبیان برد (2000) می‌توان به راهکارهای زبانی متفاوت سیاستمداران و مشخصاً بالاترین مقامات اجرایی جهت اقناع مخاطب، جذاب تر کردن سخنرانی و ارائۀ چهره‌ای مثبت‌تر و مردمی‌تر پی برد.

A Comparative Study of Political Rhetoric in the Speech of Presidents of Iran and USA

Political language is a complex language filled with various strategies to persuade public opinion. One of the major strategies of linguistics to be analyzed in political discourse is the political rhetoric. Therefore, the main purpose of the present study is to analyze the rhetorical notion in the context of political discourse of two different speech communities from the perspective of Beard rsquo;s (2000). The main issue in this research is to explain the similarities and differences of the rhetorical strategies of politics used by the two Presidents of Iran and the USA in an attempt to gain power, persuasion and to reach their audiencechr('39')s consent. To this end, we have collected the data in a library process and analyzed them analytically to answer these questions that how do both presidents use language trying to get their listenerschr('39') consent and persuading them? What are the rhetorical similarities and differences between the two presidents? The results show that both presidents use contrastive pairs, repetition and threepart lists, utilizing pronouns, verb voices, and soundbites strategies. Rouhani rsquo;s main strategy is the utilizing pronouns in different ways and Trumpchr('39')s most common strategy is the use of repetition. The use and avoidance of analogy is another aspect of difference between speeches of mentioned speakers. Overall, the present study illustrates the fact that through the study of Beardchr('39')s strategies (2000) one can easily discern politicianschr('39') different linguistic strategies, in particular top executives to persuade audiences, make speech more and present more positive and popular face.1. IntroductionUtilizing appropriate linguistic strategies is critical for politicians. Gaining the support of the masses, legitimizing political approaches, or succeeding in public debates and negotiations, largly depends on the kind of language a politician uses. Linguistic strategies in political language are one of the most important tools to achieve these goals. One of the major linguistic strategies that is analyzed in political discourse is the rhetoric. Beard (2000) believes that the rhetoric is the art of persuasion, and the rhetorical strategies in the political language can work in a variety of ways, both for persuasion or cunning. Although the rhetoric is a common feature of politicians rsquo; communication and speech, it can have similarities and differences depending on the cultural and political characteristics of each country. The importance of political rhetoric led us to select two of the highest political officials in Iran and the United States (President Rouhani and President Trump) to examine the rhetoric of each of them that can be a symbol of the political discourse of the two countries. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to reveal some of the strategies of rhetoric in the political language of the two presidents from Beard rsquo;s perspective.Beard (2000) considers tools such as analogy, contrastive pairs, repetition and Threepart lists, pronouns, voice and soundbites as criteria for examining rhetorics in political discourse. His view of political discourse is one of the most comprehensive and specialized views in the field of politics, which has been the basis of data analysis in this research to answer these questions: how did both presidents, as the best example of political leaders, use language to try to reach their audience rsquo;s consent? What are the similarities and differences between the two presidents rsquo; rhetoric? 2. MethodologyThe data of this study include the speeches of Mr. Hassan Rouhani, the winner of the 2017 presidential election in Iran, and Mr. Donald Trump, US presidential election rsquo;s winner in 2016. A total of 6 speeches for each president are collected (3 campaign speeches and 3 postvictory speeches), about 6 hours and 30 minuts for each of them. This data has been collected in a library manner with the help of Internet sites such as the official website of President, Aparat, Youtube and Fact Base. Then the linguistic strategies of political rhetoric are identified and analyzed analytically. 3. Results and ConclusionIn the present study, with the help of some of the most important political rhetoric strategies of Beard (2000), we examined the rhetorical tools used in political discourse. Regarding the analogy strategy, we saw that Rouhani, unlike Trump, uses this tool, and the analogies used are often based on citing religious events such as Ashura Uprising. Both presidents have used the tools of contrastive pairs in a similar way for emphasizing and increasing audience rsquo;s attention to words. The other strategy under consideration, repetition, has been used more by Trump, so much so that this strategy can be considered his main strategy. By using repetition and threepart lists, both presidents have tried to maintain the coherence of their speeches, to emphasize the key points without tiring the audience and to arouse their feelings. Both presidents have used a variety of pronoun roles in a variety of ways. They use pronoun ldquo;I rdquo; for different purposes. They both use pronoun ldquo;we rdquo; to talk about what has been done in their government or to introduce themselves as a member of the nation. Rouhani sometimes uses ldquo;we rdquo; to refer to others and criticize their action. This usage is not seen in Trump rsquo;s speeches. Both use pronoun ldquo;they rdquo; to create us and them division for criticizing their opponents and often their predecessors. Rouhani uses indefinite pronouns to name his opponents, a tool that Trump does not use in his speeches. Both presidents employ the passive voice in their speeches. In terms of soundbites, we see that both consciously or unconsciously use phrases that have the potential to become the headlines of newspapers and news agencies.The findings show that both presidents use Beard rsquo;s rhetorical tools, and the similarities between the strategies in their speeches outweigh the differences. Numerous similarities show that the languge of politics, regardless of any particular language and culture, is a common tool among all politicians, and this can be a confirmation for the existence of global strategies and the effectiveness of Beard rsquo; rhetorical strategies.