Trump’s and Clinton’s Style and Rhetoric during the 2016 Presidential Election
- 14 July 2017
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in Journal of Quantitative Linguistics
- Vol. 25 (2), 168-189
- https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2017.1349358
Abstract
The present paper examines the style and rhetoric of the two main candidates (Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump) during the 2016 presidential election. Based on interviews and TV debates, the most frequent lemmas indicate an emphasis on the pronoun I for both candidates while in speeches, the pronoun we appears more frequently. According to overall stylistic indicators, Trump adopts a simple and direct communication style, preferring short sentences, avoiding complex formulations and employing a reduced vocabulary. In the oral form, Trump frequently uses verb phrases (verbs and adverbs) and pronouns while Clinton is more descriptive (more nouns and prepositions). As expected, the speeches present differences from the oral form. For Trump, the difference is clearly larger, distinctively depicting two communication styles (oral and written). The specific terms or sentences associated with each candidate reveal their characteristic topics and style, such as the repetition of expressions and negativity for Trump. Based on predefined word lists, this study indicates that Clinton’s rhetoric employs more cognitive words, while negative emotions and exclusive terms occur more frequently in Trump’s verbiage.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Type-token models: a comparative studyJournal of Quantitative Linguistics, 2014
- Language and gender in Congressional speechLiterary and Linguistic Computing, 2013
- Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political TextsPolitical Analysis, 2013
- Affective News: The Automated Coding of Sentiment in Political TextsPolitical Communication, 2012
- Cutting the Gordian Knot: The Moving-Average Type–Token Ratio (MATTR)Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 2010
- The Psychological Meaning of Words: LIWC and Computerized Text Analysis MethodsJournal of Language and Social Psychology, 2009
- Classifying Party Affiliation from Political SpeechJournal of Information Technology & Politics, 2008
- Winning words: Individual differences in linguistic style among U.S. presidential and vice presidential candidatesJournal of Research in Personality, 2007
- Experiments on authorship attribution by intertextual distance in english*Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 2007
- Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts Using Words as DataAmerican Political Science Review, 2003