Characteristics of Australian Political Language Rhetoric.docx

Characteristics of Australian Political Language Rhetoric.docx

《Characteristics of Australian Political Language Rhetoric.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Characteristics of Australian Political Language Rhetoric.docx（21页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

CharacteristicsofAustralianPoliticalLanguageRhetoric

CharacteristicsofAustralianPoliticalLanguageRhetoric:

Tacticsofgainingpublicsupportandshirkingresponsibility

TongtaoZheng

SchoolofAsianLanguagesandStudies

UniversityofTasmania

GPOBox252-91,Hobart,TAS7001,AUSTRALIA

E-mail:

Tongtao.Zheng@utas.edu.au

Abstract

ThearticleexploreshowlanguagecanbeenusedasaresourceofculturalvalueandcreativepowerinAustralianEnglish.ThepaperrevealshowAustralianpoliticiansusepoliticallanguagerhetoricasapowerfultoolingainingpoliticaladvantages.Severalsegmentsofso-called"publicdiscourse"havebeenanalysed,buttheauthormainlyfocusesontwoareasofspeech:

howpoliticiansusetheirlanguageskillsingainingpublicsupport,andhowtheyshirkresponsibility.Specialdiscoursalfeaturesofthesespeecheshavebeencompiledandcategorised.Thespeechesarestudiedfromthevariousanglesofdiscourseanalysisandpoliticalrhetorictechniques.

keywords:

publicdiscourse,Australianpoliticaldiscourse,discoursalfeatures,politicalrhetorictechniques,targetingstrategy,enforcementstrategy,avoidancestrategy.

Introduction

Languageisaweaponandapowerfultoolinwinningpublicsupport,especiallyduringthecurrentinformationrevolutionperiod.Rhetoriccanbeseenasaculturaltradition,thelinguisticself-consciousness,theskillsandmethodologiesbroughtintoplayinshapingtheconvictionsofparticularaudiences–itisalsoapowerfulweaponinthestruggleofcommunityagainstcommunity,worldviewagainstworldview.Rhetorictherebycomestobeviewedasthetoolofparticularinterests,andthereforeasalinguisticmeansforimprovingapolitician’slife.

Politicaldiscourseisamixedproductofpersonaldevelopmentandtherelevantsocialenvironmentinwhichanindividualgrows.Anyindividualpoliticaldiscourseistheresultofpersonaldevelopmentincertainsocialsettings.Personaldevelopmentisaffectedbysuchfactorsastheimpactaculturalenvironmenthasupontheprocessinwhichtheindividualdevelopshis/herpersonality,theindividual’seducationalexperiences,parentalinfluence,socialcircles,politicalparty,economicstatusetc.Nevertheless,these"traces"canbefoundintheindividual’sspeechpatternsmanyyearslater,evenwhenthesameindividualbecomesadominantpublicfigurewhohastheobligationof"suppressing"orhidingthese"traces"forthesakeofthesurvivalofhis/herpoliticalparty.Thusitisstillpossibleforonetofindoutwhatconstitutestheunderlyinginfluencesofthespeechpatternsofsuchpublicfigures.Discourseanalysishaslargevolumesofrecordstotestifytothis.AustralianEnglishisnoexceptioninthisregard.

DataandBackgroundInformation

Threespeecheswereselectedforthisstudy.OnespeechistakenfromthePrimeMinister,JohnHoward,onespeechfromtheOppositionLeader,KimBeazley,andthethirdspeechisfromtheOneNationPartyleader,PaulineHanson.ThespeechgivenbyPrimeMinisterJohnHowardwasdeliveredinSydneyduringhisofficiallaunchforthe1998federalelectiononSeptember20,1998.ThespeechmadebyOppositionLeaderKimBeazleywasgivenduringtheLaborParty’smainpolicylaunchonSeptember23,1998inBrisbane.ThethirdspeechisMsPaulineHanson’smaidenspeechwhichwaspresentedbytheleaderofOneNationintheAustralianParliamentHousein1997,inthecapitalcityofCanberra.Thesespeechesweretranscribedbynewspapers.Theauthorrecordedthesespeeches,andthencomparedthemwiththenewspapertranscriptionstoverifytheirauthenticity.

Thereasonsforselectingthesepoliticalspeechesareverysimple.Intermsofmeetingelectoralexpectations,thethreepartiessharebothanumberofcommonanduniquefeatures.Forexample,thougheachpartyhasitsowntargetaudience,acertaindegreeofoverlappingalsoexists.Also,thethreespeakerscanbeseenastypicalrepresentativesofthreedifferentsocialgroupsofpeopleinAustralia.DuringtheFederalelectioncampaign,eachspeakerusedhis/herdifferentstrategiesandrhetorictechniquestoappealtothepublic.Althoughtheirspeechpatternsunderwentnumerousrevisions,theiroriginalessenceremainedunchanged.Byanalysingthesedifferentspeeches,itispossibletoseehowAustralianpoliticiansuserhetorictechniquesingainingpublicsupport,andinavoidingresponsibility.

TheCoalitiongovernmentcomprisesoftwoparties–theLiberalandNationalparties.ThemajorityofLiberalpartysupporterscomeprimarilyfromthemiddleandupper-middleclassessuchasbusinessmenandbankers.NationalPartysupportiscentredmainlyinruralareas.Thefederalcoalitionregainedpowerinthe1998electionwiththesupportof48percentofthenationalpopulation.

TheAustralianLaborPartyhasitsoriginsinthetradeunionmovement.Todayalargenumberofpartymemberscanbefoundamongsttradeunionactivistsandsupporters.Itsbasicsupportersarethereforemiddleandlower-middleincomevoterssuchaspublicservantsandworkers.TheMedicaresystem,socialsecuritysystemandindustrialrelations’regulations（whichprotectworker'srights）,areestablishedorsupportedbytheLaborParty.Thispartyhaslosttheprevioustwonationalelections,includingthe1998federalelection.Itregainedmorethantenseatsinthiselection,butstilldidnothaveenoughnumberstoformagovernment.Morethen51%ofvoterssupportedthispartyintheelection.

TheOneNationPartyformedin1997,withPaulineHansonasitsleader.Inspiteofthefactthatitwasanewparty,OneNationinitiallyreceivedstrongnationwidesupport.ItposedathreattoboththeLiberal,NationalandLaborpartiesduringthe1998electionperiod.Itdidnothavethecapacitytolaunchaneffectivepoliticalplatform,anditsdoctrinesweremainlybasedonMsHanson’smaidenspeech.OneNation’ssupporterscouldbefoundamongstawidespreadcrosssectionofthecommunity.

Thefollowingsectionswilldemonstratehowthethreespeakersusetwomainstrategiesintheirspeeches–thatis,targetingstrategyandavoidancestrategy–witheachstrategycomprisedofanumberofvarioustechniquesanddevices.

TargetingStrategy

Thethreespeechesallbeginbydrawinguponsymbolsofnationalidentity.Inallthreecases,nationalidentityservesasameansbywhichtotargetthewidestpossiblesectionofsupporters.Australianpoliticalrhetoricisseenasbeingincreasinglypersonalisticandindividuallyoriented.Thisphenomenonisbestdemonstratedinthe1996AustralianfederalelectioninwhichtheLaborPartylostgovernment.Whenpoliticaldiscoursebecomesdissociatedfromnationalidentityandtargetgroups,thereisthedangerthatthesymbolsofnationalidentity,whicharebereftofanysubstance,becomemeaningless.ThisiswhythethreeAustralianpoliticiansselectedforthisstudyallpayparticularattentiontotheissueofnationalidentity,andaddressitinthebeginningoftheirrespectivespeeches.

TheInclusivetechnique

Thepoliticiandirectshisappealtogroupsheldtogetheralreadybycommonties,tiesofnationality,religion,race,sex,vocation.ThuspropagandistscampaigningfororagainstaprogramwillappealtousasCatholics,Protestants,orJews...asfarmersorasschoolteachers;ashousewivesorasminers.Withtheaidofalltheotherpropagandadevices,alloftheartificesofflatteryareusedtoharnessthefearsandhatreds,prejudicesandbiases,convictionsandidealscommontoagroup.ThusisemotionmadetopushandpullusasmembersofagroupontoaBandWagon（PropagandaAnalysis）.1）

Theabovedescriptionofthepoliticianillustratesperfectlythetechniqueemployedbythethreepoliticiansduringthe1998federalelection.Atargetingstrategydirectedtowardsparticularsectionsofthecommunitywasadoptedbyallparties.Politiciansattempttoconvincetheiraudiencethatboththemselvesandtheirideasare"ofthepeople."Themainfunctionofthisinclusiveor"plain-folks"techniqueistoassimilatethespeakerhimself/herselfintoagrouporgroups,andtothenwinthesupportofthemembersofthesegroups.Fromthethreespeecheswecanseethattherespectivepartyleadersallusedthistechniqueintheprocessofmergingthemselvesintotheirtargetgroups.Theplain-folkstechniqueisalsousedinothercountriessuchasAmerica.ThoughrecentAmericanpresidentshavebeenmenofgreatpersonalwealth,theyhavestillgonetogreatlengthstopresentthemselvesasordinarycitizenstothevotingpublic.WecanwitnessthisphenomenononourTVsallthetime:

BillClintoneatsatMcDonald’sandreadstrashyspynovels.GeorgeBushhatedbroccoliandlovedtofish.RonaldReaganwasoftenphotographedchoppingwood,whileJimmyCarterpresentedhimselfasahumblepeanutfarmerfromGeorgia.IntheAustraliancontext,however,leaderssuchasJohn,KimandPaulinechoosetonotonlypresentthemselvesas"humblefarmers"and"woodchoppers"totheviewingpublic,butalsouseinclusivetechniquestopretendthattheyareordinaryAustralians.

OnesignificantdifferencethatcanbefoundbetweenAmericanandAustralianpoliticiansisthatAustralianpoliticiansusemoredelicatetechniquesforassimilatingthemselvesintothetargetedcommunalgroup.Theyelevatethegroup（s）history,traditionsandcontributionstothecreationofthenation.Thesetacticshelppoliticiansto"disarm"suchgroups,andtoultimatelyswaytheminfavourofsupportforthepolitician’spolicies.Forinstance,inhisspeechBeazleypraisesallethnicgroupsfortheirrolesinthefoundingofAustralia:

Nearly100yearsago,ourforbearerscreatedanewnationonthiscontinent-alandtowhichpeoplefr