Bush, Obama: (in)formality as persuasion in political discourse

This paper, framed under the scope of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), explains social processes by analyzing discourse practices. It proposes (para) linguistic variables employed in the creation of (in) formality in discourse in relation to two Aristotelian persuasive modes: Ethos and Pathos (Kennedy 1991). These modes of persuasion reveal different ways to convey a political message in the current U.S. political scene. This paper compares the stylistic differences in speeches given by George W. Bush and Barack Obama to justify escalating troops in the conflicts of Iraq (2007) and Afghanistan (2009), respectively. I propose (para) linguistic indicators of formality associated with Aristotelian modes at the level of linguistic choices ("lexical variables" [Schilling-Estes 2004] and "marked register usages" [Myers-Scotton 2001]), textual organization (structure and predictability), non-verbal communication (i.e. laughter; Jefferson, Sacks & Schegloff 1987), and intertextuality (Blackledge 2005; Fairclough 1992, 2003) by means of new voices (Bakhtin 1981) into the here-and-now moment of discourse.