ATTENTION:
BEFORE YOU READ THE 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 2011
CHAPTER
ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.0
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
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
AFFILIATE LINKS:
myeasyproject.com.ng
easyprojectmaterials.com
easyprojectmaterials.net.ng
easyprojectsmaterials.net.ng
easyprojectsmaterial.net.ng
easyprojectmaterial.net.ng
projectmaterials.com.ng
googleprojectsng.blogspot.com
myprojectsng.blogspot.com.ng
https://projectmaterialsng.blogspot.com.ng/
Comments
Post a Comment