The biblical motive of the "Promised Land" in inaugural addresses of American presidents

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Kyiv National Linguistic University

The biblical motive of the “Promised Land” in inaugural addresses of American presidents

Mudrynych S.Yu., Shutova M.О.

The article deals with the biblical motive of the “Promised Land'” in the inaugural addresses of the U.S. presidents. The article focuses on the issue from a viewpoint of semantics, pragmatics, syntax. The idea of “God's chosen the American nation and the country” is one of the main motives in inaugural addresses of the U.S. presidents. Seven inaugural speeches of American presidents were taken into consideration to prove this idea. The meaning of chosen words with the biblical motive of the “Promised Land” have been compared. Inaugural addresses delivered by William J. Clinton, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, Richard Milhous Nixon, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Barack Obama, Donald Trump are under consideration.

Key words:political language, inaugural address, motive of the “PromisedLand'”, sema “a land ofprosperity”.

БІБЛІЙНИЙ МОТИВ «ЗЕМЛІ ОБІТОВАНОЇ» В ІНАВГУРАЦІЙНИХ ПРОМОВАХ АМЕРИКАНСЬКИХ ПРЕЗИДЕНТІВ

У статті розглянуто біблійний мотив «Землі обітованої» в інавгураційних зверненнях президентів США. Проблему висвітлено з погляду семантики, прагматики, синтаксису. Ідея «обраного Богом американського народу і країни» є одним із головних мотивів в інавгураційних зверненнях президентів США. Проаналізовано сім інавгураційних виступів американських президентів та порівняно значення вибраних слів із біблійним мотивом «Землі обітованої». Увагу зосереджено на інавгураційних зверненнях Вільяма Дж. Клінтона, Дуайта Д. Ейзенхауера, Рональда Рейгана, Річарда М. Ніксона, Ліндона Б. Джонсона, Барака Обами, Дональда Трампа.

Ключові слова: політична мова, інавгураційна промова, мотив «Землі обітованої», сема «країна процвітання».

БИБЛЕЙСКИЙ МОТИВ «ЗЕМЛИ ОБЕТОВАННОЙ» В ИНАУГУРАЦИОННЫХ РЕЧАХ АМЕРИКАНСКИХ ПРЕЗИДЕНТОВ

В статье рассмотрен библейский мотив «Земли обетованной» в инаугурационных обращениях президентов США. Проблема освещена с точки зрения семантики, прагматики, синтаксиса. Идея «избранного Богом американского народа и страны» является одним из главных мотивов в инаугурационных обращениях президентов США. Проанализированы семь инаугурационных выступлений американских президентов и сравнены значения выбранных слов с библейским мотивом «Земли обетованной». Внимание сосредоточено на инаугурационных обращениях Уильяма Дж. Клинтона, Дуайта Д. Эйзенхауэра, Рональда Рейгана, Ричарда М. Никсона, Линдона Б. Джонсона, Барака Обамы, Дональда Трампа.

Ключевые слова: политическая речь, инаугурационное обращение, мотив «Земли обетованной», сема «страна процветания».

Introduction

Inaugural addresses of American presidents are the part of the policy of every American leader. Political speaking is a social and cultural phenomenon, representing the American way of thinking and speaking. They have deep traditions, begun by the “Founding fathers” of America, and their specific communicative aim, which briefly comes down to creating the right preconditions for implementing the White House policy. In simplified form, they have a significant function - to contribute to the formation of an appropriate public opinion about the president's intentions to make a certain political decision. The Presidents do not only meet the demands of the people but also represent their policy as a continuation of the traditional course sanctified by the Founding Fathers of the country. Inaugural addresses may increase positive understanding of the incoming president. The current economic situation, including all economic policies and problems, is discussed in speech, as an important point, by presidents. The president is viewed positively when the economy is prosperous.

biblical promised land inaugural

Literature Review

Inaugural addresses of American presidents are often used in linguistic research, especially in political discourse analysis [6; 8; 11]. Several analyses have dealt with this issue [5; 7; 9; 10].

In this study, we analyze the biblical motive of the “Promised Land” and in the inaugural addresses of the U.S. presidents. While most of linguistic analysis deals with these data in terms of qualitative methods or content analysis, we focus on the issue from a viewpoint of semantics, pragmatics, and syntax. The pragmatic analysis of political texts leads to establishing connections between its pragmatics and semantics, and the syntactic level cannot be studied in isolation from semantic and pragmatic levels [5].

The aim of this article is to study the ways and means of conveying the idea of biblical motive in the inaugural addresses of the U.S. Presidents, the biblical aspects which could have an impact on the addresses of American presidents, specifically, ideology and historical development. It is important to emphasize that this study is but a first insight into the issue and our approach is rather heuristic. The scientific novelty of this work is in the attempt of special systematic investigation of political language. The object of our investigation are the texts of seven inaugural addresses delivered by William J. Clinton, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Ronald Reagan, Richard Milhous Nixon, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Barack Obama, Donald Trump.

Thus, we have seven speeches under consideration.

Research Methods

In his speech, the president must show that he is able to change life of the country, generate new ideas and take new actions. The investigation of this scientific problem caused the special approach to the analysis of lexical units with biblical motive, firstly, to find out the meaning of lexical units which have sema “a land of prosperity”; secondly, found out the means of expressions and stylistic units which presidents used to express the idea of “national unity”. The political language did not study in this direction. To prove it, we, using comparative method, compare the meaning of choosing words with the biblical motive of the “Promised Land”. We use the method of semantic analysis to find out the common semantic component of the words that have the common sema “a land of prosperity”. We use quotative method to add up the quantity of words that have the common sema “a land of prosperity”. Repetition can be found in every speech. Repeating words with the sema “a land of prosperity” the presidents make people believe in the ability of the leaders to unite the nation, take new actions and change the situation.

For study of the biblical motive of the “Promised Land” in inaugural address of the U.S. Presidents is very important componential analysis of words used by speakers to describe their future policy, vision of the situation in the country and abroad. On the basis of this analysis we may single out a group of words that have the common sema “a land of prosperity”. Thus we shall be provided with objective data to prove statements that the biblical motive of the “Promised Land” play important role in inaugural speeches of American presidents and that ability to introduce the idea of national unity into life of the country is an essential component of positive image of the President.

Analysis of political speech

Stylistics as division of general language, and linguistic stylistics have a big progress in the developing of the speech and speech's meanings lately. Rhetoric has a big influence in this science, it is an eloquence art that you must clever, contently and enjoyable built your utterance and you must convince audience of your thoughts. Stylistics is that part of science where different levels can separate with each other. All of stylistic meanings can divide in three groups: phonetic, lexical and syntaxes [1].

Stylistics studies the specific of linguistic subsystems which are named functional styles and characterized originality of dictionary, phraseology and syntax and from other side are expressive, emotional and estimating qualities of different language means. A stylistic function is as expressive co-operation of language means in a text, which provides the transmission of expressive, emotional information [1]. When industries of linguistics study all of the system of language means of certain level on the whole stylistic examines their expressive qualities, their functionality at the transmission of idea and necessarily their role in ideological influence on an audience.

In an order to present a stylistic function from the aesthetically beautiful point of view it is needed to remember that style is not aggregate of facilities, but reflection of surrounding reality, vivid vision of the world and vivid thought, inseparable from an emotional estimation. The first feature of stylistic function is an accumulation which consists in the same reason, the same mood; senses are passed, if they matter very much on the whole, parallel by a few facilities. By such method public appearance comes into the desired notice of listeners [4].

Examining facilities of linguistic facts, it is needed to pay a regard to the use of casual stylistic connotations that attributing of vocabulary is to that or other style. Casual stylistic connotations or stylistic decoration arises up in those words which have the sphere of the use stove for them, sphere which is associated with them and imposes the imprint on them. A stylistic decoration belongs to the language and stylistic function to the text. It is two different things which in speech have a scalene value. It is important to dissociate a stylistic function from stylistic facilities. Stylistic tropes belong before stylistic receptions. Name words or combinations of words, used in portable or vivid sense tropes: metaphors, metonymies, synecdoche. Stylistic facilities are also syntactic and stylistic figures which increase emotionality and expressiveness of utterance due to the unusual syntactic mode: different types of repetitions, inversion, parallelism, gradation and ellipsis. All these stylistic facilities and also special group of phonetic stylistic facilities: alliteration, assonance and other facilities of sound organization of language.

To make a syntactic analysis of political speech, it's necessary to adopt a semiotic approach, i.e. to analyze grammatical relations between linguistic units from the point of view of semantics, syntax. Relations between the three aspects become clear if syntactic organization of utterances is viewed as determined by the speaker's intentions, because a syntactic form influences the meaning of the utterance and corresponds to the aims of communication. The pragmatic analysis of political texts leads to establishing connections between its pragmatics and semantics, and the syntactic level cannot be studied in isolation from semantic and pragmatic levels [2]. The syntactic analysis of political texts aims at establishing rules of international usage of syntactic units and their relations to communicators (the speaker and the addressee, i.e. at revealing pragmatic content of syntactic structures [7]. The pragmatic meaning of syntactic units and their combinations link language signs to the sphere approach to syntax shifts focus of linguistic research from the formal grammatical structure of the utterance to the sphere of modality in language, which makes it necessary to take into account aims and intentions of the speaker [3].

This makes modern syntactic closely connected with the analysis of expressive means and stylistic devices on the syntactic level, i.e. with stylistic syntax.

Parsing of the biblical motive of the “Promised Land” in American Presidential Inaugural Addresses. For his second inaugural address, William J. Clinton changed biblical metaphor promised land into a land of promise. It is an old tradition to call America a promised land that started in early days of America's history when first European settlers came to this distant continent. They were Protestants who “clung to the tales of the Jews in the Old Testament, believing that they, like the Jews, were persecuted for their faith, that they knew the one true God, and that they were the chosen elect who would establish the New Jerusalem - a heaven on Earth. The Puritans were aware of the parallels between the ancient Jews of the Old Testament and themselves... like Moses, Puritan leaders felt they were rescuing their people from spiritual corruption in England... and fashioning new laws and hew forms of government after God's wishes”. Using the metaphor the land of new promise the president shows that promised land (America) is filled with new meanings, with new opportunities. America of future is called by the president a land of new promise: Guided by the ancient vision of a promised land, let us set our sights upon a land of new promise. The promise we sought in a new land we will find again in a land of new _ promise. Our land of new promise will be a nation that meets its obligations...

And in this land of new promise, we - will have reformed our politics....with the American promise of a more perfect union a reality for all her people... Yes, let us build our bridge. A bridge wide enough and strong enough for every American to cross it over to a blessed land of new _ promise.

And here the image of a bridge is introduced by the speaker: Let us build our bridge. A bridge wide enough and strong enough for every American to cross over to a blessed land of new promise.

Combination of two images makes the idea of transition of the nation into a new stage more. Five times the metaphor the land of new promise is repeated during the speech.

The idea of “God's chosen the American nation and the country” is one of the main motives in inaugural addresses of the U.S. presidents. In his second inaugural address Dwight D. Eisenhower called America a land of plenty.

We live in a land of plenty, but rarely has this earth known such peril as today. In our nation work and wealth abound. Our population grows. Commerce crowds our rivers and rails, our skies, harbors, and highways. Our soil is fertile, our agriculture productive.

In their inaugural speeches U.S. presidents present America as prosperous country, by that cause the national pride of the country and national unity. In his first inaugural address Ronald Reagan used the method of contrast to make semantic and stylistic effect of the utterance stronger, opposing two notions, attract attention of the audience to fertility of the country.

If we look to the answer as to why, for so many years, we achieved so much, prospered as no other people on Earth, it was because here, in this land, we unleashed the energy and individual genius of man to a greater extent than has ever been done before. Freedom and the dignity of the individual have been more available and assured here than in any other place on Earth.

Repetition as a means of propaganda plays a very important role in inaugural address of the U.S. presidents. Repetition is the major instrument of propaganda because ideas repeated many times separate from the speaker, then become elements of collective belief. Repetition is in every speech.

In his second inaugural address Richard Milhous Nixon repeated lexical construction let us be proud three times to make people feel pride for living in such chosen country, believe in the in the ability of the president to lead the nation to a better life.

Let us be pproud that our system has produced and provided more freedom and more abundance, more widely shared, than any other system in the history...

Let us be proud that in each of the four wars in which we have been engaged in this century, including the one we are now bringing to an end...

Let us be proud that by our bold, new initiatives, and by our steadfastness for peace with honor, we have made a break-through toward creating in the world...

Lyndon Baines Johnson in his inaugural address spoke about the opportunities which opened in wellbeing country and called America a land of great wealth, a land rich in harvest, a land of healing miracles, a great land of learning and scholars. He pointed out that great prospects would open for those who would work diligently for the good of their country by their labor multiplying the welfare of the nation. People could not starve and suffer from wars, children could not be unhappy in the Promised Land.

In a land of great wealth, families must not live in hopeless poverty. In a land rich in harvest, children just must not go hungry. In a land of healing miracles, neighbors must not suffer and die unattended. In a great land of learning and scholars, young people must be taught to read and write.

He was sure that America would be a place where each man could be proud to be himself: stretching his talents, rejoicing in his work, important in the life of his neighbors and his nation.

To understand the American system of values, consider the concept of the American Dream as a reflection of the life ideals of US citizens. Dreamt by James Truslow Adams in 1931, “life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement”. All men are equal, all men have equal rights to life and liberty. So the American Dream, as the set of democratic ideals, rights, and equality, expects the opportunity for prosperity and success. In his speech Lyndon Baines Johnson used metaphors and compared America with the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge, the star that is not reached and the harvest sleeping in the unplowed ground. These metaphors express the biblical motive of the “Promised Land”. They mean that America is the land of extensive opportunities, where everybody can be free.

For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest sleeping in the unplowed ground.

This combination of images produces a vivid picture of prosperous, free and successful country. The picture can be seen in the following sentences conveys the ideas of “real” well-off.

Barack Obama in his first inaugural address compered America with American nation. To compare these two concepts, he attracted attention to the potency of the country, its greatness and freedom. Obama entered his presidency at a time when the United States was in a deep economic recession. This state of recession made his inaugural addresses ever more important and anticipated. The president had to address the audiences and provide a light of hope in a time where there was very little. Obama gave a stirring inaugural addresses that provided a sense of hope during a time when the country needed it most.

They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction. We remain the most prosperous, ppowerful nation on Earth. Obama gave stirring inaugural addresses that provided a sense of hope during a time when the country needed it most.

In his second inaugural address Barack Obama named America a land of opportunity, a country where everybody can reach advancement.

Our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see America as a land of opportunity; until bright young students and engineers are enlisted in our workforce rather than expelled from our country.

Donald Trump in his inaugural address, referring to the words of the Bible, spoke of the unity of the nation. The Bible tells us: how good and pleasant it is when God's people live together in unity. He named America totally unstoppable country when it is united.

When America is united, America is totally unstoppable. We are protected... And most importantly, we will be protected by God.

Speaking that American nation is under the protection of God, the newly elected president gave people faith in a bright future. Calling America totally unstoppable, the president emphasized the possibilities for further development of the country in all fields of activity, the prosperity of the nation, which of course ultimately creates the expressive image of the new president.

Conclusions

In the present research paper, we study of the biblical motive of the “Promised Land” in inaugural address of the U.S. Presidents and means of its conveying. We identified eleven lexical units, four opposing notions, three repetitions, four metaphors with a common semantic component.

We pick out lexical units that have the common sema “a land ofprosperity”: a land of new promise, a blessed land of new promise, a land of plenty, this land, a land of great wealth, a land rich in harvest, a land of healing miracles, a great land of learning, a place where each man could be proud to be himself, a land of opportunity, totally unstoppable; opposing two notions: prospered as no other people on Earth; more available and assured here than in any other place on Earth; America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction; repetitions: let us be proud (three times); metaphors: the uncrossed desert, the unclimbed ridge, the star that is not reached, the harvest sleeping in the unplowed ground.

We can prove statements that the biblical motive of the “PromisedLand” plays important role in inaugural speeches of American. This ability to introduce prosperous country is an essential component ofpositive image of the president. American political speaking is a social product, which represents the American way of thinking and understanding. Inaugural speech is a unique chance for every president to address the nation, share his vision of the situation in America and in the world, and to acquaint people with his future policy. It is assumed that the study of inaugural speeches from the point of view of stylistic analysis may contribute to an understanding of how presidents choose strategies to achieve their goals. The style of the speeches is rather influenced by economic, political and social situation which exists in the country and of course by personality of each president. This work is just a first attempt to analyze the US presidential addresses from this angle.

References

1. Арнольд И. В. Стилистика. Современный английский язык. Москва: Флинта, Наука, 2002. 384 с.

2. Воробьева О. И. Политическая лексика. Ее функции в современной устной и письменной речи: монография. Архангельск: Поморский гос. ун-т, 2000. 120 с.

3. Кобозева И. М. Компонентный анализ лексического значения. Москва: Эдиториал УРСС, 2000. 352 с.

4. Чечет Р. Г. Стилистика и культура речи. Минск: Тетра Системс, 2001. 544 с.

5. Garabik R., Altmann G. Testing the thematic concentration of text. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics. 2005. Volume 22. P. 215-232.

6. Kyle A. R. Influence of the Presidential Inaugural Address on Audience Perceptions of Candidate Image and the State of the Nation. Portland State University, 2017. P. 351-365.

7. Kцhler R. Exact Methods in the Study of Language and Text. Berlin - New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2017. 438 p.

8. Mati D. Ideological discourse structures in political speeches. Komunikacija i kultura online. 2012. № 3. P. 54-78.

9. Romagnuolo A. Political Discourse In Translation: A Corpus-Based Perspective On Presidential Inaugurals. Translation & Interpreting Studies: The Journal Of The American Translation & Interpreting Studies Association, 2014. P. 52-65.

10. Orwell G. Politics and the English Language. Penguin Modern Classics, 2013. 32 p.

11. Savoy J. Lexical Analysis of US Political Speeches. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics. 2010. Volume 17. P. 123-141.

Размещено на Allbest.ru