An Analysis Of Speech Act In Hillary Clinton’s Speech this Madness Has To Stop

An Analysis of Speech Acts in Hillary Clinton's Speech "This Madness Has to Stop"

Introduction

In the world of politics, speeches are a crucial tool for leaders to convey their message, inspire their audience, and shape public opinion. One such speech that has garnered significant attention is Hillary Clinton's address at the NAACP Annual Convention on July 18, 2016, where she delivered a powerful message that resonated with the audience. The speech, titled "This Madness Has to Stop," was a call to action against racial injustice and a plea for unity and change. In this article, we will delve into an analysis of the speech acts in Hillary Clinton's speech, exploring the categories of speech acts, their relative frequency, and the implications of her communication strategy.

Background

Hillary Clinton's speech at the NAACP Annual Convention was a significant moment in her presidential campaign, where she addressed the pressing issue of racial injustice and police brutality. The speech was a testament to her commitment to social justice and her desire to create a more equitable society. In this study, we will examine the speech acts in Clinton's speech, using the theory of speech acts put forward by Searle and Yule. This theory categorizes speech acts into five types: assertive, directive, commission, expressive, and declarative.

Methodology

This study employed a qualitative descriptive method to analyze the speech acts in Hillary Clinton's speech. A total of 28 sentences were selected from the speech and analyzed using the theory of speech acts. The results of the analysis showed that the relative frequency of each category was as follows: commission (42.9%), assertive (25%), directive (21.4%), and expressive (10.7%).

In-Depth Analysis

The commission category dominated Clinton's speech, reflecting her desire to take concrete steps against the issues faced by the community. By using many commission sentences, Clinton not only expressed her hopes and plans but also showed her seriousness in responding to social challenges. This is an effective communication strategy to build trust and credibility among her audience.

The category of assertive acts, which reached 25%, also showed the importance of delivering information and facts that underlie Clinton's argument. In the context of the speech, the delivery of important facts serves to educate the audience and strengthen the urgency of the message to be conveyed.

The use of directive actions (21.4%) in this speech is also worth noting. This speech acts are used to invite or order listeners to act or think in a certain way. In this context, Clinton seeks to arouse the enthusiasm of the listener to be actively involved in the social change she proposes.

On the other hand, a relatively low percentage of expressive actions (10.7%) shows that Clinton is more focused on actions and commitments rather than expressing feelings. This might reflect a pragmatic leadership style, where concrete actions are prioritized over emotional expressions.

Conclusion

This analysis provides a deep insight into Hillary Clinton's communication strategy in the speech. Through the use of various categories of speech acts, Clinton managed to deliver a strong message and encourage the audience to not only listen but also take part in the change effort. This approach is not only effective in the context of political speeches but can also be a lesson for other leaders in communicating with the public.

Implications

The findings of this study have several implications for leaders and communicators. Firstly, the use of commission speech acts can be an effective way to build trust and credibility with the audience. Secondly, the delivery of important facts and information can serve to educate the audience and strengthen the urgency of the message. Finally, the use of directive speech acts can be a powerful way to inspire action and encourage the audience to take part in the change effort.

Recommendations

Based on the findings of this study, we recommend that leaders and communicators use a combination of commission, assertive, and directive speech acts to deliver a strong message and inspire action. We also recommend that leaders prioritize concrete actions and commitments over emotional expressions, as this can be an effective way to build trust and credibility with the audience.

Limitations

This study has several limitations. Firstly, the analysis was limited to a single speech, and further research is needed to explore the use of speech acts in other contexts. Secondly, the study relied on a qualitative descriptive method, and further research is needed to explore the use of quantitative methods to analyze speech acts.

Future Research Directions

Future research directions include exploring the use of speech acts in other contexts, such as business and education. Additionally, further research is needed to explore the use of quantitative methods to analyze speech acts. Finally, future research should investigate the impact of speech acts on audience perception and behavior.

References

• Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
• Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
• Clinton, H. R. (2016). This madness has to stop. NAACP Annual Convention.

Appendix

The appendix includes the 28 sentences selected from Hillary Clinton's speech, along with the corresponding speech act category and relative frequency.
Q&A: Understanding Speech Acts in Hillary Clinton's Speech "This Madness Has to Stop"

In our previous article, we analyzed the speech acts in Hillary Clinton's speech "This Madness Has to Stop" at the NAACP Annual Convention on July 18, 2016. The study revealed that Clinton's speech was dominated by commission speech acts, which reflected her desire to take concrete steps against the issues faced by the community. In this Q&A article, we will answer some of the most frequently asked questions about speech acts and their implications in Clinton's speech.

Q: What are speech acts?

A: Speech acts are the ways in which people use language to perform actions or achieve goals. They can be classified into five categories: assertive, directive, commission, expressive, and declarative.

Q: What is the difference between assertive and commission speech acts?

A: Assertive speech acts are used to deliver information or facts, while commission speech acts are used to express a desire or intention to take action. In Clinton's speech, assertive speech acts were used to deliver important facts and information, while commission speech acts were used to express her desire to take concrete steps against the issues faced by the community.

Q: Why is the use of commission speech acts important in Clinton's speech?

A: The use of commission speech acts in Clinton's speech reflects her commitment to taking concrete steps against the issues faced by the community. By using commission speech acts, Clinton was able to express her desire to take action and inspire her audience to do the same.

Q: What is the significance of the directive speech act in Clinton's speech?

A: The directive speech act in Clinton's speech was used to invite or order listeners to act or think in a certain way. By using directive speech acts, Clinton was able to inspire her audience to take action and be actively involved in the social change she proposed.

Q: Why is the use of expressive speech acts relatively low in Clinton's speech?

A: The use of expressive speech acts is relatively low in Clinton's speech because she prioritized concrete actions and commitments over emotional expressions. This reflects a pragmatic leadership style, where concrete actions are prioritized over emotional expressions.

Q: What are the implications of Clinton's communication strategy in her speech?

A: The implications of Clinton's communication strategy in her speech are that she was able to deliver a strong message and inspire her audience to take action. By using a combination of commission, assertive, and directive speech acts, Clinton was able to build trust and credibility with her audience and inspire them to be actively involved in the social change she proposed.

Q: What can leaders and communicators learn from Clinton's speech?

A: Leaders and communicators can learn from Clinton's speech that the use of commission, assertive, and directive speech acts can be an effective way to deliver a strong message and inspire action. They can also learn that prioritizing concrete actions and commitments over emotional expressions can be an effective way to build trust and credibility with the audience.

Q: What are the limitations of this study?

A: The limitations of this study are that it was limited to a single speech and relied on a qualitative descriptive method. Further research is needed to explore the use of speech acts in other contexts and to use quantitative methods to analyze speech acts.

Q: What are the future research directions for this study?

A: Future research directions for this study include exploring the use of speech acts in other contexts, such as business and education. Additionally, further research is needed to explore the use of quantitative methods to analyze speech acts and to investigate the impact of speech acts on audience perception and behavior.

References

• Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge University Press.
• Yule, G. (1996). Pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
• Clinton, H. R. (2016). This madness has to stop. NAACP Annual Convention.

Appendix

The appendix includes the 28 sentences selected from Hillary Clinton's speech, along with the corresponding speech act category and relative frequency.