Exploring Strategic Evasion and Rhetorical Maneuvers in the 2024 U.S. Presidential Debates: A Pragma-Discoursal Analysis
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2025
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Université Mouloud Mammeri Tizi Ouzou
Abstract
The present study is a pragmatic analysis of the final 2024 U.S. presidential debate between
Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. The main objectives of this research are twofold: first, to
explore how the candidates employ strategic evasions by deliberately violating Grice‟s
maxims to generate implicatures; and second, to examine the rhetorical strategies used to
persuade voters, reinforce political ideologies, and influence public perception. The analysis
applies three theoretical frameworks: Grice‟s Cooperative Principle (1975), Aristotle‟s
persuasive appeals (ethos, pathos, logos), and Clayman and Bull‟s (2006) typology of evasive
responses. Following a qualitative, corpus-based design, the study draws on directed content
analysis to interpret how candidates use language strategically. The findings show that both
Trump and Harris used various evasion strategies, such as shifting topics, refusing to answer,
and attacking the question, while also relying on rhetorical tools like emotional storytelling,
expert opinion, and repetition. These linguistic choices helped them manage sensitive topics,
protect their image, and shape how voters perceived their competence. By uncovering the
hidden techniques behind political speech, this study aims to raise awareness and promote
critical thinking about how language is used to influence audiences in high-stakes political
settings.
Description
62p. ; (+CD-Rom)
Keywords
Pragmatics, strategic evasion, rhetorical appeals, presidential debate
Citation
Language and communication