Tendency on power dynamics and social Identity through negative sentiment utterances
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12928/commicast.v6i3.14241Keywords:
Political debate, Pragmatics, Sentiment analysis, Speech act theory, US presidential electionAbstract
This paper investigates how political candidates of differing social status pragmatically employ sentiment in formal debate discourse, focusing on the 2024 U.S. Presidential Debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. Political debates are rich in rhetorical strategies where sentiment influences persuasion and public perception, yet the pragmatic dimension of sentiment remains underexplored. To address this gap, the research integrates computational sentiment analysis with speech act classification to uncover how language choices fulfill rhetorical intentions. Using a mixed-method approach, VADER sentiment analysis was combined with manual categorization of speech acts based on Searle’s taxonomy. Debate transcripts were analyzed to quantify sentiment polarity and identify corresponding pragmatic functions. Results indicate that both candidates strategically used assertive, expressive, and commissive acts imbued with contrasting emotional tones. Trump frequently employed hyperbolic and affect-laden expressions to assert dominance and provoke response, whereas Harris relied on structured critique and historical references to convey accountability and moral authority. Sentiment functioned as a pragmatic resource for negotiating credibility, reinforcing social identity, and managing power relations. These findings highlight sentiment’s dual role as an emotional and rhetorical mechanism in high-stakes political communication. This study contributes to pragmatic and political discourse studies by demonstrating how negative sentiment utterances are systematically embedded within assertive, expressive, and commissive speech acts to negotiate power dynamics and construct social identity in formal political debates, while empirically extending speech act theory through the integration of computational sentiment analysis and qualitative pragmatic interpretation.
References
Aliwie, A. N. A. (2025). A Pragmatic Analysis of Persuasive Arguments in the 2011–2020 US Presidential Campaign Speeches. In Forum for Linguistic Studies. 7(1), 480–494. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i1.7243
Anwar, M., Amir, F. R., Zuhriyah, S. A., Purbasari, R., & Rosa, H. T. (2024). Language Impoliteness in Memes Contesting the 2024 Presidential Election in Indonesia. Journal of Languages and Language Teaching, 12(4), 1899. https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v12i4.12801
Arifin, R. P. A. (2023). The Language of Power: A Sociolinguistic Study of Social Status in little women by Greta Gerwig. EDUJ : English Education Journal, 1(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.59966/eduj.v1i1.462
Bareis, J., & Katzenbach, C. (2022). Talking AI into being: The narratives and imaginaries of national AI strategies and their performative politics. Science, Technology, & Human Values. https://doi.org/10.1177/01622439211030007
Bartscherer, S. F. (2021). Instrumentalization of Emotion During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. In Die Emotionalisierung des Politischen (pp. 321–372). transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783839452783-022
Beard, A. (2000). The language of politics. api.taylorfrancis.com. https://api.taylorfrancis.com/content/books/mono/download?identifierName=doi&identifierValue=10.4324/9780203019115&type=googlepdf
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. taylorfrancis.com. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203561218
Culpeper, J., & Hardaker, C. (2017). Impoliteness. The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_9
Dragojevic, M. (2017). Language attitudes. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-437
Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. api.taylorfrancis.com. https://api.taylorfrancis.com/content/books/mono/download?identifierName=doi&identifierValue=10.4324/9781315834368&type=googlepdf
Fetzer, A., & Bull, P. (2012). Doing leadership in political speech: Semantic processes and pragmatic inferences. Discourse &Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511431510
Fitch, K., & Motion, J. (2020). Popular culture and social change: The hidden work of public relations. In Popular Culture and Social Change: The Hidden Work of Public Relations. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315203515
Hagemann, L., & Abramova, O. (2023). Sentiment, we-talk and engagement on social media: insights from Twitter data mining on the US presidential elections 2020. Internet Research, 33(6), 2058–2085. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-12-2021-0885
Heller, M., Pietikäinen, S., & Pujolar, J. (2024). Critical sociolinguistic research methods: Studying language issues that matter. taylorfrancis.com. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003394259/critical-sociolinguistic-research-methods-joan-pujolar-sari-pietik%C3%A4inen-monica-heller
Holmes, O. W. (2006). Speeches. books.google.com.
Hymes, D. (2009). Ways of speaking. Explorations in The.
Ilie, C. (2018). Pragmatics vs rhetoric: Political discourse at the pragmatics-rhetoric interface. Pragmatics and Its Interfaces. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.294.05ili
Ilie, N. (2018). Comparative effect of self-or dual-curing on polymerization kinetics and mechanical properties in a novel, dental-resin-based composite with alkaline filler. In Materials. mdpi.com. https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1944/11/1/108
Ilie, S., & Rose, P. (2018). Who benefits from public spending on higher education in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa? Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1347870
Kaimaki, V., Sgora, A., & .Ampeliotis, D. (2025). Sentiment Analysis in the Political Dialogue: Case Study of the Candidates for the Presidency of the SYRIZA-Progressive Alliance party. Envisioning. https://eproceedings.epublishing.ekt.gr/index.php/EFoC/article/view/7920
Kampf, Z. (2021). Political speech acts in contrast: The case of calls to condemn in news interviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 180, 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.04.031
Lakoff, G. (2001). The Power of the Images. In CogWeb: Cognitive Cultural Studies, September.
Lazar, M. M. (2005). Politicizing gender in discourse: Feminist critical discourse analysis as political perspective and praxis. Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230599901_1
Liu, Y., Lee, H., & Berry, F. (2023). How and when democratic values matter: Challenging the effectiveness-centric framework in program evaluation. Public Performance &Management Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2023.2184839
Lugtigheid, C. E., van Stekelenburg, J., & Boutellier, H. J. C. J. (2025). One of us: Identity-claims and discursive strategies of Dutch party leaders in political speech. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 13(1), 100–115. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.14837
Lukianenko, N. (2024). Language and power: linguistic imperialism. International Science Journal of Education & Linguistics. https://isg-journal.com/isjel/article/view/831
Matalon, Y., Magdaci, O., Almozlino, A., & Yamin, D. (2021). Using sentiment analysis to predict opinion inversion in Tweets of political communication. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 7250. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86510-w
Mohammad, S. M., & Turney, P. D. (2013). Crowdsourcing a word–emotion association lexicon. Computational Intelligence. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8640.2012.00460.x
Nurazizah, E., Tur, A. P. A., Evans, M. A., & Jones, D. I. (2024). Depicting the politeness strategy of Tower of God’s author. Journal of Religion and and Linguistics. https://jorel.ascee.org/index.php/jorel/article/view/3
Pivecka, N., Ratzinger, R. A., & Florack, A. (2022). Emotions and virality: Social transmission of political messages on Twitter. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.931921
Pradipta, E. P., Rahman, T., Sukmono, F. G., & Junaedi, F. (2023). Analysis of Political Polarization Discourse on Social Media Ahead of the 2024 Election (pp. 95–102). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36001-5_13
Prayogi, D., & Fahadayna, A. C. (2024). Religious Identity Politics In Indonesia’s 2019 Election Campaign On Twitter And Its Socio-Political Implications. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 20(2), 95. https://doi.org/10.14203/jpp.v20i2.1497
Rahmani, H., & Saeed, A. R. (2024). The Power of Language: Exploring the Role of Language in Politics. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, VIII(VIII), 2063–2073. https://doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2024.8080152
Riemland, M. (2024). Language power relations and linguistic patterns in translation: A multilingual, corpus-based investigation. doras.dcu.ie. https://doras.dcu.ie/30140/
Sabrina, A., & Tur, A. P. A. (2025). Politeness maxim representations in Javanese culture: Revitalization strategy to reduce verbal sexual violence. Journal of Religion and Linguistics, 2(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.31763/jorel.v2i1.13
Saputra, N., & Tur, A. P. A. (2025). Three generational bearers’ diverging perception on nicknames in Rokan Hulu, Riau. NOTION: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Culture, 7(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.12928/notion.v7i1.11699
Searle, J. R., Kiefer, F., & Bierwisch, M. (1980). Speech act theory and pragmatics. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8964-1
Selting, M. (2009). Communicative style. The Pragmatics of Interaction. https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.4.01sel
Shah, K., Bhatt, S., & Chanpura, V. (2024). A rare presentation of severe alloimmune hemolytic disease of newborn pertaining to minor blood group ’c’incompatibility: a case report and review of literature. In International Journal of …. academia.edu. https://www.academia.edu/download/112105202/IJCP_Minor_BG_Case_Report.pdf
Sodah, N. (2019). The Impact of Social Status on Language Shift: A Case Study on Family Domain Language in Lembar. International Journal of Multicultural and Multireligious Understanding, 6(3), 959. https://doi.org/10.18415/ijmmu.v6i3.891
Sofian, E. S. (2021). Speech acts analysis in Joe Biden’s victory speech. In International Journal of Arts and Social Science. https://www.ijassjournal.com/2021/V4I5/4146597614.pdf
Tur, A. P. A., Ahdiani, U., Kurniawan, M. H., & Fadillah, D. (2023). Black Comedy Alike, How Indonesian Middle Low Citizens Communication Model Teasing about Lockdown. Studies in Media and Communication, 11(6), 50. https://doi.org/10.11114/smc.v11i6.5910
Tur, A. P. A., Daulay, R., & Farida, H. (2024). Shifting Echoes: Re-Evaluating Three Generations` Perspectives on Nicknames toward Bullying. Humaniora, 15(2), 141–147. https://doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v15i2.12261
Turner, M., & Lin, A. M. Y. (2024). Translanguaging: Process and power in education. In Linguistics and Education. Elsevier. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898589824000731
Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926593004002006
Wang, J., Jin, G., & Li, W. (2023). Changing perceptions of language in sociolinguistics. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10(1), 91. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01574-5
Wolfram, W. (2023). The potential of sociolinguistic impact: Lessons from the first 50 years. Language and Linguistics Compass, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12487
Woods, E. T., Fortier-Chouinard, A., Closen, M., Ouellet, C., & Schertzer, R. (2024). The Battle for the Soul of the Nation: Nationalist Polarization in the 2020 American Presidential Election and the Threat to Democracy. Political Communication, 41(2), 173–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2291150
Zamihu, J. Z. (2024). Strategies of Language Use in Indonesian Vice Presidential Candidates Debate in the 2024 Election. Indonesian Journal of EFL and Linguistics, 389–404. https://doi.org/10.21462/ijefl.v9i2.786
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ami Lia Calista, Ajar Pradika Ananta Tur
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
License and Copyright Agreement
In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal. Please also carefully read Commicast's Posting Your Article Policy at http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/commicast/about/editorialPolicies#custom-5
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- That its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
Copyright
Authors who publish with Commicast agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.Â
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
Licensing for Data Publication
Commicast use a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:
Open Data Commons Attribution License, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/ (default)
Creative Commons CC-Zero Waiver, http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
Open Data Commons Public Domain Dedication and Licence, http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/pddl/1-0/
Other data publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.
Open Data and Software Publishing and Sharing
The journal strives to maximize the replicability of the research published in it. Authors are thus required to share all data, code or protocols underlying the research reported in their articles. Exceptions are permitted but have to be justified in a written public statement accompanying the article.
Datasets and software should be deposited and permanently archived inappropriate, trusted, general, or domain-specific repositories (please consult http://service.re3data.org and/or software repositories such as GitHub, GitLab, Bioinformatics.org, or equivalent). The associated persistent identifiers (e.g. DOI, or others) of the dataset(s) must be included in the data or software resources section of the article. Reference(s) to datasets and software should also be included in the reference list of the article with DOIs (where available). Where no domain-specific data repository exists, authors should deposit their datasets in a general repository such as ZENODO, Dryad, Dataverse, or others.
Small data may also be published as data files or packages supplementary to a research article, however, the authors should prefer in all cases a deposition in data repositories.
