A study of Understatements in US Presidential Debates

1. Introduction

Presidential debates are defined as '' being surrounded by hype generated by candidates and media alike to capture the American attention and are extremely important events in the campaign for the presidency. “As a communicative strategy， Understatement is widely used in Presidential debates. In this paper， an brief introduction and a overall literature review as well as the gap and significance will be first provided， Then comes the research methodology with emphasis on theoretical approach and sample analysis. Finally ， we make a conclusion of this paper.

2. Research Methodology

2.1. Definition

Contextual Correlates Of Adaptability

According to Verschueren’s point of view， Contextual correlates of adaptability “potentially include all the ingredients of the communicative context with which linguistic choices have to be inter-adaptable” which consist of two categories， one is communicative context， whereas the other is linguistic context. As understatement is one of the communicative strategy， we just analyze it from the Communicative context， which，Furthermore， can be divided into the following parts ：

3. An Adaptive Analysis of Understatements in US presidential Debates

Samples：

CLINTON： He went on to say， \"Look at her. I don't think so.\" About another woman， he said， \"That wouldn't be my first choice.\" He attacked the woman reporter writing the story， called her \"disgusting，\" as he has called a number of women during this campaign. Donald thinks belittling women makes him bigger. He goes after their dignity， their self-worth， and I don't think there is a woman anywhere who doesn't know what that feels like. So we now know what Donald thinks and what he says and how he acts toward women. That's who Donald is.

TRUMP： And frankly， those stories have been largely debunked. And I really want to just talk about something slightly different.

Analysis：

Social World —gender equality， prevailing Feminism

Physical World—the exposure of Trump's scandal

Mental World—advocating gender equality/ the indignation towards Trump's behavior；

alleviating the audience' irritation

The communicative effects of Understatement here：

For the speaker—stating his/her opinion without arising other’s suspect； decreasing the face-threatening effect

To the opponent—arousing his neverseness； enhancing self-protection

To the audience— persuading them into believing Trump did show disrespect to women/ convincing them that Clinton rebuked him

4. Conclusion

The thesis explains Understatement in the three Presidential Debates between Clinton and Trump from the perspective of The Adaptation Theory， that is to say， first， we use Structural Objects of Adaptability to figure out the specific forms of Understatement； Then， we use mental world， social world， physical world， linguistic channel， seeking to find the pragmatic functions of Understatement in presidential debates.

6. Bibliography

1.Benoit， W. J. Wells， W. T. 1996. Candidates in conflict： Persuasive attack and defense in the 1992 presidential debates [Z]. Tuscaloosa： University of Alabama Press.

2.Verschueren， J. 1987. Pragmatics as a theory of linguistic adaptation. Paper presented at The 2nd International Pragmatics Conference， Antwerp， Belgium.

3.胡尚田.試析英語辭格“低調陳述”[J].達縣師范高等專科學校學報， 1999，9（1）：54-58

4.鞠紅.論低調陳述修辭本質及語義特征，《外語教學》2004，（5）：23-26.

作者簡介：李美華（1992.09.02—），籍貫：安徽，院校：上海對外經貿大學。