| The American presidency, which is designated to be checked in the balance of powers system, undergoes a significant transformation to a rhetorical presidency which emphasizes presidential rhetorical leadership which resides in the power to persuade the public and bargain with other branches of government. American presidents who used to direct policies toward the government bodies upon the founding of the nation, now tend to communicate and illustrate policies directly with the people over the head of the Congress within the political climate of party polarization and political gridlocks which renders legislation and policy implementation more difficult. In order to better persuade other branches of the government and to lead public opinion, presidents’ rhetoric also undergoes diachronic changes, featured by Samuel Kernell’s public presidency, Elvin Lim’s anti-intellectual presidency, and Jeffrey Tulis’s rhetorical presidency. Based on these tendencies, this thesis puts forward the hypothesis that American presidents construct increasing audience awareness, identify with the audience to communicate with the audience more actively in their public speeches, i.e., the intersubjectivity of presidential rhetoric increases over time. The hypothesis is tested in this thesis by quantitative methods.This thesis aims to study the diachronic change of subjectivity and intersubjectivity of presidential speeches including inaugural speeches and SOU speeches, falling into the category of presidential rhetoric. Subjectivity demonstrates the speaker’s emphasis on personal cognition, attitude and belief. Frequent usage of subjective words reflects the speaker’s expanding self and assertive self intention. Intersubjectivity reflects the addresser’s inclination to interact with the addressee by incorporating the addressee as part of the subject. Speeches with higher intersubjectivity indicate the addresser’s closer psychological relationship with the audience. In conventional cognition, the addresser and the addressee, as the subject and the object, are separated. Intersubjetivity goes beyond the dualities of "addresser-addressee" and "subject-object", reducing the difference between the addresser and the addressee and narrowing the distance between the subject and the object by constructing shared reality and projecting common characteristics. When American presidents go public and become more rhetorical, this thesis aims to answer the following questions:1. How does the subjectivity and intersubejctivity of American presidential rhetoric (represented by inaugural speeches and SOU speeches) change over time from Washington to Obama? 2. Since the audience of presidential speeches incorporate the people, the Congress and the government, how does presidents’emphasis on different types of audience change over time? 3. How does the diachronic change of subjectivity and intersubjectivity in presidential rhetoric represent the historical change of rhetorical presidency, as well as the evolution of constitution and balance of powers mechanism in American politics?In Tulis’s theory of the rhetorical presidency, two antithetical constitutions exist and guide presidential rhetoric. The first is the original constitution, which respects separation and balance of powers between different branches. The second is an "organic constitution", which "encourages and legitimates presidential rhetorical leadership". In adaptation with the two constitutions, there are two presidencies in American politics. The first presidency is the "constitutional presidency", constraining the presidents in the separation of powers system. The second presidency is the "rhetorical presidency", encouraging American presidents to go over the institutional constraint and to lead the public by popular rhetorical power. In American political development, American presidency evolves from "constitutional presidency" to "rhetorical presidency". American presidents’tendency to draw away from the Congress and the government while drawing closer to the public and identifying with the public, can be illustrated by the theory of rhetorical presidency.This paper finds the intersubjectivity of presidential inaugural speeches and SOU speeches significantly increases over time, which means American presidents construct increasing audience awareness and identifying with the audience in their speeches for policy support. The subjectivity of inaugural speeches decreases over time, which indicates that American presidents are inclined to identify with the public instead of labeling themselves as an independent institution away from the public. In SOU speeches, American presidents are constructing increasing subjectivity, which reflects that American presidents are becoming an independent institution from the Congress and the government. Among different audiences, in particular, the people, the Congress and the government, American presidents are more inclined to line with the people, while drawing away from the Congress and the government in their speeches. American presidents are threatening the Congress by the usage of veto, while in reality, the usage of veto decreases over time. As for the government, American presidents tend to draw away from the government and criticize the government in their speeches. American presidents are less likely to mention the Constitution in their public speeches, which means they are de-emphasizing the Constitution in their rhetoric. The presidents tend to embrace the second constitution which encourages presidential popular rhetorical leadership and draw away from the first constitution which constrains presidential power. American presidents increasingly tend to mention the executive branch, while de-emphasize the legislative branch and the judicial branch especially after 1900. The balance of powers between the executive, legislative branch and judicial branches tends to lean on the executive branch in presidential rhetoric.Corresponding to Tulis’s theory of rhetorical presidency, this paper finds that in presidential speeches, American presidents tend to draw away from the original constitution to the second "organic constitution", transforming from "constitutional presidency" to "rhetorical presidency". The presidents tend to increasingly emphasize and identify with the public while de-emphasizing the Congress and the government to be an independent institution, which leads to increasing imbalance of powers among the presidency, the Congress and the people. Meanwhile, American presidents, as the leader of the executive branch, tend to de-emphasize the legislative branch and the judicial branch, which renders increasing imbalance of powers among the legislative branch, the judicial branch and the executive branch. This rhetorical incline represents both a transformation and development of American presidency, which can be attributed to constitutional design, presidential election mode, communication technique advancement, and political polarization all contribute to this incline. |
