1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Conspiracy Theory Discourses
  4. Chapter

Chapter 18. “These cameras won’t show the crowds”

Intradiscursive intertextuality in Trumpian discourse’s crowd size conspiracy theory

image of Chapter 18. “These cameras won’t show the crowds”

This chapter uses a linguistically-based critical discourse analytic framework to identify, isolate, and contextualize the discursive strategies involved in the construction of conspiracy theories in former US President Donald Trump’s campaign-style rally speeches. Unlike simple falsehoods, conspiracy theories are discursively constructed, repeated, and must involve (specific or vague) accusations about certain agents acting against another party surreptitiously. This chapter analyzes the discursive strategies Trump uses to construct the “crowd size” conspiracy theory: the oft-repeated claim in Trumpian discourse that Trump’s opponents (especially the media) routinely manipulate, mask, and underestimate the number of Trump’s supporters who come to see him at events. Five discursive strategies are identified: the iconization of stock phrases, the repetition of numbers, insults, intertextuality, and recursivity. I also demonstrate how the application of these strategies is necessarily intradiscursively intertextual, i.e., characterized by repetition and reference across both speech genre (campaign rallies) and discursive context (Trumpian discourse) more broadly.

e-Book ISBN 9789027256959
  • Affiliations: 1: Ulster University

References

  1. Agha, Asif
    2005 “Voice, Footing, Enregisterment.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology15 (1): 38–59. 10.1525/jlin.2005.15.1.38
     https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.2005.15.1.38 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolinger, Dwight
    1973 “Truth is a Linguistic Question.” Language49 (3): 539–550. 10.2307/412350
     https://doi.org/10.2307/412350 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolonyai, Agnes , and Kelsey Campolong
    2017 “‘We Mustn’t Fool Ourselves’: ‘Orbánian’ Discourse in the Political Battle over the Refugee Crisis and European Identity.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict5 (2): 251–273. 10.1075/jlac.5.2.05bol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.5.2.05bol [Google Scholar]
  4. Boukala, Salomi
    2014 “Waiting for Democracy: Political Crisis and the Discursive (Re)Invention of the ‘National Enemy’ in Times of ‘Grecovery.’” Discourse & Society25 (4): 483–499. 10.1177/0957926514536961
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926514536961 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bourdieu, Pierre
    1991 Language and Symbolic Power. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Campolong, Kelsey
    . Forthcoming. “Donald Trump’s Construction of Truth: A Linguistically-Based Critical Discourse Analysis.” PhD diss.Ulster University.
  7. Dance, William
    . n.d. “FakeBelieve – The Disinformation and Fake News Blog.” AccessedJan. 11, 2021. https://fakebelieve.blog/resources/
  8. d’Ancona, Matthew
    2017 Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Demata, Massimiliano
    2017 “‘A Great and Beautiful Wall’: Donald Trump’s Populist Discourse on Immigration.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict5 (2): 274–294. 10.1075/jlac.5.2.06dem
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.5.2.06dem [Google Scholar]
  10. Demata, Massimiliano , Michelangelo Conoscenti , and Yannis Stavrakakis
    2020 “Riding the Populist Wave: Metaphors of Populism and Anti-Populism in The Daily Mail and The Guardian .” Iperstoria15: 8–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Fairclough, Norman
    1992 “Intertextuality in Critical Discourse Analysis.” Linguistics and Education4 (3): 269–293. 10.1016/0898‑5898(92)90004‑G
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(92)90004-G [Google Scholar]
  12. 1995 Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 2015 Language and Power, Third Edition. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Foucault, Michel
    1972 The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Goldstein, Donna M. , Kira Hall , and Matthew Bruce Ingram
    2020 “Trump’s Comedic Gestures as Political Weapon.” InLanguage in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies, ed. by Janet McIntosh and Norman Mendoza-Denton , 97–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108887410.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108887410.007 [Google Scholar]
  16. Hansson, Sten , and Sandra Kröger
    2021 “How a Lack of Truthfulness Can Undermine Democratic Representation: The Case of Post-Referendum Brexit Discourses.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations23 (4): 609–626. 10.1177/1369148120974009
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148120974009 [Google Scholar]
  17. Heffer, Chris
    2020 All Bullshit and Lies? Insincerity, Irresponsibility, and the Judgement of Untruthfulness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190923280.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190923280.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Irvine, Judith T. , and Susan Gal
    2000 “Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation.” InRegimes of Language, ed. by Paul V. Kroskrity , 35–83. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Jäger, Siegfried , and Florentine Maier
    2016 “Analysing Discourses and Dispositives: A Foucauldian Approach to Theory and Methodology.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 109–136. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Knoblock, Natalia
    2020 “Negotiating Dominance on Facebook: Positioning of Self and Others in Pro- and Anti-Trump Comments on Immigration.” Discourse & Society31 (5), 520–539. 10.1177/0957926520914684
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926520914684 [Google Scholar]
  21. Koller, Veronika , Susanne Kopf , and Marlene Miglbauer
    (eds.) 2019 Discourses of Brexit. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781351041867
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351041867 [Google Scholar]
  22. McIntosh, Janet , and Norma Mendoza-Denton
    2020 Language in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108887410
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108887410 [Google Scholar]
  23. Musolff, Andreas
    2016 Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Reisigl, Martin , and Ruth Wodak
    2016 “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 23–61. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Sclafani, Jennifer
    2017 Talking Donald Trump: A Sociolinguistic Study of Style, Metadiscourse, and Political Identity. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315276885
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315276885 [Google Scholar]
  26. van Dijk, Teun
    1988 News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 2008 Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511481499
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511481499 [Google Scholar]
  28. van Leeuwen, Theo
    2007 “Legitimation in Discourse and Communication.” Discourse & Communication1 (1): 91–112. 10.1177/1750481307071986
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481307071986 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2016 “Discourse as the Recontextualization of Social Practice – A Guide.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 137–153. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Wodak, Ruth
    2011 “‘Us’ and ‘Them’: Inclusion and Exclusion – Discrimination via Discourse.” InIdentity, Belonging and Migration, ed. by Gerard Delanty , Ruth Wodak , and Paul Jones , 54–77. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. 10.5949/UPO9781846314537.004
     https://doi.org/10.5949/UPO9781846314537.004 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2015 The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: SAGE. 10.4135/9781446270073
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270073 [Google Scholar]
  32. Wodak, Ruth , Majid KhosraviNik , and Brigitte Mral
    (eds.) 2013 Right Wing Populism in Europe: Politics and Discourse. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781472544940
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472544940 [Google Scholar]
  33. Wodak, Ruth , and Anton Pelinka
    (eds.) 2002 The Haider Phenomenon in Austria. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Agha, Asif
    2005 “Voice, Footing, Enregisterment.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology15 (1): 38–59. 10.1525/jlin.2005.15.1.38
     https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.2005.15.1.38 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolinger, Dwight
    1973 “Truth is a Linguistic Question.” Language49 (3): 539–550. 10.2307/412350
     https://doi.org/10.2307/412350 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolonyai, Agnes , and Kelsey Campolong
    2017 “‘We Mustn’t Fool Ourselves’: ‘Orbánian’ Discourse in the Political Battle over the Refugee Crisis and European Identity.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict5 (2): 251–273. 10.1075/jlac.5.2.05bol
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.5.2.05bol [Google Scholar]
  4. Boukala, Salomi
    2014 “Waiting for Democracy: Political Crisis and the Discursive (Re)Invention of the ‘National Enemy’ in Times of ‘Grecovery.’” Discourse & Society25 (4): 483–499. 10.1177/0957926514536961
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926514536961 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bourdieu, Pierre
    1991 Language and Symbolic Power. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Campolong, Kelsey
    . Forthcoming. “Donald Trump’s Construction of Truth: A Linguistically-Based Critical Discourse Analysis.” PhD diss.Ulster University.
  7. Dance, William
    . n.d. “FakeBelieve – The Disinformation and Fake News Blog.” AccessedJan. 11, 2021. https://fakebelieve.blog/resources/
  8. d’Ancona, Matthew
    2017 Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Demata, Massimiliano
    2017 “‘A Great and Beautiful Wall’: Donald Trump’s Populist Discourse on Immigration.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict5 (2): 274–294. 10.1075/jlac.5.2.06dem
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.5.2.06dem [Google Scholar]
  10. Demata, Massimiliano , Michelangelo Conoscenti , and Yannis Stavrakakis
    2020 “Riding the Populist Wave: Metaphors of Populism and Anti-Populism in The Daily Mail and The Guardian .” Iperstoria15: 8–35.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Fairclough, Norman
    1992 “Intertextuality in Critical Discourse Analysis.” Linguistics and Education4 (3): 269–293. 10.1016/0898‑5898(92)90004‑G
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(92)90004-G [Google Scholar]
  12. 1995 Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 2015 Language and Power, Third Edition. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Foucault, Michel
    1972 The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Goldstein, Donna M. , Kira Hall , and Matthew Bruce Ingram
    2020 “Trump’s Comedic Gestures as Political Weapon.” InLanguage in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies, ed. by Janet McIntosh and Norman Mendoza-Denton , 97–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108887410.007
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108887410.007 [Google Scholar]
  16. Hansson, Sten , and Sandra Kröger
    2021 “How a Lack of Truthfulness Can Undermine Democratic Representation: The Case of Post-Referendum Brexit Discourses.” The British Journal of Politics and International Relations23 (4): 609–626. 10.1177/1369148120974009
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148120974009 [Google Scholar]
  17. Heffer, Chris
    2020 All Bullshit and Lies? Insincerity, Irresponsibility, and the Judgement of Untruthfulness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780190923280.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190923280.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  18. Irvine, Judith T. , and Susan Gal
    2000 “Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation.” InRegimes of Language, ed. by Paul V. Kroskrity , 35–83. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Jäger, Siegfried , and Florentine Maier
    2016 “Analysing Discourses and Dispositives: A Foucauldian Approach to Theory and Methodology.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 109–136. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Knoblock, Natalia
    2020 “Negotiating Dominance on Facebook: Positioning of Self and Others in Pro- and Anti-Trump Comments on Immigration.” Discourse & Society31 (5), 520–539. 10.1177/0957926520914684
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926520914684 [Google Scholar]
  21. Koller, Veronika , Susanne Kopf , and Marlene Miglbauer
    (eds.) 2019 Discourses of Brexit. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781351041867
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351041867 [Google Scholar]
  22. McIntosh, Janet , and Norma Mendoza-Denton
    2020 Language in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108887410
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108887410 [Google Scholar]
  23. Musolff, Andreas
    2016 Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Reisigl, Martin , and Ruth Wodak
    2016 “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 23–61. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Sclafani, Jennifer
    2017 Talking Donald Trump: A Sociolinguistic Study of Style, Metadiscourse, and Political Identity. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315276885
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315276885 [Google Scholar]
  26. van Dijk, Teun
    1988 News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. 2008 Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511481499
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511481499 [Google Scholar]
  28. van Leeuwen, Theo
    2007 “Legitimation in Discourse and Communication.” Discourse & Communication1 (1): 91–112. 10.1177/1750481307071986
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481307071986 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2016 “Discourse as the Recontextualization of Social Practice – A Guide.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 137–153. London: SAGE.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Wodak, Ruth
    2011 “‘Us’ and ‘Them’: Inclusion and Exclusion – Discrimination via Discourse.” InIdentity, Belonging and Migration, ed. by Gerard Delanty , Ruth Wodak , and Paul Jones , 54–77. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. 10.5949/UPO9781846314537.004
     https://doi.org/10.5949/UPO9781846314537.004 [Google Scholar]
  31. 2015 The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: SAGE. 10.4135/9781446270073
     https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270073 [Google Scholar]
  32. Wodak, Ruth , Majid KhosraviNik , and Brigitte Mral
    (eds.) 2013 Right Wing Populism in Europe: Politics and Discourse. London: Bloomsbury. 10.5040/9781472544940
     https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472544940 [Google Scholar]
  33. Wodak, Ruth , and Anton Pelinka
    (eds.) 2002 The Haider Phenomenon in Austria. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027256959-dapsac.98.18cam
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Figure -contentType:Table -contentType:SupplementaryData
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027256959-dapsac.98.18cam
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal -contentType:Figure -contentType:Table -contentType:SupplementaryData
10
5
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error