Abstract
This article represents the analysis of American modern political discourse, mainly the field connected with the pre-election campaign 2016. It explores primary genres of political discourse (speeches, announcements, debates, party programmes), as well as secondary genres (commentaries, discussions, interpretation, political interviews). Owing to the fact that political communication embraces the whole range of informal political processes in society, the field of research includes the so-called informal political socializing. The aim of the paper is to study the use of irony and its functions in political discourse. The data used for the study were taken from candidates’ speeches, interviews with political and public figures, and recent witty sayings/comments. The study is based on the theory of critical discourse analysis (M. Bilig 2007, Teun A. van Dijk 2009, N. Fairclough 1996, P. Graham 2007, J. Lemke 2007, S. Scollon 2007), political discourse analysis (A. Beard 2001, D. Ponton 2011 etc.) and theory of irony (L. Alba-Juez 2014, S. Attardo 2007, R. Giora 2001, 2003, L. Hutcheon 2005, B. Komlosi 2010 etc.). The analysis showed that irony is a frequent communicative strategy used by politicians in pre-election campaigns, it performs different functions, such as aggression, defense, entertainment and some others and plays a positive role in commucation with the audience. When used expertly, irony contributes to making political discourse more expressive and convincing. An ironic politician is a better manipulator of public opinion than one unable to use irony.
Highlights
As the time of the presidential elections, 2016 in the USA is approaching, candidates and their pre-election campaigns attract increasing attention
The material analysed proves that the use of irony by the speaker and its interpretation by the recipient do not depend on ideology or membership of the Republican or Democratic party
Mrs Clinton is often criticized for not having a sense of humour and using ready-made jokes prepared by her speechwriters — as Donald Trump ironically remarks at Al Smith Memorial foundation dinner (October, 20, 2016): I am sure Hilary is going to laugh quite a bit tonight, sometimes even at appropriate moments
Summary
As the time of the presidential elections, 2016 in the USA is approaching, candidates and their pre-election campaigns attract increasing attention. The material analysed proves that the use of irony by the speaker and its interpretation by the recipient do not depend on ideology or membership of the Republican or Democratic party. It rather depends on individual characteristics, the Горностаева А.А. The candidates whose speeches are analyzed in this paper are the following: Jeb Bush (uses irony quite sparingly); Ben Carson (rare cases of irony, mainly to attack his opponent); Bernie Sanders (occasional cases of irony); The final contestants — Hilary Clinton (sticks to an official tone, practically no irony at all during the whole campaign, apart from Al Smith dinner) and Donald Trump (a really ironic speaker, bright examples of the use of irony). Mrs Clinton is often criticized for not having a sense of humour and using ready-made jokes prepared by her speechwriters — as Donald Trump ironically remarks at Al Smith Memorial foundation dinner (October, 20, 2016):
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
