Abstract
The question posed in this study is: Are there differences in rhetorical strategy and tactic between discourse initially constituting the sole response of our government to states of emergency and discourse accompanying, justifying, and rationalizing specific military moves undertaken in response to crises? To provide a partial answer to this question, five presidential messages were analyzed and placed into two categories: consummatory rhetoric‐where presidential discourse initially constituted the only official reply made by the American government; and justificatory rhetoric‐where presidential discourse was part of a larger, military retaliation taken by the government. Differences and similarities between these two kinds of talk are detailed, and implications for crisis rhetoric are presented.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
