Abstract
The purpose of the study was to examine the interactional linguistic resources in concession speeches of Selected Political Leaders in Ghana and the United States of America. The past three decades have witnessed an increasing scholarly interest in political discourse. Despite this, concession speeches have received limited scholarly attention. This study, therefore, comparatively analyzed the concession speeches delivered by John Dramani Mahama and Nana Addo Danquah Akuffo-Addo of Ghana and Hillary Clinton and Al Gore of the United States of America. Speech Act and Metadiscourse Interactionist Theories were used to examine the interpersonal linguistic resources found in the speeches. The speeches, were analyzed qualitatively. The study concluded that speakers of CSs in the two different cultural contexts use similar statements, as has already been discussed earlier in this study. For instance, the four losing candidates used almost the same interpersonal linguistic resources (hedges, boosters, self-mention, attitude markers, and engagement markers) to establish a bond between them and their interlocutors and supporters. It is recommended that, concession speeches (CSs) to be studied from other theoretical perspectives, this will allow for a detailed analysis of a wider range of linguistic resources such as noun phrases, verb phrases, and the use of adjuncts, beyond the SAs in CSs in order not to treat them as mere rhetoric in politics.
Highlights
Language is used in performing various functions during pre-elections, elections, and post-elections in various democracies
The second research question of the study deals with the interactional linguistic resources used by the speakers and the affectual meaning of the texts
The study concluded that speakers of concession speeches (CSs) in the two different cultural contexts use similar statements, as has already been discussed earlier in t his study
Summary
Language is used in performing various functions during pre-elections, elections, and post-elections in various democracies. Citizens of democratic countries vote for their preferred candidate or party. Whether their decision goes along with a political conviction or not, it is most likely to be based on communication through language. From autocratic, through oligarchic to democratic, lea ders have relied on the spoken word to convince others of the benefits that arise from their leadership [1]. The ideas and orientation of a political party are brought to bear through language, one of the most important sign systems of humans. Language possesses an inherent quality of reciprocity that distinguishes it from any other sign systems [2]. Political speeches (PSs) have attracted much scholarlyattention because of their central place in the organization andmanagementof society in local and national governance
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
