A Rhetorical Analysis of Political Discourse: A Comparative Study of the Use of Metaphor In The Speeches of Nkrumah and Rawlings

Abstract

Politics is one vocation which is indispensably yoked with language. Politicians need to be at their persuasive best to win voters over. The best speakers stand the best chance of getting elected or swaying the opinions of others one particular way or the other. Oratory is about the best endowment in politics. This thesis is based on the part metaphors played in the political speeches of Nkrumah and Rawlings. Nkrumah and Rawlings’ long reigns can be attributed to their oratory, to some extent. They used the spoken word, not only as a medium to convey their intentions, but also to mask them. The study focuses on the similarities and differences in their use of metaphor. It also attempts to find out how the different backgrounds of the two politicians are reflected in their choice of metaphors. The study used printed data with twenty speeches: ten from each of the politicians. The framework is Aristotle’s Rhetorical theory, Burke’s theory of Dramatism and Lakoff s theory of Metaphor. They all help point out the major similarities and differences in the metaphors chosen by Nkrumah and Rawlings and that these were the effect of their different backgrounds. This research intends to prove that metaphors were utilized as a deliberate communicative tool in the rhetoric of the two ex-presidents.