Cover not available
Part of
Conspiracy Theory Discourses
Edited by Massimiliano Demata, Virginia Zorzi and Angela Zottola
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 98] 2022
► pp. 421–442

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

Intradiscursive intertextuality in Trumpian discourse’s crowd size conspiracy theory

ORCID logo | Ulster University

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.

Keywords: Trumpian discourse, conspiracy theories, Critical Discourse Analysis, truth, crowd size, discursive strategies
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Related work
  • 3.Key terminology
  • 4.Methodology
  • 5.Discursive strategies
    • 5.1Stock phrases
    • 5.2Numbers
    • 5.3Insults
    • 5.4Intertextuality
    • 5.5Recursivity
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Transcription notations
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 1 December 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.98.18cam
References
Agha, Asif
2005 “Voice, Footing, Enregisterment.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 15 (1): 38–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight
1973 “Truth is a Linguistic Question.” Language 49 (3): 539–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 Conflict 5 (2): 251–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boukala, Salomi
2014 “Waiting for Democracy: Political Crisis and the Discursive (Re)Invention of the ‘National Enemy’ in Times of ‘Grecovery.’” Discourse & Society 25 (4): 483–499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre
1991 Language and Symbolic Power. Translated by Gino Raymond and Matthew Adamson. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Campolong, Kelsey
Forthcoming. “Donald Trump’s Construction of Truth: A Linguistically-Based Critical Discourse Analysis.” PhD diss. Ulster University.
Dance, William
n.d. “FakeBelieve – The Disinformation and Fake News Blog.” Accessed Jan. 11, 2021. [URL]
d’Ancona, Matthew
2017 Post-Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.Google Scholar
Demata, Massimiliano
2017 “ ‘A Great and Beautiful Wall’: Donald Trump’s Populist Discourse on Immigration.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 5 (2): 274–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 .” Iperstoria 15: 8–35.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman
1992 “Intertextuality in Critical Discourse Analysis.” Linguistics and Education 4 (3): 269–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995 Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2015 Language and Power, Third Edition. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel
1972 The Archaeology of Knowledge. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Donna M., Kira Hall, and Matthew Bruce Ingram
2020 “Trump’s Comedic Gestures as Political Weapon.” In Language in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies, ed. by Janet McIntosh and Norman Mendoza-Denton, 97–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 Relations 23 (4): 609–626. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heffer, Chris
2020 All Bullshit and Lies? Insincerity, Irresponsibility, and the Judgement of Untruthfulness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Irvine, Judith T., and Susan Gal
2000 “Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation.” In Regimes of Language, ed. by Paul V. Kroskrity, 35–83. Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research Press.Google Scholar
Jäger, Siegfried, and Florentine Maier
2016 “Analysing Discourses and Dispositives: A Foucauldian Approach to Theory and Methodology.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 109–136. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Knoblock, Natalia
2020 “Negotiating Dominance on Facebook: Positioning of Self and Others in Pro- and Anti-Trump Comments on Immigration.” Discourse & Society 31 (5), 520–539. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koller, Veronika, Susanne Kopf, and Marlene Miglbauer
(eds.) 2019 Discourses of Brexit. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, Janet, and Norma Mendoza-Denton
2020 Language in the Trump Era: Scandals and Emergencies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Musolff, Andreas
2016 Political Metaphor Analysis: Discourse and Scenarios. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Reisigl, Martin, and Ruth Wodak
2016 “The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA).” In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 23–61. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Sclafani, Jennifer
2017 Talking Donald Trump: A Sociolinguistic Study of Style, Metadiscourse, and Political Identity. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Dijk, Teun
1988 News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
2008 Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Leeuwen, Theo
2007 “Legitimation in Discourse and Communication.” Discourse & Communication 1 (1): 91–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 “Discourse as the Recontextualization of Social Practice – A Guide.” In Methods of Critical Discourse Studies, Third Edition, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer, 137–153. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth
2011 “ ‘Us’ and ‘Them’: Inclusion and Exclusion – Discrimination via Discourse.” In Identity, Belonging and Migration, ed. by Gerard Delanty, Ruth Wodak, and Paul Jones, 54–77. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 The Politics of Fear: What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: SAGE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, Majid KhosraviNik, and Brigitte Mral
(eds.) 2013 Right Wing Populism in Europe: Politics and Discourse. London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, and Anton Pelinka
(eds.) 2002 The Haider Phenomenon in Austria. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar