{"id":1918,"date":"2005-12-28T18:10:37","date_gmt":"2005-12-28T17:10:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/?p=1918"},"modified":"2017-02-28T18:12:43","modified_gmt":"2017-02-28T17:12:43","slug":"lexical-analysis-of-the-third-presidential-debate-between-george-w-bush-and-john-kerry-13th-october-2004-tempe-arizona","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/lexical-analysis-of-the-third-presidential-debate-between-george-w-bush-and-john-kerry-13th-october-2004-tempe-arizona\/","title":{"rendered":"Lexical Analysis of the Third Presidential Debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry (13th October 2004, Tempe, Arizona)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p class=\"qtranxs-available-languages-message qtranxs-available-languages-message-en\">Sorry, this entry is only available in <a href=\"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/it\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1918\" class=\"qtranxs-available-language-link qtranxs-available-language-link-it\" title=\"It\">It<\/a>.<\/p><p><\/p>\n<p class=\"titolo\">Lexical Analysis of the Third Presidential Debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry (13th October 2004, Tempe, Arizona) \u2013 Giuseppe Milazzo, Giovanna Maiola<\/p>\n<p class=\"testo\"><i>The transcription used is the one published by the Commission on Presidential Debates<\/p>\n<p>(Commission on Presidential Debates:\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.debates.org\/\">www.debates.org<\/a>)<\/p>\n<p>The lexical analysis programme used is Alceste 4.0<\/p>\n<p>(IMAGE &#8211; Informatique Math\u00e9matique Gestion:\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.smess.egss.ulg.ac.be\/lejeune\/logiciels\/alceste.html\">www.smess.egss.ulg.ac.be\/lejeune\/logiciels\/alceste.html<\/a>)<\/i><\/p>\n<p>The analysis of lexical correspondences statistically summarises the language used by the two candidates during the third and final presidential debate on domestic affairs.<\/p>\n<p>Mr. Schieffer\u2019s interventions have been excluded from the analysis.<\/p>\n<p>The format of the final presidential debate is similar to the one of the first debate: no questions from the public and an anchorman, in this case Mr Schieffer of CBS News, as moderator among the two candidates.<\/p>\n<p>The last debate is tuned on\u00a0<b>domestic affairs<\/b>. The major areas of discussion are classified in the first and fifth lexical classes, who cover most of the significant sentences.<\/p>\n<p>The first class is dominated by\u00a0<b>ethical<\/b>\u00a0and\u00a0<b>moral issues<\/b>; the two candidates answer questions on homosexuality, civil rights, abortion and religion. The word\u00a0<i>faith<\/i>\u00a0is mentioned 18 times in the candidates\u2019 answers, the word\u00a0<i>marriage<\/i>\u00a015 times and\u00a0<i>respect\u00a0<\/i>20 times.<\/p>\n<p>Mr Kerry manages to dominate syntactically this first lexical class.<\/p>\n<p>The other major lexical class covers the most conventional discussion on\u00a0<b>economic<\/b>\u00a0and\u00a0<b>social issues<\/b>. The traditional divergences between conservatives and liberals clearly emerge; each candidate is willing to reiterate values and ideals of their parties and talk to their electorate.<\/p>\n<p>President\u00a0<b>Bush<\/b><\/p>\n<p>&#8211; defends his fiscal policy,<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; reminds the period of recession he had to face during his presidency,<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; accuses the opponent to make faint promises<\/p>\n<p>Senator\u00a0<b>Kerry<\/b><\/p>\n<p>&#8211; accuses the President to cut taxes only of the richest<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; reminds the numbers of Americans who have lost the health insurance<\/p>\n<p>&#8211; promises social reforms targeting middle class citizens.<\/p>\n<p>The two most relevant topics of discussion are the\u00a0<b>health system<\/b>\u00a0(the word\u00a0<i>health<\/i>\u00a0is mentioned 52 times) and the\u00a0<b>tax cuts<\/b>\u00a0(the words\u00a0<i>tax<\/i>\u00a0and\u00a0<i>taxes<\/i>\u00a0compare jointly 50 times in the text)<\/p>\n<p>None of the candidates is significantly associated to this class. Mr Kerry makes use of a more rich vocabulary covering a variety of issues while the President muses on the inconsistency of his opponent.<\/p>\n<p>The question of\u00a0<b>national security<\/b>\u00a0takes the debate back to issues of foreign policy and war on terror, as happened in the previous debates.<\/p>\n<p>Mr\u00a0<b>Bush<\/b>\u00a0is associated only to the fourth class of the factor plan. This minor class is related to the education issue, proposed by the President as a pragmatic plan to endorse the problems of increasing unemployment.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Sorry, this entry is only available in It. Lexical Analysis of the Third Presidential Debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry (13th October 2004, Tempe, Arizona) \u2013 Giuseppe Milazzo, Giovanna Maiola The transcription used is the one published by the Commission on Presidential Debates (Commission on Presidential Debates:\u00a0www.debates.org) The &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/lexical-analysis-of-the-third-presidential-debate-between-george-w-bush-and-john-kerry-13th-october-2004-tempe-arizona\/\">Continued<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1919,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"inline_featured_image":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1918","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-attivita-internazionali"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1918","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1918"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1918\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1921,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1918\/revisions\/1921"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1918"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1918"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.osservatorio.it\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1918"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}