Masaryk university faculty of education

28.Truman’s speech

13. 
    Syntax
    

It is sentences such as these that make it difficult to choose the correct category, as their content does not match the expected content of a war speech. That said, Truman split his attention between justification, our plan, appeal to American values and the issue, as seen in chart 8.17, completely leaving out steps that failed, future and also the actual declaration. Politically speaking, Truman has always referred to the Korean War as a “police action.”

Chart 8.17

The speech also appears disjointed as it is not well organized, but mainly covers too many irrelevant topics, such as tax and production increase, food shortage or legal changes, which only confuse the audience and keep away from the real focus of the speech, a declaration of armed conflict.

14. 
    Semantics
    

As for top 10 nouns, table 8. 18 shows areas of main concern, such as defense, peace and security, and also the global importance of the issue. Interestingly, Truman does not point to a specific country as the adversary but uses terms like communist forces or communist leaders to address the country-less guilty party.

Table 8.18

KOREA	35
NATIONS	30
FORCES	15
DEFENSE	12
PEACE	12
SECURITY	12
WORLD	12
ATTACK	11
AGGRESSION	10
GOVERNMENT	10

Truman does use emotive expressions but they are often not employed effectively to their fullest potential and as a result, the speech lacks drive and conviction. It is similar with binary conceptualizations and juxtapositions.

We know that it will take a hard, tough fight to halt the invasion, and to drive the Communists back. The invaders have been provided with enough equipment and supplies for a long campaign. They overwhelmed the lightly armed defense forces of the Korean Republic in the first few days and drove southward.

The first sentence in the above example begins more like an appeal to determination with words like we know, tough fight, but the following sentences switch to rather an informatory style, speaking about equipment and supplies, confusing the audience because the invaders (the subject of the 2^nd sentence) were in the previous sentence referred to as the Communists. The 3^rd sentence talks about the unpreparedness of Korean forces, which only further confuses the audience. Though correct words are applied, frames are not followed carefully, mixing various topics within a paragraph and thus confusing the audience. That said, frames pertaining to justification of the war or identification of the danger are very effective.

Indeed, Truman is the first of all the speakers too apply a conceptual metaphor when he talks about the attack on Korea and then extends it to an attack on all free nations.

On Sunday, June 25th, Communist forces attacked the Republic of Korea. This attack has made it clear, beyond all doubt, that the international Communist movement is willing to use armed invasion to conquer independent nations. An act of aggression such as this creates a very real danger to the security of all free nations.

At first, it is stated that the Communist forces attacked Korea, in a following sentence, with the help of suggestive words beyond all doubt and willing, attack on Korea is extended to independent nations, which is extended further in the third sentence as a very real danger to all free nations. By doing so, he succeeds in creating the illusion of fear in the American audience, be it thousands of miles away from the real attack. Truman goes steps further and uses another conceptual metaphor to justify the involvement of the United States in the Korean War by a similar tactic.

Moving from Korean independence to world peace, Truman simply states that the US involvement is crucial in order to protect American security and the peace of the world. Combined with the frequent appeal to American values, he is very effective in manipulating the data towards the desired effect.

15. 
    Pragmatics
    

Chart 8.19

There are, however, parts of the speech where Truman is very informal, almost colloquial, when speaking to the audience about food shortages.

I have been sorry to hear that some people have fallen victim to rumors in the last week or two, and have been buying up various things they have heard would be scarce. That is foolish--I say that is foolish, and it is selfish, very selfish, because hoarding results in entirely unnecessary local shortages.

Hoarding food is especially foolish. There is plenty of food in this country. I have read that there have been runs on sugar in some cities. That is perfectly ridiculous. We now have more sugar available than ever before. There are ample supplies of our other basic foods also.

Now, I sincerely hope that every American housewife will keep this in mind when she does her daily shopping.

Considering the purpose of this speech and the seriousness of the situation, this sort of paternalistic talk seems out of place and most surely also draws attention from the topic at hand. It is interesting to also notice the sexist stereotype about American women shoppers and housewives, common in the 50s. Further on in the discourse, there are direct quotes from U.S. military officers supporting the justification of war. The quotes are long drawn and could have probably been simply referenced. Truman also uses a 3 part statement when naming all the plans and actions that Congress has to enact and then again when naming what the country has to do in order to help the defense plans. Again, these things to do resemble a laundry list and keep the attention of the audience away from the important part, which is the reasons for U.S. involvement in the war.

As for deictic pointers, Truman is staying within his time and place, bringing the conflict to the American public, as demonstrated by previous examples and also by the data in chart 8.20.

Chart 8.20

A reference to WWII is made as part of Truman’s justification for going to war, stressing the importance of never appeasing aggression but rather meeting it with force.

The free nations have now made it clear that lawless aggression will be met with force. The free nations have learned the fateful lesson of the 1930’s. That lesson is that aggression must be met firmly. Appeasement leads only to further aggression and ultimately to war.

In the end of his speech, Truman also makes a direct reference to Winthrop’s city upon a hill, exemplifying America with the eyes of the world upon it as it works as a community for the common good.

As for the impact of media, Truman’s speech was televised, but viewers were few as only a third of the population had access to TV. Radio was still the main source of information so it can be presumed that most people listened to the speech. Truman’s discourse has no rhetorical questions and no apparent sound bites but it is very informal at times and has a narrative feel. There is a definite decrease in syntax and vocabulary complexity correlating with an increase in appeal to American values.