Im/Politeness in Presidential Trials: A Contrastive Study

Aalaa Yaseen Hassan; Wafaa Mahdi Sahib

doi:10.18326/jopr.v8i2.618-644

Authors

Aalaa Yaseen Hassan English Department, College of Education for Women, University of Baghdad, Iraq
Wafaa Mahdi Sahib English Department, College of Education for Women, University of Baghdad, Iraq

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18326/jopr.v8i2.618-644

Keywords:

politeness strategies, presidential trials, Judges, preisdents

Abstract

This study examines the politeness and impoliteness strategies used by Donald Trump and Saddam Hussein during their respective trials. The judges' questions accusing the presidents were also taken into consideration. The data is drawn from the transcript of Saddam Hussein’s court proceedings, reported by NBC News and MSNBC. The analysis is based on Brown and Levinson’s theory of politeness and Culpeper’s framework of impoliteness. To achieve rigorous qualitative validity, this study utilizes Qualitative Descriptive Analysis to investigate face-work and linguistic aggression within the selected court transcripts. The contrast observed in the study between Trump's and Hussein’s trials can be attributed to several factors, including cultural norms. Trump’s politeness and cooperation reflected the cultural expectations of American society. On the other hand, Hussein’s actions reflected the cultural norms of Iraqi society, where people often prefer a strong, defiant leader. Thus, the two strategies were fundamentally different: both former presidents aimed to project strength, but in opposing ways. The role of the judges also differed. The judge, al-Amiri, managed power dynamics effectively and acknowledged Hussein’s former status, a crucial factor in a political trial. Alternatively, Letitia James primarily conducted an investigative role during Trump’s testimony. Her strategy focused on gathering information rather than asserting authority. In conclusion, the qualitative conclusions are bound by the micro-contextual relationship between speaker intent and participant evaluation within the selected boundaries of the text.

References

Alonso-Almeida, F., & Álvarez-Gil, F. J. (2021). Impoliteness in women’s specialised writing in seventeenth-century English. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 22(1), 121–152.

Archer, D. E. (2008). Verbal aggression and impoliteness: Related or synonymous? In D. Bousfield & M. A. Locher (Eds.), Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice (pp. 181–207). Mouton de Gruyter.

Archer, D. (2011). Cross-examining lawyers, facework and the adversarial courtroom. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(13), 3216–3230.

Archer, D. (2017). (Im)politeness in legal settings. In D. Culpeper, M. Haugh, & D. Kádár (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of linguistic (im)politeness (pp. 713–737). Palgrave Macmillan.

Ayansola, A. O. (2018). Courtroom verbal aggression: A comparative appraisal of lawyers versus judges’ attitude to politeness or impoliteness. UNIUYO Journal of Humanities, 22(2), 581–598.

Ayansola, A. O. (2021). “When handshake goes beyond the elbow”: Impolite behaviour in courtroom proceedings. Journal of Language and Linguistics, 7(1).

Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in interaction. John Benjamins.

Bousfield, D., & Locher, M. A. (Eds.). (2008). Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice. De Gruyter.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In Questions and politeness: Strategies in social interaction (pp. 56–311). Cambridge University Press.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.

Carranza, I. E. (2017). Face, social practices, and ideologies in the courtroom. In Research on politeness in the Spanish-speaking world (pp. 167–190). Routledge.

Csulich, G. (2022). (Im)politeness and power in the Early Modern English courtroom (1560–1639) (Doctoral dissertation). Birmingham City University.

Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 349–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3

Culpeper, J. (2007). A new kind of dictionary for Shakespeare’s plays: An immodest proposal. SEDERI Yearbook, 17, 47–73.

Culpeper, J. (2011). Politeness and impoliteness. In K. Aijmer & G. Andersen (Eds.), Sociopragmatics (Vol. 5, pp. 391–436). De Gruyter.

Eelen, G. (2001). A critique of politeness theories. St. Jerome.

Hassan, A. Y., Al-Rawe, M. F. A., Abdullah, S. S., & Hlaimi, S. (2023). Analysis of impoliteness strategies used in Putin’s speech at annexation ceremony. Journal of Pragmatics Research, 5(2), 153–167.

Hatab, W. A., Al-Refai, S., & Al-Badawi, M. (2026). Politeness in courtroom language from a linguistic perspective. In Business resilience and business innovation for sustainability: The double-edged role of artificial intelligence and other disruptive technologies (pp. 1445–1456). Springer Nature.

Haugh, M. (2008). Intention in pragmatics. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(2), 99–110.

Holmes, J. (2013). An introduction to sociolinguistics (4th ed.). Routledge.

Holmes, J., & Wilson, N. (2022). An introduction to sociolinguistics. Routledge.

Hu, P. C. (2018). An investigation of interruption in courtroom discourse. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 3(2), 213–234.

Huang, Y. (2012). The Oxford dictionary of pragmatics. Oxford University Press.

Kuntsi, P. M. H. (2012). Politeness and impoliteness strategies used by lawyers in the “Dover Trial” (Master’s thesis). University of Eastern Finland.

Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. Harper & Row.

Lebedeva, I. S., & Ivanova, M. V. (2024). Persuasion, hedging and politeness in discourse construction in courtroom. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.25076/vpl.54.03

Leech, G. N. (1980). Explorations in semantics and pragmatics. John Benjamins.

Li, K. (2024). In the pursuit of the constructed truth: Courtroom questioning as a persuasive genre of talk. Journal of Contemporary China, 33(147), 521–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2022.2153017

Meizhen, O., & Xue, G. (2021). A study of interruption and impoliteness in Chinese criminal courtroom trial discourse. International Journal of Language, Culture and Law, 3(2), 17–?.

Mills, S., & Mullany, L. (2011). Language, gender and feminism: Theory, methodology and practice. Routledge.

Mısır, H., & Akın, G. (2024). Navigating power and impoliteness in criminal court discourse. International Journal of Legal Discourse, 9(2), 289–312.

NBC News. (2004, July 2). Transcript: Saddam in court. https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna5345118

MSNBC. (2023, September 1). Full text: Read Trump’s deposition in New York AG Letitia James’ civil fraud lawsuit. https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/trump-deposition-new-york-attorney-general-full-pdf-rcna102791

Sari, Y., Aritini, L. P., & Kusuma, I. P. I. (2025). Unmasking linguistic power dynamics: Exploring politeness violations in the “Ferdi Sambo” courtroom. Journal of English Educational Study, 8(1), 127–136.

Shahrokhi, M., & Bidabadi, F. S. (2013). An overview of politeness theories: Current status, future orientations. American Journal of Linguistics, 2(2), 17–27.

Terkourafi, M. (2008). Toward a unified theory of politeness and impoliteness. In Impoliteness in language: Studies on its interplay with power in theory and practice (pp. 45–?). De Gruyter.

Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge University Press.

Yibifu, T. (2020). Politeness and impoliteness strategies in the courtroom: An analysis of a trial script. Asian Conference on Language.