TREĆI GLAS: RODNA PERFORMATIVNOST I JEZIČKA REDISTRIBUCIJA AUTORITETA U PREDSEDNIČKOJ DEBATI U SAD

Abstract

This article analyzes the September 2024 presidential debate between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump through the lens of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), with a focus on gendered communication styles and the performativity of authority in Harris’s discourse. The study explores how, and to what extent, the hybridization of conventionally “masculine” and “feminine” discursive resources contributes to the establishment, maintenance, and redistribution of political power. The full debate transcript is analyzed as a form of highly ritualized political discourse in which, alongside ideological opposition, gendered patterns of power are manifested. The analysis proceeds in three stages which examine how Harris uses linguistic resources to (re)construct authority and (re)define her political position: (1) defining linguistic categories of gendered strategies according to the theoretical framework (Lakoff 1975; Tannen 1990) and systematically identifying segments where these patterns appear; (2) contextual and pragmatic interpretation of each segment to determine its function in constructing authority, with attention to how Harris combines “masculine” and “feminine” models to reinforce or challenge the debate’s rhetorical dynamics; (3) thematic synthesis identifying key patterns: reproduction of gendered expectations, their deliberate subversion, and the strategic interaction of registers that redefines authority. The analysis is situated within the sociopolitical and media context of the debate, given its symbolic significance and global visibility. Findings suggest that Harris’s rhetorical effectiveness lies in her strategic hybridization of speech styles. Assertive features, such as imperatives, interruptions and direct challenges, enable her to project authority and contest her opponent’s legitimacy, while narrative and empathetic strategies, including personal testimony, emotional appeals, and mitigation, foster connection and credibility with the audience. This context-dependent flexibility produces a hybrid model of political speech that destabilizes normative gender boundaries and reconfigures the linguistic performance of authority. The study concludes that discursive power in contemporary political communication derives from the strategic reconfiguration of gendered linguistic resources, offering insights into how political actors negotiate identity, legitimacy, and power through discourse.