Linguistics in the last 50 years of 20th century takes a big stride in the analysis of political speech. Halliday proposed functional linguistics. In the 1970s, he emphasizes that there’s a close relationship between the grammatical system and social an personal need. Such point view has combined the linguistics with society not to say politics included. Scholars in UK focus on pragmatics, speech-acts theory, and meanings. VanDijk applies a wide range of analytic methods, for example textual, ethno-methodological, and cognitive approaches, to analyze political speeches. Some scholars also pay attention to the texture itself and analyze the content.

Obama is good at making attractive speeches. In previous studies, scholars prefer to analyze speeches made in important political diplomatic events, such as Obama’s speech in Africa(C Hernández-Guerra,2012:41) Obama’s Speech in Shanghai(M Lin， 2012:12), and press conferences. 来!自~751论-文|网www.751com.cn

Besides, according to the collected essays, previous studies on Obama’s speech are also mainly from political, linguistic and rhetoric perspectives. Rowland & Jones (2007) explores how the conservative party changes into a liberal party. Zhou (2009) analyzes his political campaigns. Atwater studies Obama’s figure of speech, however his focus is on “the contemporary vision of an inclusive America and the America dream.” Andersen digs into the reasons why Obama’s speeches are better than Clinton’s from the arrangement, appeal forms, topics and styles aspects. Anderson concludes that, despite of similarities, Obama takes the advantage of figure of speeches compared with Hillary Clinton, and this helps him to build a more optimistic image. Su(2009) researched on Obama’s speech from a rhetorical aspect. In her essay, she uses Aristotle’s three models of appeals and explains how they work in Obama’s speech. Gallo (2008) summarize the practical public speaking skills in Obama’s speech.