论文部分内容阅读
1.Introduction
Research background.Some of the most important points of attractiveness in the recent history of linguistics as a science are the different perspectives from which text analysis can be carried out.That is why discourse analysis is becoming a discipline that brings together linguistics researchers from different areas.According to the text to be analyzed，one will be more suitable than others.But the common ground is that analysts start from the same proposition：a text.Text linguistics is always descriptive and，from this perspective，we analyze what words are used，how a message is said and how discourse is built upon （Coulthard，1994）.
In November 2008，Barack Obama became the 44th president of the United States，sweeping to a victory of historic consequence.Exotically named and unusually colored，Obama’s candidacy was intoxicating.He “hit the American scene like a thunderclap” （Von Drehle，2008），rising from relative obscurity to transform the political agenda and restore the fragile confidence of an increasingly disorientated superpower.Supported by a remarkably effective campaign – “powered by hope” （Obama，2009） – his margin of victory was the largest of any democratic candidate in history （Uhlenbeck，2008； Harris，2008），signaling a popular desire for change，and handing Obama a mandate to refashion America’s political terrain in the most radical terms since Reagan’s landslide victory of 1980.Quite apart from the symbolic reverberation of his ethnicity，Obama’s eloquent and inspirational rhetoric helped reaffirm a nation’s faith in its most cherished of myths，whilst confirming the decline of a political discourse that had dominated American society，and indeed the wider world，for almost three decades.In November 7th，2012，Barack Obama won the campaigning for re-election.At Obama headquarters in Chicago，a huge crowd gathered waving small American flags and cheering.Supporters hugged each other，danced and pumped their fists in the air.“Excited crowds gathered in New York’s Times Square，at Faneuil Hall in Boston and near the White House in Washington，drivers joyfully honking as they passed by.” New York Daily News，November 7，2012，late ed.：B6.To compare with these two political discourses，I have found that there is an intersection.It is about the intention of the discursive functions of using “I” and “we”.
My own analysis and findings of the victory speech of Barack Obama in 2012，I found that the former conclusion is not specific enough.According to the data from the material of the victory speech ，I could conclude that in the speech，Obama has used the first-person pronoun “we” more frequently than “I” to make the entire Americans and himself closer，make them believe that Obama himself is the one who is capable to make the United States stronger.Moreover，besides using “we”，Obama has used other two first-person plural respectively in accusative case （us） and in possessive case （our）. This study aims to analyze Barack Obama’s Strategic Use of First-Person Pronouns more specifically based on the doubt why the data from the victory speech in 2012 is not in accord with the conclusions of the previous researches.
2.Related studies
2.1The most frequently-use is the first-person pronoun
A stylistic study on Barack Obama’s Presidential Victory Speech has been conducted in 2011 by Chen Danbin，a doctor from Guangdong Food and Drug Vocational College.In this study，the writer had a general survey of the main linguistic features in the speech.They are phonetic，lexical and syntactic features.Among these features’ analysis，I found that the writer had conclude something that impressed me in his lexical feature analysis.
In this part，he had found that lexical features are used to find out how choice of words involves various types of meaning.They may contain a general description of vocabulary choice，and examinations of nouns，adjectives，verbs，adverbs，etc.Lexical choices can help to achieve perfect characterization and in turn a growing revealing of the novel’s theme.Public speech，as a formal activity，is very particular in choosing vocabulary.Vocabulary in a speech is clearly than daily conversation，included a number of difficult words and abstract words.In this Obama’s speech，there are 473 difficult words with more than three syllables.Abstract words in public speech are commonly seen，especially in this speech，such as democracy，sacrifice，enormity，challenge，mortgage，determination，humanity，etc，which increased the difficulty of understanding，but on the other hand，increased the formality and reliability of the speech.
On the other hand，the writer also analyzes another lexical feature in the public speech，which is the use of personal pronoun.The most frequently-use is the first-person pronoun （I，We），but the second and third person pronoun is not so frequently used in speech.The use condition of person pronoun in this Obama’s speech is seen in the following chart：
Person
pronoun The
first-person
pronoun（we） The
first-person
pronoun（I） The
first-person
pronoun（out） The
first-person
pronoun（us） The
second-person
pronoun（you） The
third-person
pronoun（they）
NO. 47 26 23 19 15 4
Honestly，in my opinion，although this study’s analysis，from the aspects of lexical，syntax，rhetorical devices，etc，is quite all-sided，it didn’t show us something more specific.For instance，the write just showed us the distribution of the first，second and third person pronoun，but not analyze their different functions when they are used in different positions. 2.2The role of first，second and third person
Dolores Fernández Martínez and Verónica Cristina Trujillo González （Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria，Espa?a） have published an article （October，25，2012） to emphasis on the role of first，second and third person based on the comparison of Obama and Bush’s speeches.In this article，they have examined the role played by first，second and third person references or systems of identification taking into account the transitivity structures （Halliday，2004[1985]：168-305） in which they appear.
From their research，I have found that in Obama’s speech you of the present and the future had produced a new entity，you in power who，associated to the first person I，produces the first person plural （we）.In its first manifestation，we appeared within a negative structure in the past in order to later reinforce its description in the present：we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states.We are，and always will be，the United States of America.Far from being conceived of as a mere group of individuals，we represents a national unit whose description in terms of age，status，ideological and sexual orientation，color，nation and physical conditions has been previously provided through the portrayal of the third person.The transitivity structures of they have prepared the territory for the first appearance of we in its patriotic role，but in addition，the negation of the past has also prepared the ground for the association of the first person plural to the present and the future.We represented an amalgamated individuality，they （namely，you） and I，which belongs to the present and the future.We is the entity which unifies past，present and future.Future expectations determine the agent role of we （what we can achieve），but emphasizing the present as the point of departure （tonight … this date in this election at this defining moment），and maintaining a link with the past in order to validate his role as an agent of change （but tonight，be -cause of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to America）.
Once the identities of the third and second person have been defined，we becomes visible as a main participant in the text.Obama reiterates explicitly the association of we with the present and the future，and assigns to it the triple-sided transitivity structure of material （celebrate），existential （stand） and mental （know） processes.We is an agent of reflection and action which comes into view tonight （as we celebrate tonight，we know the challenges that tomorrow … we stand here tonight，we know…）.The text also presents the first person plural as a participant who is cautious about the future （may not），but nonetheless displaying a strong determination （will）： We may not get there in one year or even in one term.But，… we will get there.I promise you we as a people will get there.Second，third and first person plural are interpreted as a cohesive entity of power looking ahead to the future （I promise you we as a people will get there）.But the first person plural is enriched by additional roles.We represents you in responsibility，an agent of control that emerges in the present and projects to the future，a social actor bringing about change （the challenges we face … the change we seek … for us to make that change）. 3.Methodology
3.1Issues in Tables Design and Establishment of Tables
To serve its own purpose of research，three tables are established before the analyzing process begins in this study.As tables have become larger and more diverse and as they are frequently used to make definitive statements about language，issues of how they are designed have become of increasing importance.The establishment of tables is by no means an easy task in that a lot of factors should be taken into account.Several aspects of tables design are discussed：purpose，representative and balance，size and contents，data means and sources as well as data collecting principles.
Data analysis
3.1.1 First-person singular and plural pronouns
Table 1：The use condition of first-person singular and plural pronouns
Items First-person
singular （I，me，my） First-person plural
（we，us，our） Total
NO. 40 88 128
Percentage 31.25% 68.75% 100%
Using first-person plural pronouns—“we，our and us” can narrow psychological distance with listeners and then win more listeners over.According to the table 1 above，Obama used the first-person plural pronouns in 88 times totally，as a percentage of 68.75%.It is as more than 2 times as the first-person singular pronouns—“I，my and me”.In the speech，Obama frequently said：（1） “our union moves forward”，（2） “we are an American family and we rise or fall together as one nation and as one people”，（3） “makes us rich，makes us strong and each of us”.To analyze the example sentences with the first-person plural pronouns in them，we can obviously feel that the use of “we，our and us” can shorten the distance between speakers and listeners，leaving them in the same position，establishing a cordial relationship，winning the approval and support from listeners.In this speech，the frequent use of “we” can make the listeners realize that the president Obama will firmly stand together with them in facing of future challenges coming from current severe economical crisis.
3.1.2 The cases of first-person pronouns
Table 2：An analysis of different cases of first-person pronouns
Items Nominative
case （I and we） Accusative case （me and us） Possessive case （my and our） Total
NO. 86 15 27 128
Percentage 67.2% 11.7% 21.1% 100%
According to the table 2，we can see that the usage number of the nominative case （I and we） is the biggest，with the percentage of 67.2% which is enormously more than the other two cases （accusative and possessive case）.Here are the examples： （1）“We have picked ourselves up，we have fought our way back，and we know in our hearts that for the United States of America the best is yet to come”
（2）“We have our own opinions.Each of us has deeply held beliefs.And when we go through tough times，when we make big decisions as a country，it necessarily stirs passions，stirs up controversy”
（3）“We want to pass on a country”，“We believe in a generous America”，“That’s where we need to go”
（4）“You elected us”，“America’s never been about what can be done for us.It’s about what can be done by us together through the hard and frustrating”，“that’s not what makes us rich，but that’s not what makes us strong”
（5）“our culture are all the envy of the world”，“but that’s not what keeps the world coming to our shores”
We can see that from the example （1），（2） and （3），the nominative case “we” always directly carry out a verb and moreover，the verb is full of passion and purpose.It is to approve the whole nation to do one thing together and activate all the listeners’ emotion making them feel that the president Obama will firmly stand together with them in facing of future challenges.Also，we can learn from the example （4） and （5） that，the accusative case （us） sometimes is regarded as the one object that accepts the verb.For instance，“elected us” and “done for us” is the case and in this case，“us” is not represented the president and the listeners but the president and the other official members.However，in the sentences “makes us rich” and “makes us strong”，the “us” is represented the whole nation.Also，in the example （2），“each of us” is a phrase which is a kind of nominative case.Finally，the possessive case （our） is mostly used to modify a noun and make the noun become a thing that belong to the whole nation making the listeners believe they are an American family and they have the rights to own and share everything of the United States together.
3.1.3 The discursive functions of using “I” and “we”
Table 3： An analysis of distribution of “I” and “we” in the speech
Items I we Total
NO. 36 50 86
Percentage 41.9% 58.1% 100%
According to the table 3，we can find that the distribution of “I” and “we” is in a quite balanced level.The numbers of the usage of “I” and “we” are respectively 36 and 50，with the percentages of 41.9% and 58.1%.Here are some examples：
（1）“I know that political campaigns can sometimes seem small”，“I will always be grateful for everything that you’ve done and all the incredible work that you put in”，“I will say that for now one dog’s probably enough”，“I wouldn’t be the man I am today”. （2）“We may have battled fiercely”，“we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future”，“when we go through tough times，when we make big decisions as a country”，“We want our children to live in an America”.
We can learn from the examples that when Obama used “I”，he was going to express his own opinions and emotions，and what he would do for the whole nation.Although，the subject is not including the listeners，he would use “you” in the back of the sentence to make the listeners believe that he would make as more contributions as possible for the United Stated and that he was working for the whole country but not himself.When he used “we”，he demonstrate his opinions so straightly to strengthen the listeners’ belief that he was standing for the whole nation and that the president would firmly stand together with them in facing of future challenges.
4.Conclusion
After the analysis of data collected from the text of the victory speech in 2012 addressed by Barack Obama，I have found that the former conclusion is not specific enough.According to the data from the material of the victory speech ，I could conclude that in the speech，Obama has used the first-person pronoun “we” more frequently than “I” to make the entire Americans and himself closer，make them believe that Obama himself is the one who is capable to make the United States stronger.I have also found that “We” and “I” are always used in the head of the sentences but not in the clauses.In that case，Obama was actually appealing the whole nation to act and move with him，and he was trying his best to make all the listeners believe that he was the one who is able to lead them to face different challenges and recover from the crisis.Although，sometimes “We” and “I” are not used in the head，they have the function of being the subjects who launch an act.To analyze the example sentences with the first-person plural pronouns in them，I have found that the discursive functions of using “we，our and us” can shorten the distance between speakers and listeners，leaving them in the same position，establishing a cordial relationship，winning the approval and support from listeners.
References：
[1]James Paul Gee.An Introduction to Discourse Analysis：Theory and Method.Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.
[2]Stephen E.Lucas.The Art of Public Speaking.Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2006.
[3]Halliday，M.A.K.An Introduction to Functional Grammar.London：Edward.Arnold.1994.
[4]Stevenson，R.Models of Language Development.Milton Keynes：Open University Press.1988.
[5]Dolores Fernández Martínez，Verónica Cristina Trujillo González.Obama and Bush：their victory and non-victory speeches.Espa?a，BY-ND（CC）：2012.
[6]Levinson S.C.Pragmatics.Cambridge：Cambridge University Press，1983.
[7]Leech G..Principles of Pragmatics.New York M.Longman，1983.
Research background.Some of the most important points of attractiveness in the recent history of linguistics as a science are the different perspectives from which text analysis can be carried out.That is why discourse analysis is becoming a discipline that brings together linguistics researchers from different areas.According to the text to be analyzed，one will be more suitable than others.But the common ground is that analysts start from the same proposition：a text.Text linguistics is always descriptive and，from this perspective，we analyze what words are used，how a message is said and how discourse is built upon （Coulthard，1994）.
In November 2008，Barack Obama became the 44th president of the United States，sweeping to a victory of historic consequence.Exotically named and unusually colored，Obama’s candidacy was intoxicating.He “hit the American scene like a thunderclap” （Von Drehle，2008），rising from relative obscurity to transform the political agenda and restore the fragile confidence of an increasingly disorientated superpower.Supported by a remarkably effective campaign – “powered by hope” （Obama，2009） – his margin of victory was the largest of any democratic candidate in history （Uhlenbeck，2008； Harris，2008），signaling a popular desire for change，and handing Obama a mandate to refashion America’s political terrain in the most radical terms since Reagan’s landslide victory of 1980.Quite apart from the symbolic reverberation of his ethnicity，Obama’s eloquent and inspirational rhetoric helped reaffirm a nation’s faith in its most cherished of myths，whilst confirming the decline of a political discourse that had dominated American society，and indeed the wider world，for almost three decades.In November 7th，2012，Barack Obama won the campaigning for re-election.At Obama headquarters in Chicago，a huge crowd gathered waving small American flags and cheering.Supporters hugged each other，danced and pumped their fists in the air.“Excited crowds gathered in New York’s Times Square，at Faneuil Hall in Boston and near the White House in Washington，drivers joyfully honking as they passed by.” New York Daily News，November 7，2012，late ed.：B6.To compare with these two political discourses，I have found that there is an intersection.It is about the intention of the discursive functions of using “I” and “we”.
My own analysis and findings of the victory speech of Barack Obama in 2012，I found that the former conclusion is not specific enough.According to the data from the material of the victory speech ，I could conclude that in the speech，Obama has used the first-person pronoun “we” more frequently than “I” to make the entire Americans and himself closer，make them believe that Obama himself is the one who is capable to make the United States stronger.Moreover，besides using “we”，Obama has used other two first-person plural respectively in accusative case （us） and in possessive case （our）. This study aims to analyze Barack Obama’s Strategic Use of First-Person Pronouns more specifically based on the doubt why the data from the victory speech in 2012 is not in accord with the conclusions of the previous researches.
2.Related studies
2.1The most frequently-use is the first-person pronoun
A stylistic study on Barack Obama’s Presidential Victory Speech has been conducted in 2011 by Chen Danbin，a doctor from Guangdong Food and Drug Vocational College.In this study，the writer had a general survey of the main linguistic features in the speech.They are phonetic，lexical and syntactic features.Among these features’ analysis，I found that the writer had conclude something that impressed me in his lexical feature analysis.
In this part，he had found that lexical features are used to find out how choice of words involves various types of meaning.They may contain a general description of vocabulary choice，and examinations of nouns，adjectives，verbs，adverbs，etc.Lexical choices can help to achieve perfect characterization and in turn a growing revealing of the novel’s theme.Public speech，as a formal activity，is very particular in choosing vocabulary.Vocabulary in a speech is clearly than daily conversation，included a number of difficult words and abstract words.In this Obama’s speech，there are 473 difficult words with more than three syllables.Abstract words in public speech are commonly seen，especially in this speech，such as democracy，sacrifice，enormity，challenge，mortgage，determination，humanity，etc，which increased the difficulty of understanding，but on the other hand，increased the formality and reliability of the speech.
On the other hand，the writer also analyzes another lexical feature in the public speech，which is the use of personal pronoun.The most frequently-use is the first-person pronoun （I，We），but the second and third person pronoun is not so frequently used in speech.The use condition of person pronoun in this Obama’s speech is seen in the following chart：
Person
pronoun The
first-person
pronoun（we） The
first-person
pronoun（I） The
first-person
pronoun（out） The
first-person
pronoun（us） The
second-person
pronoun（you） The
third-person
pronoun（they）
NO. 47 26 23 19 15 4
Honestly，in my opinion，although this study’s analysis，from the aspects of lexical，syntax，rhetorical devices，etc，is quite all-sided，it didn’t show us something more specific.For instance，the write just showed us the distribution of the first，second and third person pronoun，but not analyze their different functions when they are used in different positions. 2.2The role of first，second and third person
Dolores Fernández Martínez and Verónica Cristina Trujillo González （Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria，Espa?a） have published an article （October，25，2012） to emphasis on the role of first，second and third person based on the comparison of Obama and Bush’s speeches.In this article，they have examined the role played by first，second and third person references or systems of identification taking into account the transitivity structures （Halliday，2004[1985]：168-305） in which they appear.
From their research，I have found that in Obama’s speech you of the present and the future had produced a new entity，you in power who，associated to the first person I，produces the first person plural （we）.In its first manifestation，we appeared within a negative structure in the past in order to later reinforce its description in the present：we have never been just a collection of individuals or a collection of red states and blue states.We are，and always will be，the United States of America.Far from being conceived of as a mere group of individuals，we represents a national unit whose description in terms of age，status，ideological and sexual orientation，color，nation and physical conditions has been previously provided through the portrayal of the third person.The transitivity structures of they have prepared the territory for the first appearance of we in its patriotic role，but in addition，the negation of the past has also prepared the ground for the association of the first person plural to the present and the future.We represented an amalgamated individuality，they （namely，you） and I，which belongs to the present and the future.We is the entity which unifies past，present and future.Future expectations determine the agent role of we （what we can achieve），but emphasizing the present as the point of departure （tonight … this date in this election at this defining moment），and maintaining a link with the past in order to validate his role as an agent of change （but tonight，be -cause of what we did on this date in this election at this defining moment change has come to America）.
Once the identities of the third and second person have been defined，we becomes visible as a main participant in the text.Obama reiterates explicitly the association of we with the present and the future，and assigns to it the triple-sided transitivity structure of material （celebrate），existential （stand） and mental （know） processes.We is an agent of reflection and action which comes into view tonight （as we celebrate tonight，we know the challenges that tomorrow … we stand here tonight，we know…）.The text also presents the first person plural as a participant who is cautious about the future （may not），but nonetheless displaying a strong determination （will）： We may not get there in one year or even in one term.But，… we will get there.I promise you we as a people will get there.Second，third and first person plural are interpreted as a cohesive entity of power looking ahead to the future （I promise you we as a people will get there）.But the first person plural is enriched by additional roles.We represents you in responsibility，an agent of control that emerges in the present and projects to the future，a social actor bringing about change （the challenges we face … the change we seek … for us to make that change）. 3.Methodology
3.1Issues in Tables Design and Establishment of Tables
To serve its own purpose of research，three tables are established before the analyzing process begins in this study.As tables have become larger and more diverse and as they are frequently used to make definitive statements about language，issues of how they are designed have become of increasing importance.The establishment of tables is by no means an easy task in that a lot of factors should be taken into account.Several aspects of tables design are discussed：purpose，representative and balance，size and contents，data means and sources as well as data collecting principles.
Data analysis
3.1.1 First-person singular and plural pronouns
Table 1：The use condition of first-person singular and plural pronouns
Items First-person
singular （I，me，my） First-person plural
（we，us，our） Total
NO. 40 88 128
Percentage 31.25% 68.75% 100%
Using first-person plural pronouns—“we，our and us” can narrow psychological distance with listeners and then win more listeners over.According to the table 1 above，Obama used the first-person plural pronouns in 88 times totally，as a percentage of 68.75%.It is as more than 2 times as the first-person singular pronouns—“I，my and me”.In the speech，Obama frequently said：（1） “our union moves forward”，（2） “we are an American family and we rise or fall together as one nation and as one people”，（3） “makes us rich，makes us strong and each of us”.To analyze the example sentences with the first-person plural pronouns in them，we can obviously feel that the use of “we，our and us” can shorten the distance between speakers and listeners，leaving them in the same position，establishing a cordial relationship，winning the approval and support from listeners.In this speech，the frequent use of “we” can make the listeners realize that the president Obama will firmly stand together with them in facing of future challenges coming from current severe economical crisis.
3.1.2 The cases of first-person pronouns
Table 2：An analysis of different cases of first-person pronouns
Items Nominative
case （I and we） Accusative case （me and us） Possessive case （my and our） Total
NO. 86 15 27 128
Percentage 67.2% 11.7% 21.1% 100%
According to the table 2，we can see that the usage number of the nominative case （I and we） is the biggest，with the percentage of 67.2% which is enormously more than the other two cases （accusative and possessive case）.Here are the examples： （1）“We have picked ourselves up，we have fought our way back，and we know in our hearts that for the United States of America the best is yet to come”
（2）“We have our own opinions.Each of us has deeply held beliefs.And when we go through tough times，when we make big decisions as a country，it necessarily stirs passions，stirs up controversy”
（3）“We want to pass on a country”，“We believe in a generous America”，“That’s where we need to go”
（4）“You elected us”，“America’s never been about what can be done for us.It’s about what can be done by us together through the hard and frustrating”，“that’s not what makes us rich，but that’s not what makes us strong”
（5）“our culture are all the envy of the world”，“but that’s not what keeps the world coming to our shores”
We can see that from the example （1），（2） and （3），the nominative case “we” always directly carry out a verb and moreover，the verb is full of passion and purpose.It is to approve the whole nation to do one thing together and activate all the listeners’ emotion making them feel that the president Obama will firmly stand together with them in facing of future challenges.Also，we can learn from the example （4） and （5） that，the accusative case （us） sometimes is regarded as the one object that accepts the verb.For instance，“elected us” and “done for us” is the case and in this case，“us” is not represented the president and the listeners but the president and the other official members.However，in the sentences “makes us rich” and “makes us strong”，the “us” is represented the whole nation.Also，in the example （2），“each of us” is a phrase which is a kind of nominative case.Finally，the possessive case （our） is mostly used to modify a noun and make the noun become a thing that belong to the whole nation making the listeners believe they are an American family and they have the rights to own and share everything of the United States together.
3.1.3 The discursive functions of using “I” and “we”
Table 3： An analysis of distribution of “I” and “we” in the speech
Items I we Total
NO. 36 50 86
Percentage 41.9% 58.1% 100%
According to the table 3，we can find that the distribution of “I” and “we” is in a quite balanced level.The numbers of the usage of “I” and “we” are respectively 36 and 50，with the percentages of 41.9% and 58.1%.Here are some examples：
（1）“I know that political campaigns can sometimes seem small”，“I will always be grateful for everything that you’ve done and all the incredible work that you put in”，“I will say that for now one dog’s probably enough”，“I wouldn’t be the man I am today”. （2）“We may have battled fiercely”，“we love this country deeply and we care so strongly about its future”，“when we go through tough times，when we make big decisions as a country”，“We want our children to live in an America”.
We can learn from the examples that when Obama used “I”，he was going to express his own opinions and emotions，and what he would do for the whole nation.Although，the subject is not including the listeners，he would use “you” in the back of the sentence to make the listeners believe that he would make as more contributions as possible for the United Stated and that he was working for the whole country but not himself.When he used “we”，he demonstrate his opinions so straightly to strengthen the listeners’ belief that he was standing for the whole nation and that the president would firmly stand together with them in facing of future challenges.
4.Conclusion
After the analysis of data collected from the text of the victory speech in 2012 addressed by Barack Obama，I have found that the former conclusion is not specific enough.According to the data from the material of the victory speech ，I could conclude that in the speech，Obama has used the first-person pronoun “we” more frequently than “I” to make the entire Americans and himself closer，make them believe that Obama himself is the one who is capable to make the United States stronger.I have also found that “We” and “I” are always used in the head of the sentences but not in the clauses.In that case，Obama was actually appealing the whole nation to act and move with him，and he was trying his best to make all the listeners believe that he was the one who is able to lead them to face different challenges and recover from the crisis.Although，sometimes “We” and “I” are not used in the head，they have the function of being the subjects who launch an act.To analyze the example sentences with the first-person plural pronouns in them，I have found that the discursive functions of using “we，our and us” can shorten the distance between speakers and listeners，leaving them in the same position，establishing a cordial relationship，winning the approval and support from listeners.
References：
[1]James Paul Gee.An Introduction to Discourse Analysis：Theory and Method.Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2000.
[2]Stephen E.Lucas.The Art of Public Speaking.Beijing：Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2006.
[3]Halliday，M.A.K.An Introduction to Functional Grammar.London：Edward.Arnold.1994.
[4]Stevenson，R.Models of Language Development.Milton Keynes：Open University Press.1988.
[5]Dolores Fernández Martínez，Verónica Cristina Trujillo González.Obama and Bush：their victory and non-victory speeches.Espa?a，BY-ND（CC）：2012.
[6]Levinson S.C.Pragmatics.Cambridge：Cambridge University Press，1983.
[7]Leech G..Principles of Pragmatics.New York M.Longman，1983.