“The Fact is That Everything He is Saying So Far is Simply a Lie” : Expressive Truthmaking in the Political Debate

This study investigates language use in political debates. It takes a closer look at linguistic markers of expressivity and truthmaking on word level in a presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden. The results show clear differences between these two debaters. Trump uses expressive language more extensively than Biden. Examples of markers that Trump uses more often than Biden are rein-forcing: very, much, super, totalizing: all, every, never, mental: know, think, want, verbal: tell, talk, say, hypothetical: if, could, would, and self-reference: I, me. Ex-amples of markers that Biden uses more often that Trump are reinforcing: more, totalizing: none, mental: feel verbal: ask, hypothetical: should, and self-reference: my. All in all, Trump uses these kinds of linguistic resources both more often and in lager clusters. There is also a difference between Trump and Biden in their choice of markers from the same group, for example between know (Trump) and feel (Biden), and between tell (Trump) and ask (Biden). The methodological results show that our current constellation of linguistic markers is effective as an analytical tool and highlights the importance of expressivity, in relation to empirical and logical truth, as a crucial component of truthmaking in political debates