Main Article Content


The inaugural speeches mark the beginning of a new term in office for a community or government leader, such as the president. This reaction must persuade the people to believe in the government and the programs will be enacted. This research aims at finding the rhetorical appeals of President Joe Biden's inaugural address on his inauguration as the 46th President of the United States. The research is based on Aristotle's theory called a rhetorical theory. The resercher employs descriptive qualitative as a methodology to analyze the data from the spoken utterances of the speech. The result shows that Joe Biden uses all of the Aristotelian rhetoric strategies in his inaugural address, which are: ethos, pathos, and logos. The data shows that Joe Biden uses pathos as 55% of his speech, followed by ethos 37%, and logos 8%.. Joe Biden skillfully used and implied Aristotle's rhetorical theory in his inauguration address to engage and build trust with the American people. From the analysis, the researcher has concluded that a good speaker can use all of the three elements of the rhetorical theory and imply them in the speech or writing.


Ethos Inaugural Address Joe Biden Logos Pathos Rhetorical Analysis

Article Details

How to Cite
Nurkhamidah, N., Fahira, R. Z., & Ningtyas , A. R. (2021). Rhetorical Analysis of Joe Biden’s Inauguration Address. JL3T (Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Language Teaching), 7(2), 73-82.


  1. Arofah, K. (2018). Rhetorical Analysis of Hate Speech: Case Study of Hate Speech Related to Ahok’s Religion Blasphemy Case. Mediator: Jurnal Komunikasi, 11(1), 91–105.
  2. Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. K. (2010). Introduction to Research in Education (8th ed.). Wadsworth.
  3. Ayeomoni, O. M., & Akinkuolere, O. S. (2012). A Pragmatic Analysis of Victory and Inaugural Speeches of President Umaru Musa Yar‟Adua. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(3).
  4. Biria, R., & Mohammadi, A. (2012). The socio pragmatic functions of inaugural speech: A critical discourse analysis approach. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(10), 1290–1302.
  5. Darminto, W. (2019). Rhetorical analysis of Oprah Winfrey’s commencement speech at the University of Southern California in 2018.
  6. David, W. T., & Miracle, O. (2014). a Pragmatic Analysis of Victory and Inaugural Speeches of President Jonathan: a Measure for Transformation and Good Governance in Nigeria. 1(November 2013).
  7. Demirdöğen, Ü. D. (2016). The Roots of Research in (political) Persuasion: Ethos, Pathos, Logos and the Yale Studies of Persuasive Communications. Undefined.
  8. Fanani, A., Setiawan, S., Purwati, O., Maisarah, M., & Qoyyimah, U. (2020). Donald Trump’s grammar of persuasion in his speech. Heliyon, 6(1), e03082.
  9. Feng, V. W., & Hirst, G. (2011). Classifying arguments by scheme. ACL-HLT 2011 - Proceedings of the 49th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, 1, 987–996.
  10. Floyd-lapp, C. (2014). Aristotle ’ s Rhetoric : The Power of Words and the Continued Relevance of Persuasion. Young Historians Conference, 1–13.
  11. Gabrielsen, J., Christiansen, T. J., Lange, E. F., & CLM Translation. (2010). The power of speech (1st ed.). Hans Reitzels Forlag.
  12. Griffin, E. (2012). A First Look at Communication Theory (Eighth Edition)
  13. Hie Ting, S. (2018). Ethos, Logos and Pathos in University Students’ Informal Requests. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 18(1), 234–251.
  14. Higgins, C., & Walker, R. (2012). Ethos , logos , pathos : Strategies of persuasion in social/environmental reports. Accounting Forum, 36(3), 194–208.
  15. Isai, K. I. A., Lin, T. M., Ching, H. S., Selvajothi, R., & Maruthai, E. (2020). Using Rhetorical Approach of Ethos, Pathos and Logos by Malaysian Engineering Students in Persuasive Email Writings. Malaysian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (MJSSH), 5(4), 19–33.
  16. Ko, H. (2015). Political Persuasion : Adopting Aristotelian Rhetoric in Public Policy Debate Strategies. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 5(10), 114–123.
  17. Mori, K. (2016). Analysis of the discourse of diplomatic conflict at the UN: Application of ethos, pathos, logos. Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Humanities & Social Sciences 2016 (IC-HUSO 2016).
  18. Mshvenieradze, T. (2013). Logos Ethos and Pathos in Political Discourse. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3(11).
  19. Murthy, D. M. L., & Ghosal, D. M. (2014). D. Madhavi Latha Murthy a Study on Aristotle’S Rhetoric. Research Journal of English Language and Literature (RJELAL), 2(4), 249–255.
  20. Quijano, M. G., & Bulusan, F. (2020). Language and politics: Exploring the rhetorical appeals and devices employed by three Philippine presidents in their first state of the nation addresses. Asian ESP Journal, 16(21), 31–49.
  21. Salleh, L. M. (2014). POWER OF LANGUAGE. Prosiding Seminar Antarabangsa Kelestarian Insan 2014 (INSAN2014), 1–10.
  22. Shaw, K. (2017). Beyond the bully pulpit: Presidential speech in the courts. Texas Law Review, 96(1), 71–140.
  23. Stuckey, M. E. (2010). Rethinking the Rhetorical Presidency and Presidential Rhetoric1. Review of Communication, 10(1), 38–52.
  24. Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing and Health Sciences, 15(3), 398–405.
  25. Widyawardani, Y. I. (2016). Rhetorical analysis of Donald Trump`s Presidential candidacy announcement speech.