From straight talk to change you can believe in, from reform mavericks to more of the same, the current election campaign's mantra is all about the issue of change.

As our previous analyses have shown, the differences in frequency between the candidates and their usage of the theme of change have substantially narrowed since the spring of 2008 (see SEMTRACKS Analysis #5).

Given these developments, this analysis takes a closer look at the collocations of the word change in John McCain and Barack Obama's campaign speeches from February 10, 2007 until August 19, 2008.



1. Common / Different Collocations of Change

The chart below illustrates the collocations of change shared by McCain and Obama (in the middle, red) and the collocations in which they differ (on the sides, blue):

As becomes clear when looking at their shared collocations, both candidates overlap in their connection of the theme of change to words indicating collectivity (we, our) or urgency and possibility (can, need, will, believe). They also share a subject (climate) as well as an object (Washington) of change in their campaign rhetoric.

When compared to Obama, McCain, however, shows a significantly higher frequency of change-collocations associated with the economy (jobs) and the political realm (government, policy). He also employs the adjective right more often in connection with change. All of this reconfirms the conscious crafting of his image as an experienced reformer of the political system (see SEMTRACKS Analysis #5).

Obama's immediate change-collocations, on the other hand, underline the fundamentals of his campaign: the stress on a substantial overhaul of the current political business (real, fundamental), an all-encompassing national transformation (country) with international implications (world, global), as well as the urgency of the moment (time).



2. Common Collocations: Second Level

A follow-up on the change-collocations shared by McCain and Obama to the second level reveals how both candidates design their language with regard to specific fields/words related to the theme of change (with high statistical frequency).

In the case of McCain, the second level of the change-collocations will and our are particularly interesting. As the cluster below indicates, McCain, for example, frequently connects the word will to several action verbs (reform, create), expressing determination and direction. His connections change-collocation pronoun our, on the other hand, essentially echo his broader political message and Republican agenda, offering statistically significant references to the economy, military, as well as the political system and his values (compare SEMTRACKS Analysis #2).

Obama's second-level collocations of the word change paint a different picture. Whereas McCain's rhetoric, for example, offered very few statistically significant collocations of the word Washington, Obama's language is far more semantically elaborate (see the cluster below). In line with his overall political message, he connects Washington to the words same, politician, lobbyist, game, all of them evoking negative connotations and thus reinforcing his agenda of change.

Similarly to McCain, Obama's collocations to the pronoun our when associated with change reflect his the keypoints on his political agenda in a very clear-cut manner. Obama connects our to words from the field of economy, energy, national security and, most of all, to the historic moment and opportunities associated with his presidency (through the words child, history, future). This is also very much in line with the general buzzwords of his campaign speeches (compare SEMTRACKS Analysis #1).

Surprisingly, the second-level change-collocations of both candidates with regard to the words we and can do not display a similarly striking semantic differences.



3. Different Collocations: Second Level

What does illuminate the different interpretations of change for the two candidates, however, are the second-level collocations of change in which they differ.

As the cluster below illustrates, McCain's second-level of change-collocations largely remain in the political and economic field. The statistically relevant words associated to his unique change-collocations job, government and policy, for example, only further underline the strong focus of his political campaign in this area.

In contrast, Obama's cluster suggests a much broader interpretation of change:

For Obama, change is defined in much broader and comprehensive terms. His second-level collocations associated with the word time yet again underline the historical opportunity and moment for change as he envisions it. As the second-level cluster around his change-collocations world and global illustrate, his understanding of change is shaped by America's international position. The themes of national security (e.g. through the words dangerous, weapons), the economy (compete, economy), energy (warming, climate), as well as education are thus semantically tied to a global playing field, on which the U.S. is supposed to lead and compete.

Similarly, as the words clustered around his second-level collocation country indicate, his interpretation of change includes a change in mentality, leading to a common mission beyond political partisanship (exemplified by the words together, unite, love, serve, believe).



4. Conclusions

The first- and second-level collocations of the word change in the rhetoric of both candidates reveal distinctly different visions of how to transform the U.S.

While McCain and Obama's campaign rhetoric toward change overlaps in its usage of words indicating the urgent need for collective transformative effort of Washington, both candidates differ when it comes to the concrete meaning of change.

Whereas McCain's language mainly connects change to the reform political and economic sphere, Obama's change association are more comprehensive, also including a change of mentality and the connection between domestic and international implications of change.


For an explanation of scientific terms, please visit our glossary section.


Calculated with SEMTRACKS collocation analysis tool, powered by Black Forest Grid, the Supercomputer Cluster of the University of Freiburg/Breisgau, Germany.

Context: 5 words left and right of the query word, limited by clause boundaries.