Article

A pragmatic analysis of the use of person deixis in political discourse

Journal of Pragmatics 01/1994; DOI: 10.1016/0378-2166(94)90010-8

ABSTRACT Previous research into the persuasive functions of first-person plural deictic pronominals has not adequately accounted for the complex pragmatic process involved in the resolution of such pronouns and the consequent effects of such complexity on the persuasive functions of indexicals. The present paper addresses this gap by means of an analytic framework that introduces the concept of ‘discourse spaces’ and demonstrates its interrelationships with participant structures, participant roles, linguistic indicators, and deixis. Through analysis of one interlocutor's responses in a televised political speech event, it is demonstrated that the relationships that hold among these concepts and elements are crucial to the analysis of vague deixis, and the consequent potential persuasive functions of such usage. It further demonstrates that a speaker's power of persuasion is greatly determined by an ability to shift in and out of various roles within and across ‘discourse spaces’. This study synthesizes and extends findings from the various theoretical and methodological approaches of political discourse analysis, studies on the resolution of referring expressions, and theories concerning the different ‘realities’ evoked in social interaction and language.

3 Bookmarks
 · 
494 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This article applies social constructionism and groupism theory to discourses on language officialization in Puerto Rico. It examines three argumentative texts presented prior to the passage of Law #4 in 1991 making Spanish the sole official language of the island. Grounded critical discourse theory maintains that language form and content are inextricably linked; thus, the article examines how protectionist and receptive discourses present in all three texts variably make recourse to forms of groupism through the use of linguistic resources in the first person plural. Specific acts of framing, accompanied by inclusive, exclusive, and ambiguous reference, enable all three proponents to make the argument that “we the Puerto Rican people” stand behind what are in reality opposing points of view. A muted call for moving beyond groupism also can be identified in these texts, which potentially forms a third space within which are integrated both protectionist and receptive discourses. More broadly speaking this paper is applicable to the study of the nature of political discourse and its contributions to and effects on language policy worldwide.
    Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 01/2011; 8(2):176-202.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Based on videotaped data from two televized Taipei mayoral debates from 1998, this study examines, both qualitatively and quantitatively, how the use of the second-person singular pronoun ni 'you' by three Taiwanese politicians reflects their attitudes and relations toward other participants as well as their perceptions of the interactive goals of the speech activity. My analysis has found that compared with the first debate, the frequency of ni in the second debate increased from 63 to 221. More importantly, the functions of ni in these two debates are very different. In the first debate, more than 60 percent of the occurrences of ni are used by the three debaters either to address the audience/voters or to refer to an indefinite person (i.e., the impersonal ni), thereby establishing solidarity with the audience or voters. In contrast, more than 80 percent of the occurrences of ni in the second debate (which took place only four days before the election) are used when debaters address their opponents directly to challenge or attack them. I suggest that the different uses of ni in the two debates signal that the interactive goal of the debate has changed from establishing or reinforcing solidarity with the audience to expressing antagonism and confrontation vis-a`-vis one's opponent. In addition, the different uses of ni among the three mayoral candidates also reflect their distinct communicative styles, e.g., casual or formal.
    Text. 01/2002; 22(1):29-55.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The British General Election of 2010 raised high expectations due to the social and political situation of the country, both externally and internally alike: the global economic crisis, the troops in Afghanistan, the anticipation of a political landslide with the accession of the Liberal Democrats to power. However, it seems apparent that the parties involved did not live up to them in terms of political debate and engament with the issues. This article sets out to explore the discourses of the manifestos published by the three main parties, with a view to identifying differences in their means of relating to the electorate, and tracing their discursive construction of key issues. RESUMEN: las elecciones generales británicas de 2010 crearon un alto grado de expectación debido a la situación socio-política del país. Tanto a nivel externo como interno: la crisis económica global, las tropas en Afganistán, la posibilidad real de un cambio en los equilibrios de poder con la entrada de los liberaldemócratas en el gobierno. Sin embargo, los partidos políticos no satisficieron tales expectativas en relación con el nivel del debate político y su respuesta a los temas candentes. Este artículo explora las prácticas discursivas de los programas electorales publicados por los tres partidos principales con el propósito de identificar las posibles diferen-cias en la construcción discursiva de los temas más relevantes y sus estrategias para conectar con el electorado. Palabras clave: elecciones generales británicas de 2010, programas electorales, análisis del discurso, multimodalidad, discurso político.
    Cultura, Lenguaje y Representación. 01/2011;