Home » eJournal

Wieczorek (2008) Proximisation, Common Ground, and Assertion-Based Patterns for Legitimisation in Political Discourse

Proximisation, Common Ground, and Assertion-Based Patterns for Legitimisation in Political Discourse

Anna Ewa Wieczorek, University of Łódź

Abstract

This methodological-critical paper aims to investigate the interplay between three prime strategies for legitimisation of the speaker's actions, or actions for which she/he bears responsibility in political discourse: proximisation (cf. Cap 2006), common ground, and assertion-based patterns. It starts with a brief description of the phenomenon of linguistic legitimisation of the speaker's actions, or of actions for which she/he is responsible. The notion may be readily associated with one of the positive politeness strategies proposed by Brown and Levinson (1987), however, it is far more than a politeness strategy, as it consists of a number of pragmatic and extra-pragmatic phenomena: (a) proximisation theory and the STA model for legitimisation (Cap 2005, 2006) enriched with positive, negative and neutral values, (b) assertive speech acts, and their role in assertive-directive and thesis-antithesis patterns, (c) common ground strategy. The operation of these mechanisms will be demonstrated in the analysis of a speech delivered by the Spanish Prime Minister on the acceptance of the bill allowing same-sex marriages. The application of a top-down approach to the analysis (de? Beaugrande 1991) reveals that all the aforementioned aspects comprise a net of complementary linguistic mechanisms ideally suited for the purpose of legitimisation.

Download

Download full text of the article as PDF

(We recommend the free FoxIt PDF Viewer or Adobe Acrobat Reader 8 for better PDF experience.)

References

Austin, J. (1962). How to Do Things With Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Beaugrande, R. de. (1991). Linguistic Theory: The Discourse of Fundamental Works. London: Longman.

Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cap, P. (2005). Language and legitimization: Developments on the proximization model of political discourse analysis. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics I: 7-36.

Cap, P. (2006). Legitimisation in Political Discourse: A Cross-Disciplinary Perspective on the Modern US War Rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.

Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2005). Politeness strategies in institutional speech acts. Masarykovy Univerzity: http://www.ped.muni.cz/weng/co4et2/docs/Navratilova.pdf

Leech, G. (1983) Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.

Levinson, S. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Mann, W. (1984). Discourse structures for text generation. ACL Anthology: A Digital Archive of Research Papers on Computational Linguistics: http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P84-1076.

Pagin, P. (2007). Assertion. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: http://plato.stanford.edu/ entries/assertion/

Schäffner, C. (1996). Editorial: Political speeches and discourse analysis. Current Issues in Language and Society 3/3: http://www.multilingual-matters.net/cils/003/0201/ cils0030201.pdf.

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.

van Dijk, T. (2005). War rhetoric of a little ally: Political implicatures and Aznar's legitimization of the war in Iraq. Journal of Language and Politics 4 (1): 65-91.

van Dijk, T. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse and Society 17 (2): 359-383.

( categories: )