Cover not available

In:Follow-ups in Political Discourse: Explorations across contexts and discourse domains
Edited by Elda Weizman and Anita Fetzer
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 60] 2015
► pp. 25–56

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Intertextual references in Austrian parliamentary debates

Between evaluation and argumentation

ORCiD logo with link
Published online: 20 August 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.60.02gru
In this chapter, the contributions Austrian MPs deliver during the debate after the inaugural speech of a new federal chancellor are investigated under a discourse analytic and rhetorical-argumentative perspective. As the debate contributions refer only to a limited set of reference text, this specific communication situation provides a quasi-experimental setting in which “follow-up” moves in political discourse can be studied. MPs’ follow-up moves during one inaugural speech debate (approx. 12 hours) are investigated on three dimensions: source of reference, linguistic form of reference, rhetorical/argumentative function of statement. Political affiliations of MPs and the time of statement delivery (during or after live TV broadcast) are taken as independent variables of the analysis. Results show that evaluation patterns change during time and that there are two “genres” of debate contributions: the “alternative policy focussed statement” and the “evaluation focussed statement” which display different linguistic and rhetorical/argumentative characteristics.
References (48)
References
Antaki, Charles and Ivan Leudar. 2001. “Recruiting the Record: Using Opponents’ Exact Words in Parliamentary Argumentation. Text, 21(4): 467–488.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Edited by Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin/Texas: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bayley, Paul. 2004. “Introduction: The Whys and Wherefores of Analyzing Parliamentary Discourse.” In Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse, ed. by Paul Bayley, 1–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles. 1994. “Systems of Genres and the Enactment of Social Intentions.” In Genre and the New Rhetoric, ed. by Aviva Freedman & Peter Medway, 79–105. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burkhardt, Armin. 2004. Zwischen Monolog und Dialog. Zur Theorie, Typologie und Geschichte des Zwischenrufes im deutschen Parlamentarismus. Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert. 1996. Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven and John Heritage. 2002. The News Interview : Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crouch, Colin. 2008. Postdemokratie. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1992. “Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-Examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape.” In Talk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 470–521. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eriksson, Göran. 2011. “Follow-Up Questions in Political Press Conferences.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3331–3344. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita and Elda Weizman. 2006. “Political Discourse as Mediated and Public Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 38(2): 143–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita, Elda Weizman, and Elisabeth Reber. 2012. “Introduction.” In Proceedings of the ESF Strategic Workshop on Follow-ups Across Discourse Domains: A Cross Cultural Exploration of Their Forms and Functions, Würzburg (Germany), 31 May – 2 June 2012, ed. by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman and Elisabeth Reber, 3–4. Würzburg: Universität Würzburg – [online]. URL: [URL] URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-71656.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita and Elda Weizman . “Following Up Across Contexts and Discourse Domains: Introduction.” This volume.
Girnth, Heiko. 2002. Sprache und Sprachverwendung in der Politik. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1956. “The Nature of Deference and Demeanor.” American Anthropologist 58(3): 475–499. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, Anchor Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993b. “Evaluation Devices in Newspaper Reports.” Journal of Pragmatics 19(5): 469–486. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. “Genres in Political Discourse: The Case of the Parliamentary “Inaugural Speech” of Austrian Chancellors.” In Analyzing Genres in Political Communication: Theory and Practice, ed. by Piotr Cap & Ursula Okulska (eds), 29–73. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1988. Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns (3. Aufl., Bd. 1–2, Bd. 2). Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1985. “Analyzing News Interviews: Aspects of the Production of Talk for an Overhearing Audience.” In Handbook of Discourse analysis (vol. 1,), ed. by Teun van Dijk, 95–117. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hess-Lüttich, Ernest W.B. 2007. (Pseudo-)Argumentation in TV-debates. Journal of Pragmatics 39(8): 1360–1370. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holly, Werner, Peter Kühn, and Ulrich Püschel. 1986. Politische Fernsehdiskussionen. Zur medienspezifischen Inszenierung von Propaganda als Diskussion. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian and Robin Wooffitt. 1998. Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian. 1996. Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries, and Power on Talk Radio. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 2010. “Identity Co-Construction in Parliamentary Discourse Practices.” In European Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse Strategies and Interaction Practices, ed. by Cornelia Ilie, 57–79. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klein, Josef. 1991. “Politische Textsorten”. Aspekte der Textlinguistik (Germanistische Linguistik 106/107): 245–278.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Textsorten im Bereich politischer Institutionen.” In Handbuch der Text- und Gesprächsanalyse (vol. 2), ed. by Gerd Antos, Karin Brinker and Sven F. Sager, 1589–1605. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kühn, Peter. 1995. Mehrfachadressierung. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 2003. “What if we Talked Politics a Little?” Contemporary Political Theory (2): 143–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey N. and Michael Short. 2007. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, William, and Sandra Thompson. 1987. Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. Marina del Rey/California.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, Jim R. and David Rose. 2008. Genre Relations. Mapping Culture. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, Jim R. and Peter White. 2007. Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Houndsmills Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nuolijärvi, Pirkko and Liisa Tiittula. 2011. “Irony in Political Television Debates.” Journal of Pragmatics 43(2): 572–587. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plug, José. 2010. “Ad-Hominem Arguments in Dutch and the European Parliaments: Strategic Manoeuvring in an Institutional Context. In European Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse Strategies and Interaction Practices, ed. by Cornelia Ilie, 305–329. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reisigl, Martin. 2007. Nationale Rhetorik in Fest- und Gedenkreden. Eine diskursanalytische Studie zum „österreichischen Millennium“ in den Jahren 1946 und 1996. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Steiner, Jürg, André Bächtiger, Markus Spörndli, and Marco R. Steenbergen. 2004. Deliberative Politics in Action. Analysing Parliamentary Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, Gerhard. 1986. Der politische Wortschatz. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, John M. 2004. Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Eemeren, Frans, Rob Grootendorst, and Tjark Kruiger. 1987. Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vice, Sue. 1997. Introducing Bakhtin. Manchester University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weizman, Elda and Marcello Dascal. 1991. “On Clues and Cues: Strategies of Text-Understanding.” Journal of Literary Semantics 20(1): 18–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Welan, Manfred. 1989. Regierungserklärungen in Recht und Politik. In Was die Kanzler sagten: Regierungserklärungen der Zweiten Republik, ed. by Maximilian Gottschlich, Oswald Panagl and Manfred Welan, 69–87. Wien: Böhlau.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 2011. The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. Basingstoke [u.a.]: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zima, Elisabeth and Kurt Feyaerts. 2010. Participant Roles and Layered Intersubjectivity in Austrian Parliamentary Debates. Conference Presentation (Vierte Konferenz der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kognitive Linguistik, Bremen).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (12)

Cited by 12 other publications

Kohn, Ayelet & Elda Weizman
2024. Enhancing the Debate Through Quotations: The Political Arena in Israel. In Not My Words [The Language of Politics, ], ► pp. 81 ff. DOI logo
Saeed, Zafran, Dr. Said Imran & Dr. Syed Sabih ul Hassan
2024. Critical Discourse Analysis of Discursive Strategies Employed in Unga Speeches of Imran Khan: A Socio-Cognitive Perspective. Journal of Policy Research 10:2 ► pp. 107 ff. DOI logo
Kleinke, Sonja
2023.  Top-down meets bottom-up . In Remedies against the Pandemic [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 102], ► pp. 196 ff. DOI logo
Weizman, Elda
2023. Recontextualization practices: A scale of directness. Frontiers in Communication 7 DOI logo
Shibata, Masaki
2020. Why do politicians cite others in political debates?. Journal of Language and Politics 19:4 ► pp. 604 ff. DOI logo
Bull, Peter
2015. Follow-ups in broadcast political discourse. In Follow-ups in Political Discourse [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 60], ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Gruber, Helmut
2015. Policy-oriented argumentation or ironic evaluation: A study of verbal quoting and positioning in Austrian politicians’ parliamentary debate contributions. Discourse Studies 17:6 ► pp. 682 ff. DOI logo
Gruber, Helmut
2018. Debating or displaying political positions?. Pragmatics and Society 9:4 ► pp. 571 ff. DOI logo
Gruber, Helmut
2019. Staged conflicts in Austrian parliamentary debates. Language and Dialogue 9:1 ► pp. 42 ff. DOI logo
Johansson, Marjut
2015. Bravo for this editorial!. In Follow-ups in Political Discourse [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 60], ► pp. 83 ff. DOI logo
Mikalayeva, Liudmila
2015. Follow-ups in pre-structured communication. In Follow-ups in Political Discourse [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 60], ► pp. 231 ff. DOI logo
Sauer, Christoph
2015. Follow-ups in political talk shows and their visual framing. In Follow-ups in Political Discourse [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 60], ► pp. 169 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue