Cover not available

In:A Gender-based Approach to Parliamentary Discourse: The Andalusian Parliament
Edited by Catalina Fuentes Rodríguez and Gloria Álvarez-Benito
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 68] 2016
► pp. 77–92

Get fulltext
PDF logo with download linkDownload Chapter PDF

Chapter 4
Argumentation and face-threatening acts

The non-literal quotation

 | Universidad de Sevilla
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 1 December 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.68.05lop
Abstract
This chapter analyses parody in parliamentary discourse as a strategy towards the following objective: disqualifying one’s political enemies. To do this, the politician uses a very useful resource: the non-literal quotation. This form of attack is a very effective manipulation tool, which we must study by relating politeness theory and argumentation. This chapter also studies aggressive and fallacious strategies in relation to the gender of the speaker and the listener, in the context of a discourse traditionally monopolised by men.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Corpus
  • 3.The non-literal quotation as a face-threatening act
    • 3.1Quoting the words of an ideological adversary in the House
    • 3.2Quoting the words of an opposing ideological group
    • 3.3Quoting the words of a community or common sense
  • 4.Results according to gender and ideology
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (21)
References
Bañón, A. (2010) “Comunicación destructiva y agresividad verbal en la Red. Notas en torno al discurso sobre las enfermedades raras” in Discurso y Sociedad 4 (4): 650–673.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bañón A. M. Arcos J. M. and Requena S. (2012): “La gestión del tiempo en el discurso parlamentario” in Discurso y Sociedad 6 (1): 49–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brenes E. (2010b) “Violencia verbal y discurso televisivo. Análisis pragmalingüístico de la figura del moderador-excitador” in Discurso y Sociedad 4 (4): 706–730.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brenes E (2011) “Recursos lingüísticos al servicio de la (des)cortesía verbal: los apéndices apelativos” in Fuentes-Rodríguez, C., E. Alcaide and E. Brenes (eds.) Aproximaciones a la (des)-cortesía verbal en español. Bern: Peter Lang Verlag, 119–138.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012) “El discurso de los parlamentarios y parlamentarias andaluces. Análisis pragmático de la ironía verbal” in Discurso y Sociedad 6 (1): 79–97.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ducrot, O. (1986): El decir y lo dicho: polifonía de la enunciación, Barcelona, Paidós.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fant, L. (2007) “La modalización del acierto formulativo en español” in Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana V: 39–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fant, L. and Granato, L. (2002) “Cortesía y gestión interrelacional: hacia un marco conceptual” in Stockholm Studies in Interaction, Identity and Linguistic Structure, SIIS Working Papers IV. Estocolmo: Universidad de Estocolmo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fant, L. and Grinsted, A. (1995) “Conflict and consensus in Spanish vs. Scandinavian negotiation interaction” in Hermes, Journal of Linguistics 15: 111–141.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fuentes-Rodríguez, C. (2009) “La argumentación en la lengua y la cortesía verbal ¿dos teorías distintas?” in M. Casas, et al. (eds.) Actas de las XI Jornadas de Lingüística, Universidad de Cádiz, 109–148.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012) “La verdad como estrategia de legitimación discursiva” in Discurso y Sociedad 6 (1): 128–155.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
González M. (2012) “La acusación en las preguntas orales formuladas en el Parlamento andaluz: una perspectiva de género” in Discurso y Sociedad 6 (1): 156–168.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lo Cascio, V. (1998) Gramática de la argumentación. Madrid: Alianza.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
López, J. M. (2012) “La cita como estrategia argumentativa y de ataque en el discurso parlamentario” in Discurso y Sociedad 6 (1): 169–186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Márquez, M. (2012) “La paradoja de la atenuación en el discurso político. Su funcionalidad argumentativa en las interpelaciones de parlamentarias y parlamentarios andaluces” in Discurso y Sociedad 6 (1): 187–215.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reyes, G. (1995) Los procedimientos de cita: estilo directo y estilo indirecto, Madrid, Arco Libros.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruhi, S. (2010) “Face as an indexical category in interaction” in Journal of Pragmatics 38 (6): 2131–2146. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samra-Frederiks, D. (2010) “Ethnomethodology and the moral accountability of interaction: Navigating the conceptual terrain of ‘face’ and ‘face-work’” in Journal of Pragmatics 38(6): 2147–2157. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Son Jang, J. (2010) “Fórmulas de tratamiento pronominales en los jóvenes universitarios de Medellín (Colombia) desde la óptica sociopragmática: estrato socioeconómico y sexo” in Íkala 15 (26): 43–116.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dijk, T. (2005) “Ideología y análisis del discurso”, in Utopía y praxis latinoamericana 29: 9–36.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van-Dijk, T. (2009) Society and discourse: how social contexts influence text and talk, Cambridge, New York, Cambridge University Express. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue