Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatic perspectives on disagreement
Edited by Jennifer Schumann and Steve Oswald
[Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 12:1] 2024
► pp. 41–65

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

Aggression and disagreement in public communication

Convincing third parties through implicit strategies

ORCiD logo with link | Università Roma Tre, Italy
Published online: 7 June 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00096.lom
Abstract
The persuasive effectiveness of implicit strategies, associated with reduced epistemic vigilance, may lead to their exploitation in conveying doubtful information in advertisement and propaganda. In political communication, presuppositions tend to specialize for the conveyance of questionable opinions and self-praise, while implicatures reveal a preferential association with face-threatening contents in general, where implicitness can allow speakers to count less evidently as offenders, at the same time being able to convey contents that can discredit the opponent.
In public debates, speakers do not necessarily aim at convincing the opponent, but at shaping the beliefs of the public at home. In Italian broadcast political debates, implicatures and presuppositions are used exactly with this function. Confirming this pattern, participants in public debates often “intercept” the opponent’s implicatures and make them explicit in order to reduce the persuasiveness effected by their being implicit. Sometimes this also offers the opportunity to provide explicitations that are different from the original implicature, caricaturizing the position of the opponent with a strawman effect.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Specialization of implicit strategies for pragmatic functions
  • 3.Epistemic vigilance and resources devoted to critical judgment are reduced by implicitness
    • 3.1Implicatures
    • 3.2Presuppositions
  • 4.Third parties as the real target in public debates
    • 4.1Implicatures
    • 4.2Presuppositions
  • 5.Intercepting the implicature as a needed defense against its persuasive power
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (54)
References
Brocca, Nicola, Davide Garassino, and Viviana Masia. 2016. “Politici nella rete o nella rete dei politici? L’implicito nella comunicazione politica italiana su Twitter.” Philologie im Netz 111: 66–79.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burkhardt, Petra. 2008. Two Types of Definites: Evidence for Presupposition Cost, in Grønn, Atle (ed.), Proceedings of SUB12, Oslo, Oslo University, 66–80.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burkhardt, Petra, and Dietmar Roehm. 2007. “Differential Effects of Saliency: An Event-Related Brain Potential Study.” Neuroscience Letters 4131: 115–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christiansen, Morten, and Nick Chater. 2016. “The Now-or-Never Bottleneck: A Fundamental Constraint on Language.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 391: 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Saussure, Louis. 2013. “Background Relevance.” Journal of Pragmatics 591: 178–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. “Présuppositions discursives, assertion d’arrière-plan et persuasion.” In Rhétorique et cognition – Perspectives théoriques et stratégies persuasives, ed. by Thierry Herman, and Steve Oswald, 279–311. Lausanne: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Domaneschi, Filippo, Paolo Canal, Viviana Masia, Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri, and Valentina Bambini. 2018. “N400 and P600 Modulation in Presupposition Accommodation: The Effect of Different Trigger Types.” Journal of Neurolinguistics 451: 13–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1972. Dire et ne pas dire. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Erickson, Thomas D., and Mark E. Mattson. 1981. “From Words to Meanings: A Semantic Illusion.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 2051: 540–551. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferreira, Fernanda, Karl G. D. Bailey, and Vittoria Ferraro. 2002. “Good-Enough Representations in Language Comprehension”. Current Directions in Psychological Science 11(1): 11–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garassino, Davide, Viviana Masia, and Nicola Brocca. 2019. “Tweet as you Speak: The Role of Implicit Strategies and Pragmatic Functions in Political Communication: Data from a Diamesic Comparison.” Rassegna Italiana di Linguistica Applicata (RILA) 511: 187–208.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, Gerd. 2008. “Why Heuristics Work.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 3(1): 20–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1982. “Evidentiality and Epistemic Space.” Studies in Language 611: 23–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hertrich, Ingo, Mareike Kirsten, Sonja Tiemann, Sigrid Beck, Anja Whüle, Hermann Ackermann, and Bettina Rolke. 2015. “Context-Dependent Impact of Presuppositions on Early Magnetic Brain Responses during Speech Perception.” Brain and Language 1481: 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hornby, Peter A. 1974. “Surface Structure and Presupposition.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13(5): 530–538. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Irwin, David E., Kathryn J. Bock, and Keith E. Stanovich. 1982. “Effects of Information Structure Cues on Visual Word Processing.” Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 211: 307–325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jouravlev, Olessia, Laura Stearns, Leon Bergen, Marianna Eddy, Edward Gibson, and Fedorenko, Evelina. 2016. “Processing Temporal Presuppositions: An Event-Related Potential Study.” Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31(10): 1245–1256. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1986. L’Implicite. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Carol, and Paul Kiparsky. 1971. “Fact.” In Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reading, ed. by Danny D. Steinberg, and Leon A. Jakobovitz, 345–369. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krebs, John R., and Richard Dawkins. 1984. “Animal Signals: Mind-Reading and Manipulation.” In Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, ed. by John R. Krebs, and Nicholas B. Davies, 380–402. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langford, J., and V. M. Holmes. 1979. “Syntactic Presupposition in Sentence Comprehension.” Cognition 71: 363–383. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lewis, David. 1979. “Scorekeeping in a Language Game.” Journal of Philosophical Logic 81: 339–359. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Loftus, Elizabeth F. 1975. “Leading Questions and the Eyewitness Report.” Cognitive Psychology 71: 550–572. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo. 1993. “Clausole a contenuto presupposto e loro funzione discorsiva in italiano antico.” Quaderni del dipartimento di Linguistica dell’Università di Firenze 41: 71–95.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Tratti linguistici della persuasione in pubblicità.” Lingua Nostra 2/31: 41–51.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. La struttura informativa. Forma e funzione negli enunciati linguistici. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “The ‘Exaptation’ of Linguistic Implicit Strategies.” SpringerPlus 5(1): 1–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Bidirectional Reciprocal Reinforcement of Stereotypes and Implicatures in Persuasive Texts.” Italian Journal of Cognitive Sciences 1/2017 a. 6. 11:, 63–78. ()Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019. La lingua disonesta. Bologna: Il Mulino.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. “Manipulative Shallow Processing Induced by Presuppositions and Topics: Theoretical Perspectives and Experimental Evidence.” Frontiers in Communication 61: 610807. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo, and Viviana Masia. 2014. Implicitness Impact: Measuring texts. In Journal of Pragmatics 611: 161–184.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lombardi Vallauri, Edoardo, and Viviana Masia. 2020. “La comunicazione implicita come dimensione di variazione tra tipi testuali.” In Linguaggi settoriali e specialistici. Sincronia, diacronia, traduzione, variazione, ed. by Jacqueline Visconti, Manuela Manfredini, and Lorenzo Coveri, 113–120. Firenze: Cesati.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio. 2015. “Presupposition as Argumentative Reasoning.” In Interdisciplinary Studies in Pragmatics, Culture and Society, ed. by Alessandro Capone, and Jacob L. Mey, Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology 4, Springer International Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio, and Capone, Alessandro. 2017. “Presuppositions as Cancellable Inferences.” In Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use, Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology 9, ed. by Keith Allan, Alessandro Capone, and Istvan Kecskes, 465–487. Springer International Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maillat, Didier, and Steve Oswald. 2009. “Defining Manipulative Discourse: The Pragmatics of Cognitive Illusions.” International Review of Pragmatics 11: 348–370. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Masia, Viviana, Paolo Canal, Irene Ricci, Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri, and Valentina Bambini. 2017. Presupposition of New Information as a Pragmatic Garden Path: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials.” Journal of Neurolinguistics 421: 31–48. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mazzarella, Diana, Robert Reinecke, Ira Noveck, and Hugo Mercier. 2018. “Saying, Presupposing and Implicating: How Pragmatics Modulates Commitment.” Journal of Pragmatics 1331: 15–27. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mercier, Hugo. 2009. “La Théorie Argumentative du Raisonnement.” Ph.D. Thesis in Social Sciences, Mention Cognitive Sciences, E.H.E.S.S, Paris.
. 2011. “On the Universality of Argumentative Reasoning.” Journal of Cognition and Culture 111: 85–113.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reboul, Anne. 2011. “A Relevance-Theoretic Account of the Evolution of Implicit Communication.” Studies in Pragmatics 131: 1–19.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. Cognition and Communication in the Evolution of Language. Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rigotti, Eddo. 1988. “Significato e senso”. In AA.VV, Ricerche di semantica testuale. Brescia: La Scuola, 71–120.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1905. “On Denoting.” Mind 14(56): 479–493. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J. 2002. “Context, Attention and Depth of Processing during Interpretation.” In Mind & Language 171: 188–206.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina. 2007. Detto non detto. Le forme della comunicazione implicita. Roma-Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2021. “ Presupposition and Implicature: Varieties of Implicit Meaning in Explicitation Practices.” Journal of Pragmatics 1821: 176–188. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz, Florian. 2015. “Presuppositions vs. Asserted Content in Online Processing.” In Experimental Perspectives on Presupposition: Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, ed. by Florian Schwarz, 89–108. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “False but Slow: Evaluating Statements with Non-referring Definites.” Journal of Semantics 33(1): 177–214.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schwarz, Florian, and Sonja Tiemann. 2017. “Presupposition Projection in Online Processing.” Journal of Semantics 34(1): 61–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, Fabrice Clément, Christophe Heintz, Olivier Mascaro, Hugo Mercier, Gloria Origgi, and Deirdre Wilson. 2010. “Epistemic Vigilance.” Mind & Language 25(4): 359–393. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strawson, Peter F. 1964. “Identifying Reference and Truth-Values.” Theoria 3021: 96–118. Rep. in Idem, Logico-Linguistic Papers, London: Methuen, 1971, 75–95.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stalnaker, Robert. 2002. “Common Ground.” Linguistics and Philosophy 251: 701–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tiemann, Sonja, Schmid, Mareike, Rolke, Bettina, Ackermann, Hermann, Knapp, Julia, Beck, Sigrid. 2011. Psycholinguistic Evidence for Presuppositions: On-line vs. Off-line Data, In Reich, Ingo, Horch, Eva, Pauly, Dennis (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn & Bedeutung 15, Saarbrücken, Universaar – Saarland University Press, 581–597.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman. 1974. “Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases.” Science 185(4157): 1124–1131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Giunta, Giulia, Maria Roccaforte, Nausicaa Pouscoulous & Edoardo Lombardi Vallauri
2025. Presupposition: accepted information or embraced beliefs? The role of informative function and trigger type in separating two levels of accommodation. Folia Linguistica 59:3 ► pp. 839 ff. DOI logo
Mansour, Mansour, Sama S. Hammad, Abdelrahman Al-Anati, Lubna Khalid Alkhowiter & Ahmad Alnawafleh
2025. “Saying No Without Saying No”: An Organizational Case Study on Assertive Communication Practices Among Nursing Workforce in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Nursing Management 2025:1 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 13 november 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