Cover not available

Article published In: Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 24:2 (2025) ► pp.301–327

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

Reactions to interruptions in Finnish, French and German parliamentary debates

ORCiD logo with link | University of Helsinki
ORCiD logo with link | University of Lyon Lumière | ICAR Lab
ORCiD logo with link | University of Cambridge
ORCiD logo with link | University of Helsinki
Published online: 5 March 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.23053.iso
Abstract
This paper analyses unauthorised turns – namely, interruptions – in parliamentary debates, by focusing on their lesser-studied interactional characteristics, that is, reactions. Drawing upon cross-cultural pragmatics, we compare reactions in Finnish (Eduskunta of Finland), French (Assemblée nationale of France) and German (Bundestag of Germany) parliamentary debates. In doing so, we applied conversation analysis in the sequential analysis of reactions to interruptions while considering restrictions related to written transcriptions. While most interruptions passed without reaction in all three languages, the reactions came from different sources: from unauthorised speakers in French, from authorised speakers in German and from both in Finnish. Our study demonstrates that interruptions serve as resources for micro-interactions within official speaking turns in parliamentary debates, revealing cross-cultural differences in speech styles.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Research on interruptions in parliamentary debates
    • 2.1Finnish
    • 2.2French
    • 2.3German
  • 3.Data, methods and theoretical framework
    • 3.1Stenographic protocols of parliamentary debates
    • 3.2Data
    • 3.3Methods and theoretical framework
  • 4.Reactions to interruptions in Finnish, French and German
    • 4.1Cross-cultural comparison of reactions to interruptions
    • 4.2Reaction from an authorised speaker
    • 4.3Reaction from an unauthorised speaker
      • 4.3.1Reaction directed at an authorised speaker
      • 4.3.2Reactions not addressed to an authorised speaker
    • 4.4Reactions in multi-turn sequences
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
References (54)
References
Assemblée national, n.d. “02 réglement Assemblée nationale, 16e législature [Rule 02 of the National Assembly, 16th legislature].” Accessed 12 February, 2024. [URL]
. 2021–2022. “Comptes rendus des débats en séances (Proceedings of the Plenary Sessions).” Accessed 13 February, 2024. [URL]
Bayley, Paul. 2004. “Introduction: the whys and wherefores of analysing parliamentary discourse”. In Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse, edited by Paul Bayley, 1–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bilmes, Jack. 1997. “Being interrupted”. Language in Society 26 (4): 507–531. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bonnafous, Simone, and Dominique Desmarchelier. 1999. “Quand les députés coupent le ‘RESEDA’ [When members of parliament interrupt the ‘RESEDA’]”. Mots. Les langages du politique 60 (1): 93–109. [URL].
Burkhardt, Armin. 2004. Zwischen Monolog und Dialog. Zur Theorie, Typologie und Geschichte des Zwischenrufs im deutschen Parlamentarismus [Between monologue and dialogue. On the theory, typology and history of interruptions in the German Parliament]. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cabasino, Francesca. 1998. “Peut-on théoriser le polylogue [Can Polylogues be theorised]”. In Du dialogue au polylogue, Actes du colloque international Do.RI.F [Acts of the Do.RI.F. international conference], Università Rome, 24–25 October 1997, DSU, Rome, 37–50.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “L’injure a-t-elle droit de cité dans l’interpellation? Le cas du débat parlementaire [Can insults appear in interruptions? The case of a parliamentary debate]”. Corela. Cognition, Représentation, Langage. HS-8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carbó, Teresa. 1992. “Towards an Interpretation of Interruptions in Mexican Parliamentary Discourse (1920–60)”. Discourse & Society 3 (1): 25–45. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E., and John Heritage. 2023. “Pressuring the President: Changing language practices and the growth of political accountability”. Journal of Pragmatics 2071: 62–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven E., and Laura Loeb. 2018. “Conversation analysis and the study of language and politics.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics Routledge, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Bernhard Forchtner, 276–290, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cribb, V. Michael and Shivani, Rochford. 2018. “The Transcription and Representation of Spoken Political Discourse in the UK House of Commons”. International Journal of English Linguistics 8 (2). Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Desmarchelier, Dominique. 2005. “‘La parole est à M. le député…’” : Analyse des interventions venant interrompre l’orateur à l’Assemblée nationale [Dear honourable member, the floor is yours: Analysis of speaker interruptions at the National Assembly]”. In Parole et pouvoir 2. Enjeux politiques et identitaires (Interférences) [Speech and power 2. Political and identity issues] ed. by Martine Schuwer, 119–133. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes. [URL].
Eduskunta. 2019–2021. ”Täysistuntojen pöytäkirjat [Proceedings of the Plenary Sessions]. Accessed 13 February, 2024. [URL]
Deutscher Bundestag. 2021. “Plenarprotokoll (Proceedings of the Plenary Sessions).” Accessed 13 February, 2024. [URL]
Drew, Paul and John Heritage. 1992. “Analyzing talk at work: An introduction,” in Talk at Work, edited by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action. Interactions, Identities and Institutions. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
House, Juliane, and Dániel Kádár. 2021. Cross-cultural Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyvönen, Eero, Laura Sinikallio, Petri Leskinen, Matti La Mela, Tuominen, Jouni, Kimmo Elo, Senka Drobac, Mikko Koho, Esko Ikkala, Minna Tamper, Rafael Leal, and Kesäniemi Joonas. 2022. “Finnish Parliament on the Semantic Web: Using ParliamentSampo Data Service and Semantic Portal for Studying Political Culture and Language”. In Digital Parliamentary data in Action (DiPaDA 2022), Workshop at the 6th Digital Humanities in Nordic and Baltic Countries Conference, long paper, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 31331, 69–85. Digital Parliamentary Data in Action, Uppsala, Sweden, 15/03/2022. [URL]
Ilie, Cornelia. 2018. “Parliamentary debates”. In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics Routledge, edited by Ruth Wodak and Bernhard Forchtner, 309–325. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. “Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction”. In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, edited by Gene H. Lerner, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Junkkari, Marko. 2019. ”Kurinpalautus [Time to return to discipline].” Helsingin Sanomat, 27 October, 2019. [URL]
Kádár, Dániel, and Juliane House. 2020. “T/V pronouns in global communication practices: The case of IKEA catalogues across linguacultures”. Journal of Pragmatics 1611: 1–15. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koivisto, Matti. 2018. ”Entinen puhemies ripittää kansanedustajia salissa metelöimisestä: ’Huudellaan pitkiä näkemyksiä toisten puheenvuorojen päälle ja nauretaan’ [’Ex-chairman criticises MPs for making noise in parliament: They shout long utterances interrupting the turns of others and laugh’]”. Yle, 24 February, 2018. [URL]
Kühn, Peter. (1983). “Der parlamentarische Zwischenruf als mehrfachadressierte Sprachhandlung [Interruption in the parliament as a multiple addressed language action]”. In Sprache, Diskurs und Text [Speech, Discourse and Text] edited by René Jongen, Sabine De Knop, Peter H. Nelde and Marie-Paule Quix, 239-251. Tübingen: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lamothe, Jérémie, Mariama Darame, and Marie Slavicek (with AFP). 2022. “Séance interrompue à l’Assemblée nationale après des propos à teneur raciste d’un député RN [Debate interrupted in the National Assembly after racist remarks by an MP from the RN party]”. Le Monde, 3 November, 2022. [URL]
Manner, Henrik, Lasse Winter, and Matti Wiberg. 2012. “Välihuudot eduskunnan pöytäkirjoissa vaalikaudella 2007–2011: määrällinen tarkastelu [Interruptions in transcripts of the parliament 2007–2011: quantitative analysis]”. Politiikka 21. 131–147.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mollin, Sandra. 2007. The Hansard hazard: gauging the accuracy of British parliamentary transcripts. Corpora 2 (2): 187–210. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morel, Benjamin. 2018. “Ce que conte le compte rendu : l’institution d’un ordre parlementaire idéalisé. [What the report says: institution of an idealised parliamentary order]”. Droit et société 98 (1): 179–199. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paananen, Veera. 2022. “Vaikka eduskunta tasa-arvoistui, miehet keskeyttävät muita puhujia yhä paljon enemmän kuin naiset [Although the Finnish Parliament became more equal, men still interrupt other speakers more than women].” Helsingin Sanomat, 26 December, 2022. [URL]
Parisien, Le. ‘Tu vas la fermer!’: pagaille jeudi soir à l’Assemblée autour de la réintégration des soignants non-vaccinés [‘Shut up’: Mayhem Thursday evening in the National Assemby related to the reintegration of unvaccinated nurses]”. Le Parisien, 25 November 2022. [URL]
Rouvillois, Frédéric. 2006. Histoire de la politesse. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emmanuel Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. 1974. “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 501: 696–735. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanuel. 1992. “Repair after next turn: the last structurally provided defence of intersubjectivity in conversation.” American Journal of Sociology, 97 (5): 1295–1345. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emmanuel, Harvey Sacks. 1973. “Opening up closings.” Semiotica 8 (4): 389–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Semantic Computing Research Group (SeCo), n.d. “Parlamenttisampo. Eduskunta semanttisessa webissä [Parlamenttisampo–Parliament of Finland on the Semantic Web]”. Accessed 13 February, 2024. [URL]
Sidnell, Jack & Stivers, Tanya (eds.). 2013. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shenhav, Shaul R. 2008. “Showing and telling in parliamentary discourse: the case of repeated interjections to Rabin’s speeches in the Israeli parliament”. Discourse & Society 19 (2): 223–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stopfner, Maria. 2013. Streitkultur im Parlament: linguistische Analyse der Zwischenrufe im österreichischen Nationalrat [Culture of debate in the parliament: a linguistic analysis of interruptions in the Austrian National Council]. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. “Bleiben Sie freundlich! – Korrektive Prozesse im Parlament [Stay friendly – Corrective processes in the parliament]”. In Miscommunication and Verbal Violence, edited by Ulla Tuomarla, Juhani Härmä, Liisa Tiittula, Anni Sairio, Maria Paloheimo, and Johanna Isosävi, 279–292. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. [URL]
Truan, Naomi. 2016. “On the Pragmatics of Interjections in Parliamentary Interruptions”. Revue de Sémantique et Pragmatique 401: 125–144. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Zwischenrufe zwischen parlamentarischer Routine und Kreativität: Die Bundestagsdebatten aus dem Blickwinkel von unautorisierten Unterbrechungen [Interruptions between parliamentary routines and creativity: Debate of the Bundestag from the perspective of unauthorised interruptions]”. Cahiers d’études germaniques 731: 127–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019a. “Talking about, for, and to the People: Populism and Representation in Parliamentary Debates on Europe”. Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 67 (3): 307–337. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2019b. “Möglichkeiten und Herausforderungen einer pragmatisch orientierten kontrastiven Diskursanalyse. Ein Vorschlag am Beispiel deutscher, französischer und britischer Parlamentsdebatten” [Possibilities and challenges of a pragmatically oriented contrastive discourse analysis. A proposal based on German, French and British parliamentary debates]. Diskurse – digital 1(3): 29–50. [URL]
Valk, Ineke van der. 2002. Interruptions in French debates on immigration. In The Semiotics of Racism. Approaches in Critical Discourse Analysis, edited by Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak, 105–128. Vienna: Passagen-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Right-Wing Parliamentary Discourse on Immigration in France. Discourse & Society 14 (3): 309–348. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Voutilainen, Eero. 2023. “Written representation of spoken interaction in the official parliamentary transcripts of the Finnish Parliament”. Front. Commun. 81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wenger, Etienne. 1999. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wissik, Tanja. 2021. “Encoding Interruptions in Parliamentary Data: From Applause to Interjections and Laughter.” Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative, Issue 14. Selected Papers from the 2019 TEI Conference.
Zaki, Sonia. 2022. ”Melkein miljoona puhetta [Almost a million speeches]”. Helsingin Sanomat, June 26, 2022. [URL]
Zima, Elisabeth, Geert Brône, Kurt Feyaerts, and Paul Sambre. 2009. “‘Ce n’est pas très beau ce que vous avez dit!’ [What you said is not very nice!]”. The activation of resonance in French parliamentary debates”. Discours 41. [URL]
Zima, Elisabeth, Geert Brône, and Kurt Feyaerts. 2010. “Patterns of interaction in Austrian parliamentary debates. On the pragmasemantics of unauthorized interruptive comments.” In European Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse strategies and interaction practices, edited by Cornelia Ilie, 135–164. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Isosävi, Johanna, Heike Baldauf-Quilliatre, Christophe Gagne, Heinz L. Kretzenbacher & Eero Voutilainen
2025. “It’s the National Assembly here, Madam!”. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 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