Cover not available

Article published In: Constructing and Negotiating Identity in Dialogue:
Edited by Răzvan Săftoiu
[Language and Dialogue 5:1] 2015
► pp. 23–44

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

Construction of identity and the rhetoric of lying in Romanian political discourse

 | “Iorgu Iordan — Al. Rosetti” Institute of Linguistics of the Romanian Academy, Romania
Published online: 23 June 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.5.1.02hoi
Starting from the pragmatic descriptions of lying and the most influential theories concerning social identity, this paper explores, on the basis of authentic examples, the relationship between identity construction and the rhetoric of lying in Romanian political discourse. We are interested in presenting, on the one hand, the strategies used to denounce a political leader as a liar and to fix this negative image in the collective imagination and, on the other hand, the strategy used by the politician to refute these accusations and rebuild his credibility ethos. Through this analysis, the paper also addresses the questions of the social and moral implications of lying in Romanian public space.
References (44)
Amossy, Ruth, and Anne Herschberg-Pierrot. 1997. Stéréotypes et clichés. Paris: Nathan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breton, Philippe. 2003. L’argumentation dans la communication. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brewer, Marilynn B., and Wendi Gardner. 1996. “Who Is This “We”? Levels of Collective Identity and Self Representations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71 (1): 83–93. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carson, Thomas. 2006. “The Definition of Lying.” Nous 401: 284–306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Charaudeau, Patrick. 2005. Le discours politique. Les masques du pouvoir. Paris: Vuibert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1991. Dire et ne pas dire. Principes de sémantique linguistique. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fallis, Don. 2009. “What is Lying?” Journal of Philosophy 1061: 29–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita, and Elda Weizman. 2006. “Political Discourse as Mediated and Public Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 381: 143–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1967. Interaction Ritual. Essays on Face-to-Face Behaviour. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grice, Paul H. 1975. “ Logic and Conversation .” In Syntax and Semantics, vol. 3: Speech Acts, ed. by P. Cole, and J.L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hamon, Philippe. 1996. L’ ironie litteraire. Essai sur les formes de l’écriture oblique. Paris: Hachette Superieur.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hecht, Michael L. 1993. “A Research Odyssey: Toward the Development of a Communication Theory of Identity.” Communication Monographs 601, 76–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hecht, Michael L., Jennifer R. Warren, Eura Jung, and Janice L. Krieger. 2005. “A Communication Theory of Identity: Development, Theoretical Perspective, and Future Directions.” In Theorizing about Intercultural Communication, ed. by William B. Gudykunst, 257–278. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 2005. “Complementary and Contradictory Stereotypes in Proverbs: A Pragma-Theoretical Approach.” In Cooperation and Conflict in Ingroup and Intergroup Communication, selected papers from the Xth Biennial Congress of the IADA Bucharest 2005, ed. by Liliana Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, and Liliana Hoinărescu, 349–371. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, Liliana. 2010. “Straightforward vs. Mitigated Impoliteness in the Romanian Parliamentary Discourse. The Case of in absentia Impoliteness.” Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 55 (4): 343–351.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kleiber, Georges. 1994. Nominales. Essais de sémantique référentielle. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1993. “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor.” In Metaphor and Thought (2nd ed.), ed. by Andrew Ortony, 202–251. Cambridge: University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenclud, Gérard. 2011. “L’acte de mentir.” RevueTerrain 571: 4–19. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton. 2008. “Persuasive Definitions: Values, Meanings and Implicit Disagreements.” Informal Logic 28 (3): 203–228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahon, James Edwin. 2008. “Two Definitions of Lying.” International Journal of Applied Philosophy 22 (2): 211–230. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maingueneau, Dominique. 2012. Analyser les textes de communication. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Markland, Aidan. 2012. The Genealogy of Lying and Deception in Political Theory. Honors Theses. Wesleyan University. [URL]. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mecke, Jochen (ed). 2007. Cultures of Lying. Theories and Practice of Lying in Society, Literature and Film. Proceedings of a conference held Sept. 30 - Oct. 2 in Rosenburg, Germany. Glienicke, Berlin, Cambridge, Mass: Galda&Wilch Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meibauer, Jörg. 2005. “Lying and Falsely Implicating.” Journal of Pragmatics 371: 1373–1399. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. “On Lying: Intentionality, Implicature and Imprecision.” Intercultural Pragmatics 8 (2): 277–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norrick, Neal R. 2007. “Proverbs as Set Phrases.” In Phraseology: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 28, ed. by Harald Burger, Dmitrij Dobrovoľskij, Peter Kühn, and Neal Norrick, 381–393. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaïm, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1958/2008. Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Reboul, Anne. 1992. “Le paradoxe du mensonge dans la théorie des actes de langage.” Cahiers de linguistique française 131: 125–147.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. “The Description of Lies in Speech Act Theory.” In Pretending to Communicate, ed. by Herman Parret, 292–298. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rebul, Anne. 2002. “Semantic Transparency, Semantic Opacity, States of Affairs, Mental States and Speech Acts.” In Say Not to Say. New Perspectives on Miscommunication, ed. by Luigi Anolli, et al., 43–71. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sarr, Pierre. 2010. “Discours sur le mensonge de Platon à Saint Augustin: continuité ou rupture.” Dialogues d’histoire ancienne 36 (2): 9–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sbisà, Marina. 1999. “Ideology and the Persuasive Use of Presuppositions.” In Language and Ideology. Selected Papers from the 6th International Pragmatic Conference, vol. I1, ed. by Jef Verschueren, 492–509. Antwerp: International Pragmatic Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1989/1969. Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, Helen. 2007. “Theories of Identity and the Analysis of Face.” Journal of Pragmatics 391: 639–656. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan. 1994. “Understanding Verbal Understanding.” In What is Intelligence, ed. by J. Khalfa, 179–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1986/1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strauss, Leo, and Joseph Cropsey (eds). 1987. History of Political Philosophy (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas. 1998. Ad Hominem Arguments. Tuscaloosa (AL): University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. “Persuasive Definitions and Public Policy Arguments.” Argumentation and Advocacy 371: 117–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas, and Fabritio Macagno. 2011. “Quotations and Presumptions: Dialogical Effects of Misquotations.” Informal Logic 31 (1): 27–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilson, Deirdre. 1999. “Metarepresentation in Linguistic Communication”. UCLWPL 111: 127–161. [URL]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yule, George. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Alupoaei, Ionela-Alina & Dumitru Goldbach
2025. Ethics in the Shadow: Political Marketing’s Role in Shaping Electoral Trust. Societies 15:10 ► pp. 267 ff. DOI logo
Moldovan, Andrei
2022. Questions, Presuppositions and Fallacies. Argumentation 36:2 ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
Moldovan, Andrei
2023. Persuasive presuppositions. Journal of Pragmatics 211 ► pp. 96 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 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