Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 23:2 (2013) ► pp.361–383
The strategic value of pronominal choice
Exclusive and inclusive “we” in political panel debates
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 June 2013
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.23.2.07ver
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.23.2.07ver
This study explores the use of the first person plural pronoun “we/wij” by government and opposition party members in panel debates from the Flemish talk show De Zevende Dag. Both groups of politicians enter this arena with divergent communicative goals, which has clear implications (i) for the type of propositions in which subclasses of “we/wij”-pronouns are generally involved and (ii) for the politicians’ assessment of the status of these propositions. Patterns with regard to these three implications are analyzed by means of a systemic functional approach supported with quantitative data. It is claimed that government and opposition party discussants either employ distinct patterns in accordance with their different aims, or that they use similar ones, albeit with divergent discourse functions. The former scenario turns out to be true in the case of exclusive uses of “we/wij” and the latter in the case of inclusive meanings. In that way, the paper sheds light on subtle differences in how government and opposition party discussants argue and deal with the invisible presence of an overhearing broadcast audience.
References (40)
Bednarek, Monika A. (2009) Dimensions of evaluation: Cognitive and linguistic perspectives. Pragmatics and Cognition 17.1: 146-175. BoP
Blom, J.-P., and J.J. Gumperz (1972) Social meaning in linguistic structures: Code switching in Northern Norway. In J.J. Gumperz, and D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication.New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, pp. 407-434.
Bull, P., and A. Fetzer (2006) Who are we and who are you? The strategic use of forms of address in political interviews. Text & Talk 26.1: 3-37. BoP
Chilton, Paul A. (2004) Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London and New York: Routledge. MetBib.
Chilton, P.A., and C. Schäffner (1997) Discourse and politics. In T.A. Van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: Sage Publications, pp. 206-230.
Clayman, Steven E. (2002) Disagreements and third parties: Dilemmas of neutralism in panel news interviews. Journal of Pragmatics 34.10-11: 1385-1401.
Clayman, S.E., and J. Heritage (2002) The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
Eggins, Suzanne (1994) An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Pinter Publishers Ltd.
Emmertsen, Sofie (2006) Interviewers' challenging questions in British debate interviews. Journal of Pragmatics 39.3: 570-591.
Fairclough, Norman (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London and New York: Routledge. BoP.
Goffman, Erving (1981) Footing. In E. Goffman (ed.), Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 124-159. BoP
Greatbatch, David L. (1992) On the management of disagreement between news interviewees. In P. Drew, and J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 268-301.
Halliday, M.A.K., and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen (2004) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
Helmbrecht, Johannes (2002) Grammar and function of we
. In A. Duszak (ed.), Us and Others: Social Identities across Languages, Discourses and Cultures. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 31-49.
Hunston, S., and G. Thompson (2000) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. BoP
Íñigo-Mora, Isabel (2004) On the ese of the personal pronoun we in communities. Journal of Language and Politics 3.1: 27-52.
Lambrecht, Knud (2000 [1994]) Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
Lauerbach, Gerda E. (2006) Discourse representation in political interviews: The construction of identities and relations through voicing and ventriloquizing. Journal of Pragmatics 38.2: 196-215. BoP
Lauerbach, G.E., and A. Fetzer (2007) Political discourse in the media: Cross-cultural perspectives. In G.E. Lauerbach, and A. Fetzer (eds.), Political Discourse in the Media: Cross-cultural Perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 3-28. BoP
Levinson, Stephen C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP.
. (1992) Activity types and language. In P. Drew, and J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 66-100.
Martin, J.R., and D. Rose (2007 [2003]) Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause. London and New York: Continuum.
Martin, J.R., and P.R.R. White (2005) The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
McGregor, William B. (1997) Semiotic Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press. BoP
Pounds, Gabrina (2010) Attitude and subjectivity in Italian and British hard-news reporting: The construction of a culture-specific 'reporter' voice. Discourse Studies 12.1: 106-137. BoP
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, and J. Svartvik (2000 [1985]) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman. BoP
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie (1987) Pronouns for strategic purposes. In F.H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, and C.A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Analysis and Practices: Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986.Dordrecht: Foris Publications, pp. 261-269.
(1997) Modal (un)certainty in political discourse: A functional account. Language Sciences 19.4: 341-356. BoP
(2000) The functions of I think in political discourse. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 10.1: 41-63. BoP
Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M., P.R.R. White, and K. Aijmer (2007) Presupposition and 'taking-for-granted' in mass communicated political argument: An illustration from British, Flemish and Swedish political colloquy. In A. Fetzer, and G.E. Lauerbach (eds.), Political Discourse in the Media: Cross-cultural Perspectives. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 31-74.
Sinclair, John (1990) Collins COBUILD English Grammar. London: Harper Collins. BoP
Sperber, D., and D. Wilson (1995 [1986]) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. BoP
Verschueren, Jef (1999) Understanding Pragmatics. London: Arnold. BoP
(2012) Ideology in Language Use: Pragmatic Guidelines for Empirical Research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
White, Peter R.R. (1998) Telling media tales: The news story as rethoric. Sydney: University of SydneyPh.D. thesis.
Cited by (8)
Cited by eight other publications
Schildt, Laura, Dorien Van De Mieroop & Bart Deygers
Jacobs, Catho, Dorien Van De Mieroop & Colette Van Laar
Maalej, Zouheir A.
2022. Framing and manipulation of person deixis in Hosni Mubarak’s last three speeches. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 633 ff.
Li, Tao & Kaibao Hu
Whissell, Cynthia
Žurauskaitė, Eglė
Li, Tao & Yifan Zhu
Vázquez Laslop, María Eugenia
2019. Pragmatic and grammatical categories for the analysis of forms of address in presidential election debates. In It’s not all about you [Topics in Address Research, 1], ► pp. 305 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 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.
