Article published In: Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 16:3 (2025) ► pp.357–379
Political language gaffes and the importance of Hearer’s meaning
Published online: 16 July 2024
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20072.tin
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.20072.tin
Abstract
Drawing on Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard, and Marina Terkourafi. 2023. “We Need to Talk about Hearer’s Meaning!” Journal of Pragmatics 2081: 99–114. model of Hearer’s meaning, the paper discusses cognitive mechanisms through which hearers interpret political language gaffes (e.g. former U.S. President Trump’s “Despite the constant negative press covfefe”). The paper approaches political language gaffes as dependent on a high degree of blending between textual-and-discursive frames and social-world frames. The dataset analysis demonstrates how a Hearer’s difficulty in interpreting a gaffe-y utterance can shift Hearer’s focus (a) from one frame element (e.g. speaker, hearer, effect of utterance on hearer) to another, and (b) from a discursive frame to a social-world frame. The paper demonstrates how, while looking to pinpoint the contextual relevance of an utterance, a Hearer can simultaneously shift focus and vary the scope of cognitive structures from which Hearer can derive meaning. The paper also suggests how analyses of political language gaffes can contribute to research on sociopragmatic topics such as Speaker’s accountability, pragmatic competence, pragmatic failure, non-propositional effects, etc.
Keywords: political language gaffe, ‘covfefe’, Hearer’s meaning, relevance, frame analysis
Article outline
- 1.Introduction: From ‘covfefe’ through ‘Thighland’ to ‘the leader of Turkey’
- 2.The object of analysis: ‘A political language gaffe’
- 3.Theoretical background: ‘Hearer’s meaning’
- 4.The study
- 4.1Rationale
- 4.2Respondents
- 4.3Procedure and questionnaire
- 4.4Dataset
- 5.Data and discussion
- 5.1Main data
- 5.2Data on first verbalized responses
- 5.3Data on additional comments
- 5.4Data concerning bodily reactions
- 6.Conclusions
References
References (38)
Carston, Robyn. 2002. Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell.
Carston, Robyn, and Alison Hall. 2012. “Implicature and Explicature.” In Cognitive Pragmatics, ed. by Hans-Jörg Schmid, 47–84. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2002. The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind’s Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.
Gibbs, Raymond W., Julia Kushner, and Rob Mills III. 1991. “Authorial Intentions and Metaphor Comprehension.” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 20 (1): 11–30.
Gibbs, Raymond W., and Herbert H. Colston. 2020. “Pragmatics Always Matters: An Expanded Vision of Experimental Pragmatics.” Frontiers in Psychology 111: 1619.
Gil, José María. 2019. “A Relational Account of Communication on the Basis of Slips of the Tongue.” Intercultural Pragmatics 16 (2): 153–183.
Hansen, Maj-Britt Mosegaard, and Marina Terkourafi. 2023. “We Need to Talk about Hearer’s Meaning!” Journal of Pragmatics 2081: 99–114.
Haugh, Michael. 2013. “Speaker Meaning and Accountability in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 48 (1): 41–56.
Hutchby, Ian. 2016. “Infelicitous Talk: Politicians’ Words and the Media Ecology in Three British Political Gaffes.” Journal of Language and Politics 15 (1): 667–687.
Kádár, Dániel. 2017. Politeness, Impoliteness and Ritual: Maintaining the Moral Order in Interpersonal Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kádár, Dániel, and Michael Haugh. 2013. Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kecskes, Istvan. 2010. “The Paradox of Communication: Socio-cognitive Approach to Pragmatics.” Pragmatics and Society 1 (1): 50–73.
. 2012. “Sociopragmatics and Cross-cultural and Intercultural Studies.” In The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by Keith Allan and Kasia M. Jaszczolt, 599–616. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. 2014. “A Response to the Paper “Metaphor Interpretation and Motivation in Relevance theory” by Huaxin Huang and Xiaolong Yang.” Journal of Pragmatics 601: 274–278.
. 2019. “The Interplay of Prior Experience and Actual Situational Context in Intercultural First Encounters.” Pragmatics and Cognition 26 (1): 112–134.
Langacker, Ronald W. 2008. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
Maillat, Didier. 2023. “On the Manifestness of Assumptions: Gaining Insights into Commitment and Emotions.” Pragmatics 33 (3): 460–485.
Mazzarella, Diana. 2013. “Optimal Relevance as a Pragmatic Criterion: The Role of Epistemic Vigilance.” UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 251: 20–45.
Mazzarella, Diana, and Edoardo Vaccargiu. 2024. “Communication: Inferring Speaker Intentions or Perceiving the World? Insights from Developmental Research.” Journal of Pragmatics 2211: 123–136.
McVittie, Chris, and Andy McKinlay. 2019. “‘Alternative facts are not facts’: Gaffe-announcements, the Trump Administration and the Media.” Discourse & Society 30 (2): 172–187.
Moeschler, Jacques. 2009. “Pragmatics, Propositional and Non-propositional Effects: Can a Theory of Utterance Interpretation Account for Emotions in Verbal Communication?” Social Science Information 48 (3): 447–464.
Ruiz de Mendoza, Ibáñez, Francisco José, and María Sandra Peña Cervel. 2023. “Structural Similarity in Figurative Language: A Preliminary Cognitive Analysis.” Lingua 2901, 103541.
Sheinheit, Ian, and Cynthia Bogard. 2016. “Authenticity and Carrier Agents: The Social Construction of Political Gaffes.” Sociological Forum 31 (4): 970–993.
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and Cognition (2nd edn.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Timpe-Laughlin, Veronika, Ashley Green, and Oh Saerhim. 2021. “Raising Pragmatic Awareness: A Think-aloud Study.” System 981: art. 102470.
Tincheva, Nelly. 2019. Language gaffes (Linguistic, Discursive and Cognitive Aspects of ‘Language Bloopers’). Sofia: Polis Publ.
. 2021. “Blurring the Boundaries between Real Worlds, Discourse Worlds and Text Worlds.” Slavia Meridionalis 211: art. 2381.
. 2022. “Political Speeches: Conceptual Metaphor Meets Text Worlds and Gestalt Psychology’s Shifts in Profiling.” In Figurativity and Human Ecology, ed. by Alexandra Bagasheva, Bozhil Hristov, and Nelly Tincheva, 85–106. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
. 2023. “‘Narrative structure’, ‘rhetorical structure’, ‘text structure’: A Conceptual Complex Meets Text- and Discourse-world Profiling Shifts.” English Text Construction 16 (1): 30–58.
Verschueren, Jef. 2000. Understanding Pragmatics. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Dan Sperber. 2012. Meaning and Relevance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, Deirdre, and Robyn Carston. 2019. “Pragmatics and the Challenge of ‘Non-propositional’ Effects.” Journal of Pragmatics 1451: 31–38.
Yus, Francisco. 2017. “Contextual Constraints and Non-propositional Effects in WhatsApp Communication.” Journal of Pragmatics 1141: 66–86.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 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.
