Article published In: (Co-)Constructing Interpersonally Sensitive Activities Across Institutional Settings
Edited by Maj-Britt Mosegaard Hansen and Rosina Márquez Reiter
[Pragmatics and Society 7:4] 2016
► pp. 570–594
Evading and resisting answering
An analysis of Mexican Spanish news interviews
Published online: 20 December 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.7.4.03car
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.7.4.03car
This investigation is a conversation-analytic study of Mexican Spanish news interviews. It focuses on the question-answer adjacency pair in which interviewees (IE) are questioned, directly or indirectly, by the interviewers (IR) about the legality of their wealth in light of corruption allegations. The questions examined display strategies to generate news: content questions elicit a contrast; statement formulated questions followed by a request for confirmation give the opportunity to accept or deny the allegations, in contrast to statements which create a confrontational context. Non-type-conforming answers evade answering and type-conforming answers contain resistance elements. The IE minimize the allegations by repairing and providing a downgraded version, or use other resources to suggest that their activities are of common order, hence not newsworthy. The IE display evasion by addressing only certain elements of the question and counter the allegations by casting doubt on the professionalism of the IR.
Keywords: news interviews, answers, Mexican Spanish, evasion, questions
References (26)
Atkinson, John, and Paul Drew. 1979. Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London: Macmillan.
BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). 2011. Mexican Poll Contender Peña Nieto Falters at Book Event. 6 December 2011. [online] Accessed on 30 August 2016 from [URL]
Bull, Peter. 1994. “On Identifying Questions, Replies, and Non-replies in Political Interviews.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 13 (2): 115–131.
Bull, Peter, and Kate Mayer. 1993. “How Not to Answer Questions in Political Interviews”. Political Psychology 14 (4): 651–666.
Clayman, Steven E. 1988. “Displaying Neutrality in Television News Interviews.” Social Problems 35 (4): 474–492.
. 1992. “Footing in the Achievement of Neutrality: The Case of News Interview Discourse.” In Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 163–198. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clayman, Steven E., and John Heritage. 2002. The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clementson, David E. 2015. “Why Do We Think Politicians Are So Evasive? Insight From Theories of Equivocation and Deception, with a Content Analysis of U.S. Presidential Debates, 1996–2012.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology 35 (3): 247–267.
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage. 1992. Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie H. Goodwin. 1987. “Concurrent Operations on Talk: Notes on the Interactive Organization of Assessments.” IPRA Papers in Pragmatics 1 (1): 1–54.
Harris, Sandra. 1991. “Evasive Action: How Politicians Respond to Questions in Political Interviews.” In Broadcast Talk, ed. by Paddy Scannell, 76–99. London: Sage.
Heritage, John. 2012. “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–57.
Jefferson, Gail. 1990. “List Construction as a Task and Resource.” In Interaction Competence, ed. by George Psathas, 63–93. Lanham, Md.: University Press of America.
. 2004. “Glossary of Transcription Conventions.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies From the First Generation, ed. by Gene H. Lerner, 14–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Paz, Octavio. 1989 [1950]. El Laberinto de la Soledad [The Labyrinth of Solitude]. Mexico, DF: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Actions, ed. by John M. Atkinson and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review 681: 939–967.
Sacks, Harvey. 1987. “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button and John R.E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, Harvey, and Emanuel A. Schegloff. 1979. “Two Preferences in the Organization of Reference to Persons in Conversation and Their Interaction.” In Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas, 15–21. New York: Irvington Publishers.
Schegloff, Emanuel. A. 1996. “Some Practices for Referring to Persons in Talk-in-interaction: A Partial Sketch of Systematic.” In Studies in Anaphora, ed. by Barbara A. Fox, 437–485. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2007. Sequence Organisation in Interaction: A Prime in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vázquez Carranza, Ariel. 2013. “Responding and Clarifying: An Analysis of pues as a Sequential Marker in Mexican Spanish Talk-in-interactions.” Spanish in Context 10 (2): 284–309.
Cited by (6)
Cited by six other publications
Alroumi, Abdulrahman & El Mustapha Lahlali
2023. The role of assessments in providing evasive answers in news interviews. Pragmatics and Society 14:6 ► pp. 883 ff.
Zainal Abidin, Najah, Veronica Lowe & Jariah Mohd Jan
Alroumi, Abdulrahman
Alroumi, Abdulrahman
Alroumi, Abdulrahman
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.