Cover not available
Part of
Imagining the Peoples of Europe: Populist discourses across the political spectrum
Edited by Jan Zienkowski and Ruth Breeze
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 83] 2019
► pp. 341–361

Chapter 13
Populist discursive strategies surrounding the immigration quota referendum in Hungary

The present chapter approaches populist discourse in Hungary through a case study of parliamentary speeches surrounding the immigration quota referendum of 2 October, 2016. The analysis uses a mixed methodology of quantitative and qualitative approaches at the intersection of corpus linguistics, Critical Discourse Analysis and pragmatic marker research. The aim is to identify populist discursive strategies used by government and opposition parties in the course of parliamentary debates relating to (anti-)immigration in general and the immigration quota referendum in particular. The findings suggest that most discursive strategies (e.g. polarizing, suppression, antagonizing, selective presentation) can be observed in both pro- and anti-government campaigns, but there are differences in the degree of implicitness/explicitness used and in the linguistic realizations of the strategies.

Keywords: corpus linguistics, CDA, pragmatic markers, political discourse, populist discursive strategies
Article outline
  • Introduction: Populism and populist discursive strategies
  • Background to Hungary’s ‘illiberal democracy’ and the immigration quota referendum
  • Research questions, methodology and research material
  • Populist discursive strategies in parliamentary speeches
    • Combining critical discourse analytical and corpus linguistic approaches
    • Characteristics of parliamentary speech
    • Propositional lexical items used as manifestations of populist discursive strategies
  • Conclusions and possible directions for further research
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 13 August 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.83.14fur
References
Baker, Paul, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid KhosraviNik, Michal Krzyzanowski, Tony McEnery, and Ruth Wodak
2008 “A Useful Methodological Synergy? Combining Critical Discourse Analysis and Corpus Linguistics to Examine Discourses of Refugees and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press.” Discourse & Society 19 (3): 273–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail
1987 The Dialogic Imagination: 4 Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Cheng, Jennifer E.
2013 “Exclusive and Inclusive Constructions of ‘Australia’ in the Australian Parliament.” Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 7 (1): 51–65.Google Scholar
Connel Ian
1980 “Television news and social contrast.” In Culture, media, language: Working papers in cultural studies, ed. by Stuart Hall, Doothy Hobson D, Andrew Lowe, and Paul Willis: 139–156. Hutchinson: London.Google Scholar
De Cleen, Benjamin
this volume. “The Populist Political Logic and the Discursive Construction of the People” In Imagining the Peoples of Europe: Political Discourses across the Political Spectrum ed. by Jan Zienkowski, and Ruth Breeze Amsterdam John Benjamins
Fairclough Norman
1995 Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Fraser Bruce
1996 “Pragmatic Markers.” Pragmatics 6: 167–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Furkó, Péter
2017 “Manipulative Uses of Pragmatic Markers in Political Discourse.” Palgrave Communications 3: 17054, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Furkó, Péter, Kertész András, and Abuczki Ágnes
2018 “Discourse Markers in Different Types of Reporting.” In Indirect Reports and Pragmatics in the World Languages. Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, vol 19 , ed. by Alessandro Capone, Manuel García-Carpintero, and Alessandra Falzone: 243–276. Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Greven, Thomas
2016 “The Rise of Right-wing Populism in Europe and the United States – A Comparative Perspective.” Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, May 2016.Google Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly
2001 Evidentials and Relevance. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia
2010 European Parliaments under Scrutiny: Discourse Strategies and Interaction Practices. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Korkut, Umut
2012 Liberalization Challenges in Hungary Elitism, Progressivism, and Populism. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Küçükali, Can
2015 Discursive Strategies and Political Hegemony: The Turkish case. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lauerbach, Gerda
2006 “Discourse Representation in Political Interviews: The Construction of Identities and Relations through Voicing and Ventriloquizing.” Journal of Pragmatics 38: 196–215. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Diane
2006 “Discourse Markers in English: A Discourse-pragmatic View.” In Approaches to Discourse Particles, ed. by Kerstin Fischer: 43–59. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Nemzeti Választási Iroda
2016 “Referendum on 2 October, 2016” http://www.valasztas.hu//hu/ref 2016 /index.html (accessed 28 August, 2017).
Népszabadság Online
2006 “Morális válság Magyarországon [Moral crisis in Hungary]” [URL] (accessed 28 August, 2017).Google Scholar
2007 “A teljes balatonöszödi szöveg [The complete transcript of the ‘Öszöd speech’]” [URL] (accessed 28 August, 2017).Google Scholar
Nuckolls, Janice
1993 “The Semantics of Certainty in Quechua and its Implications for a Cultural Epistemology.” Language in Society 22: 235–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Orbán, Viktor
2014 Beszédek [ Speeches ]. [URL] (accessed 28 August, 2017).Google Scholar
2016 Beszédek [ Speeches ]. [URL] (accessed 28 August, 2017).Google Scholar
Pollak, Senja, Coesemans, Roel, Daelemans, Walter, and Nada Lavrač
2011 Detecting Contrast Patterns in Newspaper Articles by Combining Discourse Analysis and Text Mining. Pragmatics 21 (4): 647–683Google Scholar
Săftoiu, Răzvan
2013 “The Discoursive Practice of Addressing in the Romanian Parliament” In The Pragmatics of Political Discourse, ed. by Anita Fetzer: 47–65. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schirm, Anita
2009a “A diskurzusjelölők a parlamenti beszédekben [Discourse Markers in Parliamentary Speeches.].” In Hatékony nyelvi, idegen nyelvi és szakmai kommunikáció interkulturális környezetben [ Efficient Communication in an Intercultural Setting .], ed. by Kukorelli Katalin: 168–175. Dunaújváros: Dunaújvárosi Főiskola.Google Scholar
2009b “A parlamenti beszédek a diskurzuselemzés szemszögéből – esettanulmány a vajon diskurzusjelölőről [Parliamentary speeches from the perspective of discourse markers – A Case Study of Hungarian vajon .].” In Új módszerek az alkalmazott nyelvészeti kutatásban [ New Methods in Applied Linguistics .], ed. by Gecső Tamás, and Sárdi Csilla: 250–255. Budapest/Székesfehérvár: Tinta Könyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, and Deirdre Wilson
1995 Relevance. Communication and Cognition. New York: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tranchese, Alessia, and Sole Alba Zollo
2013 The Construction of Gender-based Violence in the British Printed and Broadcast Media. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 7 (1): 141–163.Google Scholar
van Dijk, Teun
1999 “¿Qué es el análisis del discurso político? [What is Political Discourse Analysis].” in Análisis del discurso social y político [ Social and Political Discourse Analysis .], ed. by Teun van Dijk, and Ivan Rordrigo Mendizábal: 9–103. Quito, Ecuador: Abya-Yala.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, Theo
1996 The representation of social actors. In Texts and Practices. Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard, and Malcolm Coulthard: 32–69. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth, Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl, and Karin Liebhart
2009 The Discursive Construction of National Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Zimányi, Árpád
2008 “A politikai-közéleti nyelv érzelmi színezete [The Emotional Colouring of Public and Political Discourse.].” In Az agressziókutatásról interdiszciplináris keretben [ Research on Agression from an In terdisciplinary Perspective .], ed. by Zimányi Árpád: 114–122. Eger: Líceum Kiadó.Google Scholar