Article published in:Persuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue
Edited by Răzvan Săftoiu, Maria-Ionela Neagu and Stanca Măda
[Dialogue Studies 26] 2015
► pp. 55–84
… every time you’ve offered an opinion, you’ve been wrong
Obama dialogically interacting in the last 2012 presidential debate
This paper describes the function of some important metadiscoursal devices such as hedges, boosters, attitude markers and transition markers in Obama’s discourse in the last 2012 presidential debate. Given their relatively high frequency in his political discourse, I expect that these devices are used as productive resources to help the speaker build an effective personal ethos in the dialogical interaction with the electorate, an initial hypothesis already confirmed in the indicative bottom-up analysis part of this article. Also, the argumentative nature of Obama’s discourse gives even more prominence to the use of such metadiscoursal devices to strategically communicate with the electorate and to create the intended rhetorical effects on it for persuasive ends.
Published online: 01 October 2015
Cited by 1 other publications
Vasilyeva, Alena L.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 march 2021. 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.
Bakhtin, Mikhail M.
Eisenhart, Christopher, and Barbara Johnstone
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser, and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
Fløttum, Kjersti, and Trine Dahl
Halliday, Michael, and Christian Matthiessen
Jalilifar, Alireza, and Maryam Alavi-Nia
Jørgensen, Marianne, and Louise J. Phillips
Martin, James R., and David Rose
O’Barr, William M.
Third Presidential Debate: Full Transcript
Vertessen, Dieter, and Christ’l Landtsheer
Vološhinov, Valentin. N.
Waring, Hansun Z.