Cover not available
Part of
Persuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue
Edited by Răzvan Săftoiu, Maria-Ionela Neagu and Stanca Măda
[Dialogue Studies 26] 2015
► pp. 101–142

Analysing the rhetoric use of the epistemic marker Eu cred că (I think) in Romanian parliamentary discourse

| University of Bucharest (Romania)

The empirical study about the discursive regime of the epistemic marker Eu cred că (I think) revolves around the political discourse species but also embraces the regime of the same epistemic marker in spontaneous conversation. On the one hand, the study will indicate the uses of I think that… in political discourses; on the other hand, it will outline the major differences in the use of I think that… in political discourse and in familiar conversation. Eu cred că (I think) is a testimonial marker which introduces either certainty or uncertainty, and brings up one or another of the modal values mentioned, depending on the context and on the discourse genre that uses it (Simon-Vandenbergen 2000).

Published online: 1 October 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.26.06ste
References
Aguilar, Marta
2008 Metadiscourse in Academic Speech. A Relevance-Theoretic Approach. Bern, Berlin, Brussells, Frankfurt am Main, New York, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Aijmer, Karin
1997 “ I think – An English Modal Particle”. In Modality in Germanic Languages [Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs/ TILSM], ed. by Toril Swan, 1–48. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amossy, Ruth
2010 La Présentation de Soi. Ethos et Identité Verbale. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J
2008 The Comment Clauses in English. Syntactic Origins and Pragmatic Development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson
1987 Politeness. Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carbó, Teresa
2004 “Parliamentary Discourse when Things Go Wrong. Mapping Histories, Contexts, Conflicts.” In Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse, ed. by Paul Bayley, 301–338. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charaudeau, Patrick
1992 Grammaire du Sens et de L’expression. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca
2006 “Indexing Stance: Reported Speech as Interactional Evidential.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 10 (5): 569–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Détrie, Catherine
2006 De la Non-personne à la Personne: L’apostrophe Nominale. Paris: CNRS Éditions.Google Scholar
2010 “Les formes nominales d’adresse dans «Questions orales au Gouvernement»: de la syntaxe aux effets de sens.” In S’adresser à Autrui. Les Formes Nominales d’Adresse en Français, ed. by Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni, 143–168. Chambéry: Université de Savoie.Google Scholar
Englebretson, Robert
(ed) 2007 Stance Taking in Discourse. Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
GALR = Valeria Guţu Romalo (ed) 2005 Gramatica limbii române. Vol. 2, Enunţul. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei Române.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael, and Alexander Kirkwood
1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London, New York, Sydney, Auckland: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hanks, William F
2012 “Evidentiality in Social Interaction.” Pragmatics and Society 1: 169–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, Liliana
2011 “Forme nominale de adresare în discursul parlamentar românesc (sec. al XIX-lea – începutul sec. al XX-lea).” In Limba română: ipostaze ale variaţiei lingvistice. Actele celui de-al 10-lea Colocviu al Catedrei de limba română (Bucureşti, 3-4 decembrie 2010), vol. II. Pragmatică şi stilistică, ed. by Rodica Zafiu, Camelia Uşurelu, and Helga Bogdan Oprea, 271–281. Bucureşti: Editura Universității din București.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
(ed) 2010 S’adresser à Autrui. Les Formes Nominales d’Adresse en Français. Chambéry: Université de Savoie.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart
2009/2006 Conceptele şi istoriile lor. Semantica şi pragmatica limbajului social-politic [Begrieffgeschichten Studien zur Semantik und Pragmatik der politischen und sozialen Sprache], transl. by Gabriel H. Decuble, and Maria Oruz. Bucureşti: Art.Google Scholar
2004 Futures Past. On the Semantics of Historical Time, transl. by Keith Tribe. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Mamina, Ion, and Ion Bulei
1994 Guverne şi guvernanţi (1866-1916). Bucureşti: Silex.Google Scholar
Marton, Silvia
2009 La Construction Politique de la Nation. La Nation Dans les Débats du Parlament de la Roumanie (1866-1871). Iaşi: Institutul European.Google Scholar
Măgureanu, Anca
2010 “Argument pour la Transfrastique: Les Actes Metalinguistiques.” In Dialog, discurs, enunţ. In memoriam Sorin Stati, ed. by Liliana Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, and Liliana Hoinărescu, 27–46. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
Mushin, Ilana
2001 Evidentiality and Epistemological Stance. Narrative Retelling. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Persson, Gunnar
1993 “ Think in a Panchronic Perspective.” Studia Neophilologica 65: 3–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plett, Heinrich F
2007 “Amplification.” In Encyclopedia of Rhetoric, ed. by Thomas O. Sloane. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at [URL]Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.” Language 50: 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shin Kim, Mary
2005 “Evidentiality in Achieving Entitlement, Objectivity, and Detachement in Korean.” Discourse Studies 7: 87–108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie
2000 “The Functions of I think in Political Discourse.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 10 (1): 41–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ştefănescu, Ariadna
2011 “Dezbaterea parlamentară din perspectiva unei abordări etnometodologice: aspecte teoretice şi practici de comunicare.” In Limba română: ipostaze ale variaţiei lingvistice. Actele celui de-al 10-lea Colocviu al Catedrei de limba română (Bucureşti, 3-4 decembrie 2010), vol. II. Pragmatică şi stilistică, ed. by Rodica Zafiu, Camelia Uşurelu, and Helga Bogdan Oprea, 289–304. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
2012 “Imaginea oratorului în discursul parlamentar românesc din secolul al IX-lea: metodă de analiză şi studiu de caz.” In Modernitate şi interdisciplinaritate în cercetarea lingvistică. Omagiu doamnei profesor Liliana Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, ed. by Mihaela Constantinescu, Gabriela Stoica, and Oana Uţă Bărbulescu, 511–525. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
Vasilescu, Andra
2011 “Construcţia identităţii parlamentare. Cadrul teoretic.” In Limba română: ipostaze ale variaţiei lingvistice. Actele celui de-al 10-lea Colocviu al Catedrei de limba română (Bucureşti, 3-4 decembrie 2010), vol. II. Pragmatică şi stilistică, ed. by Rodica Zafiu, Camelia Uşurelu, and Helga Bogdan Oprea, 305–314. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar

Sources

Buzatu = Gheorghe Buzatu (ed) 2006 Discursuri şi dezbateri parlamentare (1864-2004). Bucureşti: Editura “Mica Valahie.”Google Scholar
IVLRA = Liliana Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu (coord.) 2002 Interacţiunea verbală în limba română actuală. Corpus (selectiv). Schiţă de tipologie. Bucureşti: EdituraUniversităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
Kogălniceanu = Mihail Kogălniceanu 1982 Opere IV. Oratorie II, 1864-1878, ed. by Georgeta Penelea. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei Republicii Socialiste România.Google Scholar
Sturdza = Dimitrie A. Sturdza 1912 Autoritatea faptului îndeplinit. Executat în 1866 de cei îndreptăţiţi. Extracted from Analele Academiei Române, series II, vol. 34, no. 16. Memoriile Secţiunii Istorice. Bucureşti: Librăriile Socec and Comp., C. Sfetea, Librăria Naţională.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Ilie, Cornelia & Ariadna Ştefănescu
2016. Interdiscursive strategies of metaphor-driven rhetoric in Romanian discourses on a political crisis. Zeitschrift für Slawistik 61:1 ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Vasilyeva, Alena L.
2016. Confrontation and collaboration in the course of the election debate. Language and Dialogue 6:3 ► pp. 370 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 april 2024. 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.