Article published in:
Certainty and Uncertainty in Dialogue
Edited by Andrzej Zuczkowski
[Language and Dialogue 4:1] 2014
► pp. 132–148

Evidential and epistemic strategies in Romanian parliamentary debates

| University of Bucharest, Romania
The paper presents some evidential and epistemic strategies that appear frequently in old and present-day Romanian parliamentary debates. By evidential and epistemic strategy we mean the manipulation of evidential and epistemic markers, either grammaticalized or pragmatic, in order to achieve various interactional and rhetorical aims. We have in view not only encoded evidential and epistemic meanings, but also (interactional) inferentially conveyed evidential and epistemic meanings. Modality can be manipulated in various ways: the usual ranking of evidentials can be reinterpreted for argumentative means: i.e., hearsay can be sometimes rejected, while, in other cases, it can be presented as more reliable than perceptual evidence.
Keywords: evidentiality, epistemic, interaction, strategy, context dependency.
Published online: 20 May 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.4.1.08con
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Kraut, Joshua
2019. The polyphonic pastor. Language and Dialogue 9:3 ► pp. 418 ff. Crossref logo
Polymeneas, George
2017.  In Greece in Crisis [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 70], ► pp. 83 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 august 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.

References

References

Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2006 “Evidentiality in Grammar.” In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, ed. by Keith Brown, 2nd ed., 320-325. Oxford: Elsevier.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Angouri, Jo, and Miriam A. Locher
2012 “Theorising Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (12): 1549-1553. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cornillie, Bert, and Paola Pietrandrea
2012 “Editorial. Modality at Work. Cognitive, Interactional and Textual Functions of Modal Markers.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (15): 2109-2115. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, William F.
2012 “Foreword. Evidentiality in Social Interaction.” Pragmatics and Society 3 (2): 169-180. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly
2001 Evidentials and Relevance. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nuckolls, Janis, and Lev Michael
2012 “Introduction. Evidentials and Evidential Strategies in Interactional and Socio-cultural Context.” Pragmatics and Society 3 (2): 181-188. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Palmer, Frank Robert
2001 Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rocci, Andrea
2012 “Modality and Argumentative Discourse Relations: A Study of the Italian Necessity Modal Dovere.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (15): 2129-2149. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2012 “Who Knows Best? Evidentiality and Epistemic Asymmetry in Conversation.” Pragmatics and Society 3 (2): 294-320. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie, and Karin Aijmer
2007 The Semantic Field of Modal Certainty. A Corpus-Based Study of English Adverbs. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Walton, Douglas
2004 Relevance in Argumentation. New Jersey/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Corpus

Brătianu, Ion I.C.
1933-1939 Discursurile lui Ion I. C. Brătianu [Ion I. C. Brătianu’s speeches], published by George Fotino. Bucureşti: Cartea Românească.Google Scholar
Carp, Petre P.
2000 Discursuri parlamentare [Parliamentary speeches], ed. by Marcel Duţă, introduction by Ion Bulei. Bucureşti: Editura Grai şi Suflet – Cultura Naţională.Google Scholar
Filipescu, Nicolae
1912 Discursuri politice [Political Speeches], vol. I (1888–1901). Bucureşti: Minerva.Google Scholar
www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6286&idm=5&idl=1
19.04.2007)
www.cdep.ro/pls/steno/steno.stenograma?ids=6975&idm=5&idl=1
16.04.2011)