Part of
The Dynamics of Political Discourse: Forms and functions of follow-upsEdited by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman and Lawrence N. Berlin
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 259] 2015
► pp. 87–107
Edited by Anita Fetzer, Elda Weizman and Lawrence N. Berlin
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 259] 2015
► pp. 87–107
Pragmatic strategies for follow-ups in US political debates
Political debating in the United States forms a type of pragmatic act with a recognizable script. Within that script, the nature of the debate presents itself as rife with examples of follow-ups (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975) whereby candidates react to challenges to their prior assertions by reasserting, justifying, and/or mitigating their original claims. Follow-ups can be identified sequentially or functionally, and emerge in the linguistic and interactional context both intra- or interdiscursively when, in the latter case, speakers are called upon to follow up on an assertion they made in an earlier political discourse (e.g., in a political speech or campaign advertisement); that is, the previous assertion has been entextualized in the latter discourse. Using the Multilayered Model of Context (Berlin 2007, 2011) as a framework to conduct a critical discourse analysis, pragmatic strategies are identified within selected debates which occurred during the final days of the 2010 US Midterm Elections. The integration of Positioning Theory (Harré and van Langenhove 1991, 1999) in the analysis also emerges as instructive in classifying those strategies as affirmative versus negative.
References
ABC News
2010a “Florida Senate Debate: Transcript Part I – ABC News” (Transcribed byK. McCarthy). ABC News Blogs & Posts – ABC News 6 Oct 2010 Web 10 Oct 2011 <[URL].
2010b “Florida Senate Debate: Transcript Part II – ABC News” (Transcribed byK. McCarthy). ABC News Blogs & Posts – ABC News 6 Oct 2010 Web 10 Oct 2011 <[URL].
Austin, John
1962 How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Bakhtin, Mikhail Mikhailovich
1981 The Dialogic Imagination, ed. by Michael Holmquist . Austin: University of Texas Press.
Berlin, Lawrence N
2007 “Cooperative conflict and evasive language: The case of the 9/11 Commission Hearings.” In Context and Appropriateness: Micro Meets Macro, ed. by Anita Fetzer, 176–215. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2011 “Fighting words: Hybrid discourse and discourse processes.” In Context and Contexts, ed. by Anita Fetzer and Etsuko Oishi, 41–65. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2012 “The making of a new American revolution or a wolf in sheep’s clothing: ‘It’s time to reload’.” In Dialogue in Politics, ed. by Lawrence N. Berlin and Anita Fetzer, 167–192. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Norman Fairclough
1999 Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Cillizza, Chris
2014 “Charlie Crist didn’t leave the Republican party because of racism. He left it because he couldn’t win a primary – The Washington Post.” The Washington Post – Blogs – The Fix 8 May 2014 <[URL].
Davies, Bronwyn, and Rom Harré
1990 “Positioning: The discursive production of selves.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 20 (1), 43–63.
Geertz, Clifford
1983 Local Knowledge (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Basic Books.
Halliday, Michael A.K
1984 “Language as code and language as behavior: A systemic-functional interpretation of the nature and ontogenesis of dialogue.” In The Semiotics of Culture and Language: Volume I; Language as Social Semiotic, ed. by Robin P. Fawcett, Michael A.K. Halliday, Sydney M. Lamb, and Adam Makkai, 3–35. London and Wolfeboro, NH: Frances Pinter.
Harré, Rom, and Fathali Moghaddam
2003 The Self and Others: Positioning Individuals and Groups in Personal, Political, and Cultural Contexts. Westview, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Harré, Rom, and Luk van Langenhove
1991 “Varieties of positioning.” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 21 (4): 393–407.
1999 Positioning Theory: Moral Contexts of Intentional Action. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.
Holmes, Janet
1995 Women, Men, and Politeness. London: Longman.
Hymes, Del
1972 “Models of the interaction of language and social life.” In Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication, ed. by John J. Gumperz and Del Hymes, 35–71. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Lakoff, George
1972 “Hedges: A study in the meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.” In Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, ed. by Paul Peranteau, Judith Levi, and Gloria Phares, 183–228. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Lakoff, Robin
1975 Language and Woman’s Place: Text and Commentaries, ed. by Mary Bucholtz . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Las Vegas Sun
2010 “Transcript of the Harry Reid-Sharron Angle debate, Oct. 14, 2010 – Friday, Oct. 15, 2010 | 6:56 a.m. – Las Vegas Sun.” Las Vegas Sun 15 Oct 2010 Web 10 Oct 2011 <[URL].
Levinson, Stephen C
1983 Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Malinowski, Bronislaw
1923 “The problem of meaning in primitive languages.” In The Meaning of Meaning, ed. by Charles K. Odgen and Ivor A. Richards, 296–336. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, Inc.
Mey, Jacob L
2001 Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Sinclair, John, and Malcolm Coulthard
1975 Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Spradley, James P
1980 Participant Observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Toulmin, Stephen E
2003/1958 The Uses of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
The Uptake
2010 “Michele Bachmann and Tarryl Clark Debate in St. Cloud” (Cart provided by L. Richardson, Paradigm Reporting & Captioning). The Uptake 26 Oct 2010 Web 10 Oct 2011 <[URL].
Urban, Greg
1991 A Discourse-Centered Approach to Culture: Native South American Myths and Rituals. Austin: University of Texas Press.