Directness and indirectness in a presidential debate
This contribution examines the use of directness and indirectness as utilized by
the two candidates to the presidency of Argentina, in a debate broadcast on
television before the 2015 elections. Adopting a socio-pragmatic perspective, this
study makes a qualitative and quantitive analysis of addressivity at the micro and
meso levels of the interaction. An exploration of the form and function of the
interactants’ contributions demonstrated that directness is the preferred choice
when presentations and closing fragments are produced, while the questions and
answers addressed by the candidates to each other reveal differences in the use of
in/directness. These disparate strategies have a bearing on the interpersonal
discourse relationship between the two politicians and the audience.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Directness and indirectness
- 3.Context of the interaction and source of the data
- 4.In/directness at the micro level of the discourse
- 4.1Directness
- 4.2Indirectness
- 4.3Addressivity strategies occurring in all dimensions
- 5.In/directness at the meso level of the interaction
- 5.1Presentation of topics and final messages
- 5.2Question and answer fragments
- 6.Interpreting indirectness
- 7.Concluding remarks
-
Note
-
References
References
Dascal, Marcelo, and Elda Weizman
Grainger, Karen, and Sara Mills
2016 Directness
and Indirectness across Cultures. Hampshire United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
Halliday Michael A. K. and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
2004 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Third edition. London: Hodder Education.
Kiesling, Scott F., and Elka Ghosh Johnson
2010 “
Four
Forms of Interactional Indirection.”
Journal of
Pragmatics 42: 292–306.
Lauerbach, Guerda, and Anita Fetzer
Lempert, Michael
2012 “
Indirectness.” In
The
Handbook of Intercultural Discourse and Communication, ed.
by
Christina Bratt Paulston,
Scott F. Kiesling, and
Elizabeth S. Rangel, 180–204. Chichester, West Sussex: Blackwell.
Piatti, Guillermina
2019 “
En
torno a la verdad: algunos usos de marcadores discursivos en la
conversación coloquial y en el debate
politico.”
Presented in the III
Congreso de la delegación argentina de la ALFAL y IX Jornadas internacionales
de investigación en Filología
hispánica
. Universidad Nacional de La
Plata. Argentina. 24–26 abril de
2019.
Reisigl, Martin
2008 “
Political
Speeches and the Public
Sphere.” In
Handbook of
Communication in the Public Sphere, ed.
by
Ruth Wodak, and
Veronica Koller, 243–69. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Sifianou, Maria
1993 “Off-record Indirectness and the Notion of Imposition.”
Multilingua 12 (1): 69–79.
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie, Peter White, and Karen Aijmer
Sperber, Dan, and Dierdre Wilson
1995 Relevance.
Communication and Cognition, 2nd
Edition. Oxford: Blackwell.
Terkourafi, Marina
2011 “
The
Puzzle of Indirect Speech.”
Journal of
Pragmatics 43: 2861–2865.
Weizman, Elda, and Marcelo Dascal
1991 “On
Clues and Cues: Strategies of
Text-Understanding.
Journal of Literary
Semantics 20 (1): 18–30.
Wilson, Dierdre, and Dan Sperber
2006 “
Relevance
Theory.” In
The
Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by
Laurence R. Horn, and
Gregory Ward, 607–632. Oxford UK: Blackwell.
Yus, Francisco
2017a “
Incongruity-Resolution
Cases in
Jokes.”
Lingua 197: 103–122.
Yus, Francisco
2017b “
Relevance-Theoretic
Treatments of
Humor.” In
The
Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor, ed.
by
Salvatore Attardo, 189–203. New York and London: Routledge.
Cited by
Cited by 1 other publications
Al-Adaileh, Bilal A.
2023.
Off-record indirectness in Jordanian Arabic.
Journal of Politeness Research 0:0
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 march 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.