The pragmeme of disagreement and its allopracts in English and Serbian political interview discourse
The paper explores the disagreement pragmeme as a culture-bound notion (Mey
2016a, 2016b, 2001) in the
language use of English-speaking and Serbian-speaking politicians. The objectives are to establish the types, frequencies and
cultural specificities of disagreement allopracts in political interviews. Furthermore, the research analyses allopracts in
relation to the single and multiple dispute profiles (van Eemeren, Houtlosser and Henkemans
2007). The starting assumption is that allopracts will be realised in culturally specific ways despite the fact that
the analysed pragmeme belongs to the same communication genre, which is the Immediately Relevant tertium
comparationis (Krzeszowski 1990) of the research. The hypothesis to be
verified is that the Serbian sub-corpus will yield more examples of strong disagreement. Another aim is to classify the obtained
allopracts according to their degrees of strength. The analysis is based on the corpus of 50 political interviews, involving 30
politicians and 262 allopracts.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical framework and related research
- 2.1Pragmemes and allopracts
- 2.2The pragmeme of disagreement
- 2.3Dispute profiles
- 3.Corpus analysis and results
- 3.1Corpus
- 3.1.1The English sub-corpus
- 3.1.2The Serbian sub-corpus
- 3.2Methods
- 3.3Results and discussion
- 3.3.1Single and multiple non-mixed profiles (SNM and MNM)
- 3.3.2Single and multiple mixed profiles (SM and MM)
- 3.3.3Personal styles across cultures
- 4.Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References (61)
Austin, John L.
1962 How to Do Things with Words. The William James Lectures Delivered at Harvard University in 1955, ed. by
James O. Urmson. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Bales, Robert F.
1970 Personality and Interpersonal Behaviour. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Bell, Philip and Theo van Leeuwen
1994 The Media Interview. Confession, Contest, Conversation. Kensington: University of New South Wales Press.
Bucholtz, Mary
2000 “
The Politics of Transcription.”
Journal of Pragmatics 321: 1439–1465.
Bull, Peter and Kate Mayer
1988 “
Interruptions in Political Interviews: A Study of Margaret Thatcher and Neil Kinnock.”
Journal of Language and Social Psychology 7(1): 35–45.
Capone, Alessandro
2005 “
Pragmemes (a Study with Reference to English and Italian).”
Journal of Pragmatics 37(9): 1355–1371.
Capone, Alessandro
2016 “
Introducing the Notion of Pragmeme.” In
Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use, ed. by
Keith Allan,
Alessandro Capone and
Istvan Kecskes, xv–xxiv. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Capone, Alessandro
2018 “
Pragmemes (Again).”
Lingua 2091: 89–104.
Clayman, Steven and John Heritage
2002 The News Interview: Journalists and Public Figures on the Air. Cambridge: CUP.
Eemeren, Frans H. van
2018 Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer.
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
1984 Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. Dordrecht, The Netherlands/ Cinnaminson, USA: Foris Publications.
Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst
1992 Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Eemeren, Frans H. van, Peter Houtlosser and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
2007 Argumentative Indicators in Discourse: A Pragma-Dialectical Study. Dordrecht: Springer.
Elliot, Judy and Peter Bull
1996 “
A Question of Threat: Face Threats in Questions Posed during Televised Political Interviews.”
Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 61: 49–72.
Emmertsen, Sofie
2007 “
Interviewers’ Challenging Questions in British Debate Interviews.”
Journal of Pragmatics 391: 570–591.
Fetzer, Anita
2000 “
Negotiating Validity Claims in Political Interviews.”
Text 201: 1–46.
Fetzer, Anita
2016 “
Pragmemes in Discourse.” In
Pragmemes and Theories of Language, ed. by
Keith Allan,
Alessandro Capone and
Istvan Kecskes, 249–264. Cham: Springer.
Fetzer, Anita and Peter Bull
2013 “
Political Interviews in Context.” In
Analyzing Genres in Political Communication: Theory and Practice, ed. by
Piotr Cap and
Urszula Okulska, 73–99. New York and Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goffman, Erving
1986 Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness
1983 “
Aggravated Correction and Disagreement in Children’s Conversations.”
Journal of Pragmatics 71: 657–77.
Günthner, Susanne
1993 Diskursstrategien in der interkulturellen Kommunikation. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Hanlon, Bernadette
2010 “
Verbal Aggression and Neutrality in Political Interviews.”
Diffusion 3(2).
[URL] (accessed 24 October 2018).
House, Juliane
2010 “
The Pragmatics of English as a Lingua Franca.” In
Pragmatics across Languages and Cultures, ed. by
Anna Trosborg, 363–387. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Hutchby, Ian
2006 Media Talk: Conversation Analysis and the Study of Broadcasting. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
Hutchby, Ian and Robin Wooffitt
1998 Conversation Analysis: Principles, Practices and Applications. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Jefferson, Gail
1985 “
An exercise in the transcription and analysis of laughter”, In
Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by
Teun A. van Dijk, 25–34. London: Academic Press.
Kakavá, Christina
2001 “
Discourse and Conflict.” In
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by
Deborah Schiffrin,
Deborah Tannen and
Heidi E. Hamilton, 650–670. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kantara, Argyro
2012 “
Adversarial Challenges and Responses in Greek Political Interviews: A Case Study.”
Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 5 (2): 171–189.
Kecskes, Istvan
2016 “
Can Intercultural Pragmatics Bring Some New Insight into Pragmatic Theories?” In
Interdisciplinary Studies in Pragmatics, Culture and Society, ed. by
Alessandro Capone and
Jacob L. Mey, 43–69. Cham: Springer.
Kotthoff, Helga
1993 “
Disagreement and Concession in Disputes: On the Context-sensitivity of Preference Structures.”
Language in Society 221: 193–216.
Krzeszowski, Tomasz
1990 Contrasting Languages. The Scope of Contrastive Linguistics. Berlin/New York: Mouton De Gruyter.
Kuo, Sai-hua
1991 Conflict and Its Management in Chinese Verbal Interactions: Casual Conversations and Parliamentary Interpellations. Unpublished PhD thesis, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
Lauerbach, Gerda
2007 “
Argumentation in Political Talk Show Interviews.”
Journal of Pragmatics 391: 1388–1419.
Luckmann, Thomas
1995 “
Interaction Planning and Intersubjective Adjustment of Perspectives by Communicative Genres.” In
Social Intelligence and Interaction, ed. by
Esther Goody, 175–188. Cambridge: CUP.
Maschler, Yael and Deborah Schiffrin
2015 “
Discourse Markers: Language, Meaning and Context.” In
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by
Deborah Tannen,
Heidi E. Hamilton and
Deborah Schiffrin, Second edition, Vol. 11. 189–221. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Mey, Jacob L.
2001 Pragmatics: An Introduction. Second edition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Mey, Jacob L.
2016a “
Why We Need the Pragmeme, or: Speech Acting and Its Peripeties.” In
Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use, ed. by
Keith Allan,
Alessandro Capone and
Istvan Kecskes, 133–140. Cham: Springer.
Mey, Jacob L.
2016b “
Modular, Cellular, Integral: A Pragmatic Elephant?” In
Interdisciplinary Studies in Pragmatics, Culture and Society, ed. by
Alessandro Capone and
Jacob L. Mey, 353–369. Cham: Springer.
Patrona, Marianna
2006 “
Constructing the Expert as a Public Speaker: Face Considerations on Floor-claiming in Greek Television Discussion Programs.”
Journal of Pragmatics 381: 2124–2143.
Pomerantz, Anita
1984 “
Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes” In
Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by
J. M. Atkinson and
John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: CUP.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff and Gail Jefferson
1974 “
A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation.”
Language 501: 696–735.
Sbisà, Marina
2009 “
Speech Act Theory” in
Key Notions for Pragmatics, ed. by
Jef Verschueren and
Jan-Ola Östman, 229–244. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schenkein, Jim
(ed.) 1978 Studies in the Organisation of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press.
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987 Discourse Markers. Cambridge: CUP.
Schiffrin, Deborah
2001 “
Discourse Markers: Language, Meaning and Context.” In
The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. by
Deborah Schiffrin,
Deborah Tannen and
Heidi E. Hamilton, 54–75. Oxford: Blackwell.
Searle, John. R.
1965 “
What is a Speech Act?” In
Philosophy in America, ed. by
Max Black, 221–239. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Searle, John. R.
1969 Speech Acts. Cambridge: CUP.
Searle, John R.
1976 “
A Classification of Illocutionary Acts.”
Language in Society 51: 1–23.
Searle, John. R.
1979 Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: CUP.
Searle and Vanderveken
1985 Foundations of Illocutionary Logic. Cambridge: CUP.
Tannen, Deborah
1998 The Argument Culture: Moving from Debate to Dialogue. New York: Random House.
Weizman, Elda
1998 “
Individual Intentions and Collective Purpose: The Case of News Interviews.” In
Dialogue Analysis VI1, ed. by
Svetla Cmejrkova,
Jana Hoffmannova,
Olga Mullerova and
Jindra Svetla, 269–280. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Weizman, Elda
2006 “
Roles and Identities in News Interviews: The Israeli Context.”
Journal of Pragmatics 381: 154–179.
Wierzbicka, Anna
1985 “
Different Cultures, Different Languages, Different Speech Acts: Polish vs. English.”
Journal of Pragmatics 9 (2–3): 145–178.
Wong, Jock
2010 “
The Triple Articulation of Language (Special issue on ‘grammemes’).”
Journal of Pragmatics 421: 2932–2944.
Wong, Jock
2016 “
The ‘emesʼ of Linguistics.” In
Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use, ed. by
Keith Allan,
Alessandro Capone and
Istvan Kecskes, 567–583. Cham: Springer.
Cited by (1)
Cited by 1 other publications
Tseng, Ming-Yu
2023.
Rén qíng wèi (‘flavour of human feelings’) in the pragmeme of delivering Covid-19 directives.
Journal of Pragmatics 218
► pp. 31 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.