Being impolite while pretending to be polite. The rupture of politeness conventions in electoral debates

  1. Fernández García, Francisco 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Jaén
    info

    Universidad de Jaén

    Jaén, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0122p5f64

Journal:
Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación

ISSN: 1576-4737

Year of publication: 2016

Issue: 67

Pages: 136-166

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5209/CLAC.53481 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación

Metrics

Cited by

  • Scopus Cited by: 3 (28-01-2024)
  • Dialnet Métricas Cited by: 2 (25-02-2024)
  • Web of Science Cited by: 4 (19-10-2023)
  • Dimensions Cited by: 3 (24-01-2024)

JCR (Journal Impact Factor)

  • Year 2016
  • Journal Impact Factor: 0.258
  • Journal Impact Factor without self cites: 0.21
  • Article influence score: 0.086
  • Best Quartile: Q4
  • Area: LINGUISTICS Quartile: Q4 Rank in area: 146/182 (Ranking edition: SSCI)

SCImago Journal Rank

  • Year 2016
  • SJR Journal Impact: 0.12
  • Best Quartile: Q3
  • Area: Linguistics and Language Quartile: Q3 Rank in area: 505/887

Índice Dialnet de Revistas

  • Year 2016
  • Journal Impact: 0.250
  • Field: LINGÜÍSTICA Quartile: C1 Rank in field: 14/68
  • Field: FILOLOGÍAS Quartile: C1 Rank in field: 25/326
  • Field: COMUNICACIÓN Quartile: C2 Rank in field: 27/65

CIRC

  • Social Sciences: B
  • Human Sciences: A

Scopus CiteScore

  • Year 2016
  • CiteScore of the Journal : 0.2
  • Area: Language and Linguistics Percentile: 38
  • Area: Linguistics and Language Percentile: 37

Dimensions

(Data updated as of 24-01-2024)
  • Total citations: 3
  • Recent citations (2 years): 0
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR): 1.87

Abstract

This paper is a part of a larger research that pursues a global understanding of impoliteness in face-to-face electoral debates. That research distinguishes three essential axes, three complementary analytical perspectives: functional strategies of impoliteness, linguistic-discursive mechanisms to implement them and social impacts of impolite acts. In this frame, the present work develops an in-depth analysis of a special category of mechanisms, namely the rupture of politeness conventions, a subgroup within postliteral implicit mechanisms. This subgroup acquires its identity by the fact of carrying out a linguistic action that is conventionally associated with a polite attitude, but doing it in a rhetorically insincere way: the consequence is that apparent politeness becomes impoliteness. Relevant aspects in the characterization of ruptures are isolated and, on this basis, it is developed a detailed analysis of three specific kinds of mechanisms in which ruptures take shape: using ironic statements, developing different forms of overpoliteness and adopting a falsely collaborative attitude toward the interlocutor. The analysis of that group of mechanisms takes into account, simultaneously, the other two axes of the main research, strategies and social impacts.

Bibliographic References

  • Agha, A. (1997): “Tropic aggression in the Clinton-Dole presidential debate”. Pragmatics, 7, 461-497.
  • Anscombre, J. C., and O. Ducrot (1994): La argumentación en la lengua. Madrid: Gredos.
  • Bañón Hernández, A. M., and S. Requena Romero (2010): “Pausa y descortesía en el debate político-electoral”. Español actual, 94, 9-46.
  • Blas Arroyo, J. L. (2001): “‘No diga chorradas...’ La descortesía en el debate político cara a cara. Una aproximación pragma-variacionista”. Oralia, 4, 9-45.
  • Blas Arroyo, J. L. (2011): Políticos en conflicto: una aproximación pragmáticodiscursiva al debate electoral cara a cara. Bern: Peter Lang.
  • Bousfield, D. (2008): Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Brenes Peña, E. (2011): Descortesía verbal y tertulia televisiva. Análisis pragmalingüístico. Bern: Peter Lang.
  • Brown, P., and S. C. Levinson (1978): “Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena”. In E. N. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 56-311.
  • Brown, P., and S. C. Levinson (1987): Politeness. Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Culpeper, J. (1996): “Towards an anatomy of impoliteness”. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 349-367.
  • Culpeper, J. (2011): Impoliteness. Using Language to Cause Offence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Díaz Domínguez, M. L (2011): “‘Perdona, bonita, pero Lucas me quería a mí’. Perdona: de petición de disculpa a intensificador del desacuerdo”. In C. Fuentes Rodríguez, E. Alcaide Lara and E. Brenes Peña (eds.), Aproximaciones a la (des)cortesía verbal en español. Bern: Peter Lang, 299-313.
  • Escandell Vidal, M. V. (1996): Introducción a la pragmática. Barcelona: Ariel.
  • Escandell Vidal, M. V. (2004): “Aportaciones de la Pragmática”. In J. Sánchez Lobato e I. Santos Gargallo (dirs.): Enseñar español como segunda lengua o lengua extranjera. Vademécum para la formación de profesores. Madrid: SGEL, 179-197.
  • Fernández Sánchez, M. (1993): De la ironía en la conversación (El principio de pertinencia aplicado al análisis de un corpus en francés). PhD thesis, University of Granada.
  • Fernández García, F. (2001): “Ironía y (des)cortesía”. Oralia, 4, 103-127.
  • Fernández García, F. (2014): “Impoliteness, pseudo-politeness, strategic politeness? On the nature of communicative behaviour in electoral debates”. Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación, 58, 60-89.
  • Fernández García, F. (2015a): “Si lee el programa y no lo entiende, tenemos un problema. Estrategias funcionales para el ataque descortés en el debate cara a cara”. Cultura, lenguaje y representación / Culture, Language and Representation, 14, 33-59.
  • Fernández García, F. (2015b): “El menosprecio y la burla como armas de ataque en el debate electoral. Caracterización funcional y configuración discursiva”. Pragmática Sociocultural / Sociocultural Pragmatics, 3, 32-58.
  • Fernández García, F. (2016): “Mecanismos interaccionales al servicio de la descortesía en el debate político”. Spanish in Context, 13 (2), 263-284.
  • Fracciolla, B. (2011): “Politeness as a strategy of attack in a gendered political debate. The Royal-Sarkozy debate”. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2480-2488.
  • Grice, P. (1975): “Logic and conversation”. In P. Cole and R. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 41-58.
  • Harris, S. (2001): “Being politically impolite: extending politeness theory to adversarial political discourse”. Discourse & Society, 12, 451-472.
  • Haverkate, H. (1984): “La sinceridad del hablante retórico: una investigación pragmalingüística”. In M. A. Garrido Gallardo (ed.), Teoría Semiótica y lenguajes y textos hispánicos. Madrid: CSIC, 261-267.
  • Haverkate, H. (1985): “La ironía verbal: un análisis pragmalingüístico”. Revista española de lingüística, 15, 343-391.
  • Jorgensen, J. (1996): “The functions of sarcastic irony in speech”. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 613-634.
  • Leech, G. N. (1983): Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
  • Luginbühl, M. (2007): “Conversational violence in political TV debates: Forms and functions”. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 1371-1387.
  • Nuolijärvi, P., y L. Tiittula (2011): “Irony in political television debates”. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 572-587.
  • Ridao Rodrigo, S. (2009): “‘Y es que usted cambia de criterio cada cuarto de hora’: Las estrategias de (des)cortesía en los debates electorales españoles de 2008”. LinRed, 7, 1-19.
  • Ruiz Gurillo, L. (2010). “Para una aproximación neogriceana a la ironía en español”. Revista española de lingüística, 40, 95-124.
  • Searle, J. (1969): Speech Acts. An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Searle, J. (1975): “Indirect Speech Acts”. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics, vol. III: Speech Acts. New York: Academic Press, 59-82.
  • Seco, M., O. Andrés and G. Ramos (2004): Diccionario fraseológico documentado del español actual. Madrid: Aguilar, 2009.
  • Spencer-Oatey, H. (2002): “Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations”. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 529-545.
  • Spencer-Oatey, H. (2008): “Face, (Im)Politeness and Rapport”. In H. Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally Speaking. Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory. London: Continuum, 11-47.
  • Sperber, D., y D. Wilson (1978) : “Les ironies comme mentions”. Poétique, 36, 399-412.
  • Sperber, D., y D. Wilson (1981): “Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction”. In P. Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, New York, Academic Press, 295-317.
  • Terkourafi, M. (2005): “Beyond the micro-level in politeness research”. Journal of Politeness Research, 1, 237-262.