The (cyclical) path towards impoliteness in electoral debates

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

    Universidad de Jaén

    Jaén, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0122p5f64

Revista:
Veleia: Revista de prehistoria, historia antigua, arqueología y filología clásicas

ISSN: 0213-2095

Año de publicación: 2022

Título del ejemplar: New insights into politeness and impoliteness: studies in Ancient Greek literary dialogues

Número: 39

Páginas: 85-99

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1387/VELEIA.22297 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Veleia: Revista de prehistoria, historia antigua, arqueología y filología clásicas

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

This work proposes, first, an approach to the agonal character of electoral debates, and then analyses the nature of the acts of (im)politeness that appear in them. From there, it presents a triangular theoretical-methodological framework, based on the analysis of functional impoliteness strategies, linguistic-discursive mechanisms for their implementation and social repercussions of impolite acts. Within the first of these three axes, a dynamic quantitative analysis is carried out. this analysis demonstrates the growing appearance of impoliteness in electoral debates, as well as the cyclical nature of this growth —which is increasingly accelerated— in successive sections of these speech events. This quantitative analysis is based on the face-to-face debate between Mariano rajoy and alfredo Pérez rubalcaba days before the spanish general elections in November 2011.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Albelda Marco, M., & M. J. Barros García, 2013, La cortesía en la comunicación, Madrid: Arco/Libros.
  • Atkinson, M., 1984, Our masters’ voices. The language and body language of politics, London: Routledge.
  • 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 pragmático-discursiva al debate electoral cara a cara, Bern: Peter Lang.
  • Boudeau, B., et alii, 1989, “Michel, Jacques, Lionel et Laurent”, en R. Ghiglione (dir.), ‘Je vous ai compris’ ou L'analyse des discours politiques, Paris: Armand Colin, 107-161.
  • Bousfield, D., 2008, Impoliteness in Interaction, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Brown, P., & S. C. Levinson, 1978, “Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena”, en: E. N. Goody (ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, Cambridge: CUP, 56-311.
  • Brown, P., & S. C. Levinson, 1987, Politeness. Some Universals in Language Use, Cambridge: CUP.
  • Charaudeau, P., 2005, Le discours politique. Les masques du pouvoir, Paris: Librairie Vuilbert.
  • Chicot, M., 2016, El asesinato de Sócrates, Barcelona: Planeta.
  • Culpeper, J., 1996, “Towards an anatomy of impoliteness”, Journal of Pragmatics 25, 349-367.
  • Culpeper, J., 2011, Impoliteness. Using Language to Cause Offence, Cambridge: CUP.
  • Eemeren, F. H. van, & R. Grootendorst, 2004, A Systematic Theory of Argumentation, New York: CUP.
  • Fernández García, F., 2000, Estrategas del diálogo. La interacción comunicativa en el discurso político-electoral, Granada: Método Ediciones.
  • Fernández García, F., 2008, “Los debates Zapatero /vs/ Rajoy de 2008. Claves discursivas de una victoria”, LinRed 6, 1-37.
  • Fernández García, F., 2009, “(Des)cortesía y pugna dialéctica en el debate político-electoral”, Oralia 12, 267-304.
  • 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., 2017, La descortesía en el debate electoral cara a cara, Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla.
  • Grice, P., 1975, “Logic and conversation”, en P. Cole, J. L. 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.
  • Hernández Flores, N., 2005, “Cortesía y oscilación de la imagen social en un debate televisivo”, en J. Murillo Medrano (ed.), Actas del II Coloquio del Programa EDICE, Stockholm - Costa Rica: University of Stockholm, University of Costa Rica, 37-53.
  • Kotthoff, H., 1993, “Disagreement and concession in disputes: On the context sensitivity of preference structures”, Language in Society 22, 193-216.
  • 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., 2005, “(Im)Politeness, face and perceptions of rapport: unpackaging their bases and interrelationships”, Journal of Politeness Research 1, 95-119.
  • Spencer-Oatey, H., 2007, “Theories of identity and the analysis of face”, Journal of Pragmatics 39, 639-656.
  • Spencer-Oatey, H., 2008, “Face, (Im)Politeness and Rapport”, en H. Spencer-Oatey (ed.), Culturally Speaking. Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory, London: Continuum, 11-47.
  • Terkourafi, M., 2005, “Beyond the micro-level in politeness research”, Journal of Politeness Research 1, 237-262.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet