Argumentation in Political Interviews
Analyzing and evaluating responses to accusations of inconsistency
| University of Amsterdam
In Argumentation in Political Interviews Corina Andone uses the pragma-dialectical concept of strategic maneuvering to gain a better understanding of political interviews as argumentative practices. She analyzes and evaluates the way in which politicians react in political interviews to the accusation that the position they currently hold is inconsistent with a position they advanced before. The politicians’ responses to such charges are examined for their strategic function by concentrating on a number of concrete cases and explaining how the arguers try to enhance their chances of winning the discussion. In addition, the soundness criteria are formulated for judging properly when the politicians’ responses are indeed reasonable.
This book is important to argumentation theorists, discourse analysts, communication scholars and all other researchers and students interested in the way in which language is used for the purpose of persuasion in a political context.
Corina Andone is Assistant Professor of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric at the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Amsterdam in the Netherlands.
[Argumentation in Context, 5] 2013. viii, 147 pp.
Publishing status: Available
© John Benjamins
Table of Contents
Preface
|
vii–viii
|
1. Introduction
|
1–14
|
2. Analytically relevant responses to an accusation of inconsistency
|
15–32
|
3. The political interview as an argumentative activity type
|
33–60
|
4. Strategic maneuvering in response to an accusation of inconsistency in a political interview
|
61–100
|
5. The reasonableness of responses to an accusation of inconsistency in a political interview
|
101–124
|
6. Conclusion
|
125–134
|
References
|
135–140
|
List of figures
|
141
|
Name index
|
143–144
|
Subject index
|
145–147
|
“[T]his is an important piece of original research that makes a welcome contribution to the study of strategic maneuvering in institutional contexts and the (critical) study of political discourse. It is very clearly written and argued, in the lucid and methodical style characteristic of pragma-dialectical research, and contains a wealth of examples from political interviews from the British media, clearly analyzed. It is an excellent contribution to the development of pragma-dialectics as a major research programme in argumentation theory and will be of use not only to researchers working within the pragma-dialectical research programme but also, more widely, to analysts of political discourse, and particularly to researchers working in Critical Discourse Analysis.”
Isabela Fairclough, University of Central Lancashire, in Journal of Argumentation in Context Vol. 3:3(2014), pp.325-332
“[H]er work creates a model from which comparative study in deliberative democracy can benefit. Different regimes, rules of public engagement, content expectations and audiences condition the practices of deliberation. What norms can be posited as universal and which are subject to discovery as invested in national political authority and custom? Are the maneuvers of journalists across the globe more common than they are varied? Andone’s gifted inquiry extends pragma-dialectics appears as an insightful tool to address the communicative and interactive dimensions of professional and political practices.”
G. T. Goodnight, University of Southern California, in Argumentation, Vol. 28 (2014), pages 241-244
Cited by
Cited by 28 other publications
No author info given
No author info given
Al-Hindawi, Fareed Hameed & Wafaa Sahib Mehdi Mohammed
Andone, Corina
Andone, Corina
Andone, Corina
Andone, Corina
Bova, Antonio, Francesco Arcidiacono & Fabrice Clément
Clementson, David E.
Dahl, John Magnus R. & A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
Demir, Yeliz
Eemeren, Frans H.
Hansson, Sten
Ilie, Cornelia
Kantara, Argyro
Kauffeld, Fred J. & Beth Innocenti
Kienpointner, Manfred
Okuda, Hiroko & Takeshi Suzuki
Popa, Eugen
van Eemeren, Frans H.
van Eemeren, Frans H.
van Eemeren, Frans H.
van Eemeren, Frans H.
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans
Wu, Peng
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 07 february 2021. 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.
Subjects
Communication Studies
Philosophy
BIC Subject: CFG – Semantics, Pragmatics, Discourse Analysis
BISAC Subject: LAN000000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / General