image of Being sensible is now a radical concept I LOVE that quote haha



This paper examines how the communicative act of quotation may contribute to ordinary users’ discussion of politics through user comments following up on government- and opposition-party speeches during a pre-election and a non-election period in Britain. It analyses the linguistic formatting of the communicative act – as direct, indirect, mixed, hypothetical and scare quotation – and its production-format-specific distribution in the speeches of the political elite and in ordinary-user comments following up on the elite discourse. Particular attention is given to (1) references to the constitutive parts of the communicative act of quotation, to its felicity conditions and to social-context coordinates, (2) the discursive functions which quotation may fulfil in the two different contexts and timeframes, and (3) their perlocutionary effects.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.

Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Allan, Keith, Alessandro Capone, and Istvan Kecskes
    (eds.) 2016Pragmemes and Theories of Language Use: Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology. Cham: Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑43491‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43491-9 [Google Scholar]
  2. Arendholz, Jenny, Wolfram Bublitz, and Monika Kirner-Ludwig
    (eds.) 2015The Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110427561
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561 [Google Scholar]
  3. Austin, John L.
    1975How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  4. Boyd, Michael S.
    2014 “(New) participatory framework on YouTube? Commenter interaction in US political speeches.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  5. Brendel, Elke, Jörg Meibauer, and Markus Steinbach
    2011 “Exploring the meaning of quotation.” InUnderstanding Quotation, ed. byElke Brendel, Jörg Meibauer, and Markus Steinbach, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110240085.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110240085.1 [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bublitz, Wolfram
    2015 “Introducing quoting as a ubiquitous meta-communicative act.” InThe Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then, ed. byJenny Arendholz, Wolfram Bublitz, and Monika Kirner-Ludwig, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110427561‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-002 [Google Scholar]
  8. Buchstaller, Isabelle, and Ingrid van Alphen
    2012 “Introductory remarks on new and old quotatives.” InQuotatives: Cross-Linguistic and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives, ed. byIsabelle Buchstaller, and Ingrid Van Alphen, –, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.15.02pre
    https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.15.02pre [Google Scholar]
  9. Clark, Herbert H., and Thomas B. Carlson
    1982 “Hearers and speech acts.” Language(): –. 10.1353/lan.1982.0042
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1982.0042 [Google Scholar]
  10. Clark, Herbert H., and Richard J. Gerrig
    1990 “Quotations as demonstrations.” Language(): –. 10.2307/414729
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414729 [Google Scholar]
  11. Clayman, Steven
    1995 “Defining moments, presidential debates, and the dynamics of quotability.” Journal of Communication(): –. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1995.tb00746.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1995.tb00746.x [Google Scholar]
  12. D’Ancona, Matthew
    2017Post Truth: The New War on Truth and How to Fight Back. London: Ebury Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Fetzer, Anita
    2000 “Negotiating validity claims in political interviews.” Text & Talk(): –. 10.1515/text.1.2000.20.4.415
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.2000.20.4.415 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2002a “Negotiating rejections: A socio-cultural analysis.” Multilingua(): –. 10.1515/mult.2002.017
    https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.2002.017 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2002b “‘Put bluntly, you have something of a credibility problem’: Sincerity and credibility in political interviews.” InPolitics as Talk and Text: Analytic Approaches to Political Discourse, ed. byPaul Chilton, and Christina Schäffner, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.4.10fet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.4.10fet [Google Scholar]
  16. 2015 “‘When you came into office you said that your government would be different’: Forms and functions of quotations in mediated political discourse.” InThe Dynamics of Political Discourse: Forms and Functions of Follow-Ups, ed. byAnita Fetzer, Elda Weizman, and Lawrence N. Berlin, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.259.10fet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.259.10fet [Google Scholar]
  17. 2020 “‘And I quote’: Forms and functions of quotations in Prime Minister’s questions.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.05.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2021 “Quotation, meta-data and transparency of sources in mediated political discourse.” InThe Pragmatics of Adaptability, ed. byDaniel Silva, and Jacob Mey, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.319.07fet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.319.07fet [Google Scholar]
  19. 2022 “Doing things with discourse in the mediated political arena: Participation and pluralism of discursive action.” Pragmatics and Society(): –. 10.1075/ps.21025.fet
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.21025.fet [Google Scholar]
  20. Fetzer, Anita, and Peter Bull
    2012 “Doing leadership in political speech: Semantic processes and pragmatic inferences.” Discourse & Society(): –. 10.1177/0957926511431510
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511431510 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2019 “Quoting ordinary people in Prime Minister’s questions.” InThe Construction of ‘Ordinariness’ across Media Genres, ed. byAnita Fetzer, and Elda Weizman, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.307.04ani
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.307.04ani [Google Scholar]
  22. Fetzer, Anita, and Elda Weizman
    2018 “‘What I would say to John and everyone like John is …’: The construction of ordinariness through quotations in mediated political discourse.” Discourse & Society(): –. 10.1177/0957926518770259
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926518770259 [Google Scholar]
  23. Givón, Talmy
    1993English Grammar: A Function-Based Introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Grice, Herbert P.
    1975 “Logic and conversation.” InSyntax and Semantics, Vol., Speech Acts, ed. byPeter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, –. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Gross, Daniel Henrik
    2024 “The discursive construction of ordinary people in online media discourse: A contrastive analysis of discursive prosodies in English and German.” PhD dissertation, University of Augsburg. https://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/111607
  26. Gruber, Helmut
    2015 “Policy-oriented argumentation or ironic evaluation: A study of verbal quoting and positioning in Austrian politicians’ parliamentary debate contributions.” Discourse Studies(): –. 10.1177/1461445615602377
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615602377 [Google Scholar]
  27. Gumperz, John J.
    1992 “Contextualization and understanding.” InRethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, ed. byAlessandro Duranti, and Charles Goodwin, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 1996 “The linguistic and cultural relativity of inference.” InRethinking Linguistic Relativity, ed. byJohn J. Gumperz, and Stephen C. Levinson, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Habermas, Jürgen
    1987Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns [The Theory of Communicative Action]. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Ilie, Cornelia
    2003 “Discourse and metadiscourse in parliamentary debates.” Journal of Language and Politics(): –. 10.1075/jlp.2.1.05ili
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.2.1.05ili [Google Scholar]
  31. Jaffe, Alexandra
    2009 “Entextualization, mediatization and authentication: Orthographic choice in media transcripts.” Text & Talk(): –. 10.1515/TEXT.2009.030
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2009.030 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kirner-Ludwig, Monika
    2020 “Creation, dissemination and uptake of fake-quotes in lay political discourse on Facebook and Twitter.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.07.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.07.009 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kozinets, Robert
    2010Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Landert, Daniela, and Andreas H. Jucker
    2011 “Private and public in mass media communication: From letters to the editor to online commentaries.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.016
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.016 [Google Scholar]
  35. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1979 “Activity types and language.” Linguistics: –. 10.1515/ling.1979.17.5‑6.365
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1979.17.5-6.365 [Google Scholar]
  36. Linell, Per
    2009Rethinking Language, Mind, and World Dialogically: Interactional and Contextual Theories of Human Sense-Making. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Mey, Jacob L.
    2018 “How social is the internet: A pragmatic view.” Internet Pragmatics(): –. 10.1075/ip.00002.mey
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00002.mey [Google Scholar]
  38. Oishi, Etsuko, and Anita Fetzer
    2016 “Expositives in discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.03.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  39. Reber, Elisabeth
    2021Quoting in Parliamentary Question Time. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108869898
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108869898 [Google Scholar]
  40. Saka, Paul
    2013 “Quotation.” Philosophy Compass(): –. 10.1111/phc3.12069
    https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12069 [Google Scholar]
  41. Searle, John R.
    1969Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139173438
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173438 [Google Scholar]
  42. Short, Michael
    1991 “Speech presentation, the novel and the press.” InThe Taming of the Text: Explorations in Language, Literature and Culture, ed. byWillie Van Peer, –. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Tannen, Deborah
    2007Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511618987
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618987 [Google Scholar]
  44. Warner, Michael
    2002Publics and Counterpublics. New York: Zone Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Weiss, Daniel
    2020 “Analogical reasoning with quotations.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.10.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  46. Weizman, Elda, and Anita Fetzer
    2021 “The discursive construction of accountability for communicative action to citizens: A contrastive analysis across Israeli and British media discourse.” Intercultural Pragmatics(): –. 10.1515/ip‑2021‑5002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2021-5002 [Google Scholar]
  47. Wilson, Deidre
    2012 “Metarepresentation in linguistic communication.” InMeaning and Relevance, ed. byDeidre Wilson, and Dan Sperber, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139028370.014
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139028370.014 [Google Scholar]
  48. Yus, Francisco
    2011 “Identity-related issues in meme communication.” Internet Pragmatics(): –. 10.1075/ip.00006.yus
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00006.yus [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error