1887
Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2211-4742
  • E-ISSN: 2211-4750
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Few of the central concepts of political discourse are as controversial as “freedom”/“liberty”. However, although “freedom” definitely belongs to the so-called “essentially contested concepts”, even “a contested concept has an uncontested core” (Lakoff 2006: 23–24). This uncontested core can be described as the core meaning of language-specific lexemes such as English , German , French or Italian . The core meaning can be established as the common ground underlying all more specific controversial uses and definitions.

Within political discourse, the context-specific uses of these lexemes can be described as persuasive definitions, that is, as instances of strategic maneuvering (cf. van Eemeren 2010), which try to establish one’s own use of these words as the politically dominant one and the one most widespread in the media.

With this theoretical background in mind, I would like to provide an overview of how is persuasively defined and strategically used within contemporary Italian political discourse. In order to do this, I have compiled a small corpus of party programs, political speeches, interviews, newspaper editorials and posts. From this empirical basis a list of argumentative strategies concerning explicit and implicit definitions of will be compiled and critically evaluated.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.21019.kie
2022-03-08
2022-05-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Article “Coronavirus, Sergio Mattarella: “La libertà non è un fatto esclusivamente individuale”. Libero Quotidiano (October9 2020) (https://www.liberoquotidiano.it/news/politica/24827508/coronavirus-sergio-mattarella-liberta-non-un-fatto-esclusivamente-individuale-lockdown.html; last seenSeptember 13, 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Fallai, Paolo
    2020 “Libertà (anche dal Coronavirus) per godercela, meglio conoscerla bene.” Article inCorriere della Sera (April22 2020) (https://www.corriere.it/scuola/20_aprile_22/liberta-anche-coronavirus-godercela-meglio-conoscerla-bene-f8ed3fdc-824d-11ea-afba-f0dcf1bf9a9f.shtml; last seenSeptember 13, 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Fallaci, Oriana
    1979Un Uomo. Milano: Rizzoli. (https://dokodoc.com/oriana-fallaci-un-uomo.html; last seenSeptember 15, 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Forza Italia
    Forza Italia 2014 Carta dei valori. (www.forzaitalia.it/speciali/cartadeivalori.pdf; last seenSeptember 14, 2021).
  5. Forza Italia
    Forza Italia 2014 Credo laico. (https://www.academia.edu/5425731/IL_CREDO_LAICO_DI_FORZA_ITALIA; last seenSeptember 14, 2021).
  6. Fratelli d’Italia
    Fratelli d’Italia 2018 Il voto che unisce l’Italia. Il programma. Le priorità in 15 punti. (https://www.flipsnack.com/fratelliditalia/programma-in-sintesi.html; last seenSeptember 14, 2021).
  7. Italia Viva
    Italia Viva 2021 Carta dei valori. (https://www.italiaviva.it/carta_dei_valori; last seenSeptember 14, 2021).
  8. Meloni, Giorgia
  9. Salvini, Matteo
    2013 Programma per la candidatura alla Segreteria Federale della Lega Nord per l’Indipendenza della Padania. (file:///Users/manfred/Downloads/Programma_Salvini.pdf; last seenSeptember 15, 2021).
  10. 2019 Ultimo Live di fine anno (December31 2019; Facebook]. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1m-zt5Xfpps; last seenSeptember 15, 2021).
  11. Abaelardus, Petrus
    1956Dialectica. Ed. by Lambertus M. de Rijk . Van Gorcum: Assen.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Antelmi, Donella and Francesca Santulli
    2002 “Risorse semantiche per la costruzione del consenso: il caso Berlusconi.” Comunicazione politica3(2), 171–191.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Aristoteles
    Aristoteles 2004Topik. Transl. and comm. by Tim Wagner and Christof Rapp . Stuttgart: Reclam.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Battaglia, Salvatore
    1975Grande dizionario della lingua italiana [Great Dictionary of the Italian Language]. Vol.9. Torino: UTET.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Berlin, Isaiah
    1969 Two Concepts of Liberty. In Isaiah Berlin . Four Essays On Liberty, 166–218. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Copi, Irving M. , Carl Cohen and Kenneth McMahon
    2014Introduction to Logic. Pearson: Harlow.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Corpus di Italiano Scritto [Corpus of Written Italian] (CORIS)
    Corpus di Italiano Scritto [Corpus of Written Italian] (CORIS). corpora.dslo.unibo.it/TCORIS/
  18. Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA)
    Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). https://www.english-corpora.org/coca/
  19. Coseriu, Eugenio
    1958Sincronía, diacronía e historia, Montevideo: Universidad de la Republica.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. 1988Einführung in die Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft. Tübingen: Francke.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Eemeren, Frans H. van
    2010Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2 [Google Scholar]
  22. French Mixed Corpus
    French Mixed Corpus . Leipzig Corpora Collection. corpora.uni-leipzig.de/de?corpusId=fra_mixed_2012
  23. Herman, Edward S. and Noam Chomsky
    1988Manufacturing Consent. New York: Pantheon.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Ilie, Cornelia
    2009 “Strategies of Refutation by Definition: A Pragma-Rhetorical Approach to Refutations in American Public Speech”. InPondering on Problems of Argumentation, ed. by Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen , 35–51. Berlin: Springer. 10.1007/978‑1‑4020‑9165‑0_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9165-0_4 [Google Scholar]
  25. Kienpointner, Manfred
    (1992): Alltagslogik. Stuttgart/Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (2008): The Case for Core Meaning. InMeaning, Intentions and Argumentation, ed. by Kepa Korta and Joana Garmendia , 77–112. Stanford: CSLI.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kleiber, Georges
    1998Prototypensemantik. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Lakoff, George
    2006Whose Freedom? The Battle over America’s Most Important Idea. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Larousse
    Larousse . Dictionnaire français [Larousse French Dictionary]. https://www.larousse.fr/
  30. Longman Dictionary of contemporary English
    Longman Dictionary of contemporary English 2003 [= LDOCE]: Harlow, Essex: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Macagno, Fabrizio and Douglas Walton
    2014Emotive Language in Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139565776
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139565776 [Google Scholar]
  32. Mauro, Tullio de
    1999Grande dizionario italiano dell’uso [Great Italian Dictionary of Usage]. Torino: UTET.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Mill, John St
    1946On liberty and Considerations on Representative Government. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Padovani, Cinzia
    2015 “‘Berlusconi’s Italy’: The Media between Structure and Agency’”. Modern Italy, 20 (1): 41–57. 10.1080/13532944.2014.988605
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13532944.2014.988605 [Google Scholar]
  35. Putnam, Hilary
    1975 “The meaning of ‘meaning’”. In Hilary Putnam . Mind, Language and Reality. Volume2, 215–271. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511625251.014
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625251.014 [Google Scholar]
  36. Quine, Willard Van Orman
    1971From a Logical Point of View. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Recanati, François
    2004Literal Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Rosch, Eleanor and Mervis, Carolyn B.
    1975 “Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories.” Cognitive Psychology7(4), 573–605. 10.1016/0010‑0285(75)90024‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90024-9 [Google Scholar]
  39. Stevenson, Charles Leslie
    1938 Persuasive Definitions. Mind47(187), 331–350. 10.1093/mind/XLVII.187.331
    https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/XLVII.187.331 [Google Scholar]
  40. Walton, Douglas N.
    2005 “Deceptive Arguments Containing Persuasive Language and Persuasive Definitions”. Argumentation19(2), 159–186. 10.1007/s10503‑005‑2312‑y
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-005-2312-y [Google Scholar]
  41. Walton, Douglas , Chris Reed and Fabrizio Macagno
    2008Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511802034
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802034 [Google Scholar]
  42. Weinrich, Harald
    1993Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Hildesheim: Olms.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wierzbicka, Anna
    1997Understanding Cultures Through Their Key Words. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Zarefsky, David
    2006 “Strategic Maneuvering through Persuasive Definitions: Implications for Dialectic and Rhetoric”. Argumentation20(4): 399–416. 10.1007/s10503‑007‑9030‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-007-9030-6 [Google Scholar]
  45. Zechmann, Michael
    2018Die Mensch/Tier-Grenze. Innsbruck: Create Space Independent Publishing Platform.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.21019.kie
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.21019.kie
Loading

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