1887
Volume 13, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238

Abstract

The following article applies both quantitative and qualitative methods of research to markers of perspective in a TV interview of Colin Powell on the CNN LARRY KING LIVE program from November 26, 2001. Perspective is well established in phenomenology and social psychology; its starting point is the conviction that every utterance expresses a point of view. From previous research, we accept the dialogical nature of perspective (see O’Connell & Kowal 1998) and further argue that perspective can be observed through measures of orality and literacy and through referencing (name and pronoun reference). The following measures of orality and literacy are examined: Back channeling hesitations, interruptions, contractions and elisions, first person singular pronominals, interjections and tag questions, and turn transitions from interviewer to interviewee and vice versa. We argue further that Colin Powell’s perspective stresses the division between “we” and “they” with regard to the then imminent involvement in Iraq. Theoretical implications are discussed.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.13.3.03sul
2003-01-01
2019-09-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alber, J. , D. O’Connell , and S. Kowal
    (2002) Personal perspective in TV news interviews. Pragmatics12.3: 257-271.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtin, M
    (1981)  The dialogic imagination: Four essays (trans. C. Emerson and M. Holquist , ed. M. Holquist ). Austin, TX: Texas University Press.
  3. Caldas-Coulthard, C
    (2003) Cross-cultural representation of ‘otherness’ in media discourse. In G. Weiss and R. Wodak (eds.), Critical discourse analysis: Theory and interdisciplinarity. Great Britain: Palgrave, pp. 272-296.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chafe, W
    (1986) Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. In W. Chafe and J. Nichols (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, pp. 261-272.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Chouliaraki, L. , and N. Fairclough
    (1999) Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Clark, H
    (1996) Using language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620539
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620539 [Google Scholar]
  7. Clark, H. , and M. Ven der Wege
    (2002) Psycholinguistics. In D. Medin (ed.), Steven’s handbook of experimental psychology: Memory and cognitive processes. Vol. 2, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley, pp. 209-259.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Clayman, S. , and J. Heritage
    (2002) The news interview: Journalists and public figures on the air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511613623
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511613623 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen, A
    (1987) The television news interview. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fairclough, N
    (1994) Conversationalization of public discourse and the authority of the consumer. In R. Keat , N. Whiteley and N. Abercrombie (eds.), The authority of the consumer. London: Routledge, pp. 253-268.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (1998) Political discourse in the media: An analytical framework. In A. Bell and P. Garrett (eds.), Approaches to media discourse. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 142-162.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Farr, R
    (1990) The social psychology of the prefix “inter”: A prologue to the study of dialogue. In I. Markova and K. Foppa (eds.), The dynamics of dialogue. New York: Springer-Verlag, pp. 25-44.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Glover, R
    (2003) The War On---. In J. Collins and R. Glover (eds.), Collateral Language: A user’s guide to America’s new war. New York and London: New York University Press, pp. 207-222.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Goffman, E
    (1974) Frame analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. (1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Graumann, C
    (2002) Explicit and implicit perspectivity. In C. Graumann and W. Kallmeyer (eds.), Perspective and perspectivation in discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 25-40. doi: 10.1075/hcp.9
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/hcp.9 [Google Scholar]
  17. Halliday, F
    (2000) Nation and religion in the Middle East. Boulder, Colorado: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Jamieson, K
    (1984) Packaging the presidency: A history and criticism of presidential advertising. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kaplan, A
    (2003) Homeland insecurities: Reflections on language and space. Radical History Review85 (winter 2003): 82-93. doi: 10.1215/01636545‑2003‑85‑82
    https://doi.org/10.1215/01636545-2003-85-82 [Google Scholar]
  20. King, L
    (1988) Tell it to the King: Larry King with Peter Occhiogrosso.New York: G.P. Putnam’s.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Koch, P. , and W. Oesterreicher
    (1994) Schriftlichkeit und Sprache. In G. Gunther and L. Otto (eds.), Schrift und Schriftlichkeit. Writing and its use. Ein interdisziplinares Handbuch internationaler Forschung. An interdisciplinary handbook of international research, 1. Halbband/Volume 1. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 587-604.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kowal, S. , and D. O’Connell
    (1997) Theoretical ideals and their violation: Princess Diana and Martin Bashir in the BBC interview. Pragmatics7.3: 309-323.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lakoff, G
    (2001) Metaphors of terror. September 16 2001 (www.press.uchicago.edu/News/911lakoff.html.)
  24. Lakoff, R
    (1990) Talking power: The politics of language in our lives. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Levelt, W.J.M
    (1989) Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Linell, P
    (1998) Approaching dialogue: Talk, interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/impact.3
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/impact.3 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2002) Perspectives, implicitness and recontextualization. In C. Graumann and W. Kallmeyer (eds.), Perspective and perspectivation in discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 41-58. doi: 10.1075/hcp.9.05lin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.9.05lin [Google Scholar]
  28. O’Connell, D. , and S. Kowal
    (1998) Orality and literacy in public discourse: An interview of Hannah Arendt. Journal of Pragmatics30: 543-564. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(98)00034‑4
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00034-4 [Google Scholar]
  29. (2003) Psycholinguistics: A half century of monologism. American Journal of Psychology116: 191-212. doi: 10.2307/1423577
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1423577 [Google Scholar]
  30. (Forthcoming) The research status of Clayman and Heritage’s (2002). The news interview.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. O’Connell, D. , S. Kowal , and E. Dill
    (Forthcoming) Dialogicality in TV news interviews. Journal of Pragmatics.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Reisigl, M. , and R. Wodak
    (2001) Discourse and discrimination: Rhetoric of racism and anti-Semitism. London and New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Rommetveit, R
    (1974) On message structure: A framework for the study of language and communication. London: Wiley.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Roy, A
    . The algebra of infinite justice. The Guardian. September 29, 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Said, E.
    Islam and the West are inadequate banners. The Observer, September 16, 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Said, E
    . Low point of powerlessness. Al-Ahram Weekly, October 1, 2002.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Suleiman, C
    (1999) Pronouns and self presentation in public discourse: Yasser Arafat as a case study. In Yasir Suleiman (ed.), Language and Society in the Middle East and North Africa. London: Curzon Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. (2000) Pronoun use in television interviews: Social interaction and the Middle East peace process. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Georgetown University: Washington D.C.
  39. Suleiman, C. , D. O’Connell , and S. Kowal
    (2002) “If you and I, if we, in this later day, lose that sacred fire…”:. Perspective in political interviews. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research31: 281-299.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Tannen, D
    (1989) Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Van Dijk, T.
    (1993) Elite discourse and racism. London: Sage Publications. doi: 10.4135/9781483326184
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483326184 [Google Scholar]
  42. (2001) Critical discourse analysis. In D. Schiffrin , D. Tannen and H. Hamilton (eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 352-371.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Wardhaugh, R
    (2002) An introduction to sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Wilson, J
    (1990) Politically speaking: The pragmatic analysis of political language. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Wolfsfeld, G
    (1997) Media and political conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.13.3.03sul
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Dialogism , Orality/literacy , Perspective , Referencing , Television political interview and The Middle East
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