1887
image of The metapragmatic act of debating in the media
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to lay the theoretical foundation of the metapragmatic act of debating, and to present evidence that it provides a better approach to mediated debate than existing theoretical notions of metapragmatic acts and intertextuality in the media. To achieve this goal, it contrasts its notion with Bublitz’ (2015) metapragmatic act of quoting, and analyses a simple and a complex exchange from the First 2004 US presidential debate. The theory proposed and data analyzed suggest two things: (1) that the metapragmatic act of debating is best conceived of as a combination of Caffi’s (2006) third sense of metapragmatics and Mey’s (2001) notion of pragmatic act, (2) operationalizing the theoretical notion of a metapragmatic act means adapting it to a specific context, for example, there is no such thing as a general metapragmatic act.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.21061.jac
2025-01-23
2025-02-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arendholz, Jenny, Wolfram Bublitz, and Monika Kirner-Ludwig
    (eds.) 2015The Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then. Berlin/Bosten: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110427561
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bächtiger, Andre, John S. Dryzek, Jane Mansbridge, and Mark Warren
    2018 “Deliberative Democracy: An Introduction.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, ed. byAndre Bâchtiger, John S. Dryzek, Jane Mansbridge, and Mark Warren, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.50
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198747369.013.50 [Google Scholar]
  3. Billig, Michael
    1996Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Briggs, Charles L., and Richard Bauman
    1992 “Genre, Intertextuality, and Social Power.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology: –. 10.1525/jlin.1992.2.2.131
    https://doi.org/10.1525/jlin.1992.2.2.131 [Google Scholar]
  5. 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/Bosten: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110427561‑002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-002 [Google Scholar]
  6. Caffi, Claudia
    2006 “Metapragmatics.” InEncyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.), ed. byKeith Brown, –. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/00317‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00317-5 [Google Scholar]
  7. Carston, Robyn
    1999 “Negation, ‘Presupposition’ and Metarepresentation: A Response to Noel Burton-Roberts.” Journal of Linguistics: –. 10.1017/S0022226799007653
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226799007653 [Google Scholar]
  8. Clayman, Steven E.
    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]
  9. Deschrijver, Cedric
    2021 “On the Metapragmatics of ‘Conspiracy Theory’: Scepticism and Epistemological Debates in Online Conspiracy Comments.” Journal of Pragmatics, available onlineMarch 3, 2021. 10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.02.010 [Google Scholar]
  10. Eckert, Penelope
    2019 “The Limits of Meaning: Social Indexicality, Variation, and the Cline of Interiority.” Language: –. 10.1353/lan.2019.0072
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0072 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fetzer, Anita
    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]
  12. Fetzer, Anita, and Elisabeth Reber
    2015 “Quoting in Political Discourse: Professional Talk Meets Ordinary Postings.” InThe Pragmatics of Quoting Now and Then, ed. byJenny Arendholz, Wolfram Bublitz, and Monika Kirner-Ludwig, –. Berlin/Bosten: de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110427561‑006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561-006 [Google Scholar]
  13. Freelon, Deen, and David Karpf
    2015 “Of Big Birds and Bayonets: Hybrid Twitter Interactivity in the 2012 Presidential Debates.” Information, Communication & Society(): –. 10.1080/1369118X.2014.952659
    https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.952659 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gal, Susan
    2006 “Linguistic Anthropology.” InEncyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.), ed. byKeith Brown, –. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/03032‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/03032-7 [Google Scholar]
  15. Grice, Herbert Paul
    1989Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Haberland, Hartmut
    1999 “Text, Discourse, Discours: The Latest Report from the Terminology Vice Squad.” Journal of Pragmatics: –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(98)00099‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00099-X [Google Scholar]
  17. 2010 “Pragmatics as a Component vs. Pragmatics as a Perspective of Linguistics.” Studies in Pragmatics: –.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Hall, Stuart
    1980 “Encoding/Decoding.” InCulture, Media, Language, ed. byStuart Hall, Dorothy Hobson, Andrew Love, and Paul Willis, –. London: Hutchinson.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hübler, Axel, and Wolfram Bublitz
    2007 (eds.). Metapragmatics in Use. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Jacobsen, Ronald R.
    2020 “Evasion, Distortion and Interruption in US Presidential Debates.” PhD diss.University of Southern Denmark, SDU.
  21. 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]
  22. Koller, Veronika, and Marlene Miglbauer
    2019 “What Drives the Right-Wing Populist Vote? Topics, Motivations and Representations in the Online Vox Pop with Voters for the Alternative für Deutschland.” Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik(): –. 10.1515/zaa‑2019‑0024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zaa-2019-0024 [Google Scholar]
  23. 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]
  24. Mey, Jacob L.
    2001Pragmatics: An Introduction. (2nd ed.). Malden, Mass.: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Park, Joseph S., and Mary Bucholtz
    2009 “Public Transcripts: Entextualization and Linguistic Representation in Institutional Contexts.” Text and Talk: –. 10.1515/TEXT.2009.026
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2009.026 [Google Scholar]
  26. Rancière, Jacques
    1995La Mésentente. Paris: Galilée.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Sheinheit, Ian, and Cynthia J. Bogard
    2016 “Authenticity and Carrier Agents: The Social Construction of Political Gaffes.” Sociological Forum(): –. 10.1111/socf.12292
    https://doi.org/10.1111/socf.12292 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.21061.jac
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