Multiple hedging in the political interview

Reci Beograd Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5937/reci2215024n
M. Nikolić, Maja Nikolić
{"title":"Multiple hedging in the political interview","authors":"M. Nikolić, Maja Nikolić","doi":"10.5937/reci2215024n","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper deals with multiple hedges with non-factive verbs and phrases in political interviews in Serbian and English. Political interview, as a specific type of political discourse, is increasingly present in the media and is becoming the main form of communication between political actors and the public. This type of interview is both a source of information for the public and a means for conducting political campaigns. Since politicians are responsible to their voters for their every action and statement, they must choose carefully what to say and how to say it. One of the important characteristics of their discourse is the hedging of propositional content, because they sometimes cannot or do not want to give an explicit answer to delicate questions. In these cases, they use one or more hedges to make their statements acceptable to the public without compromising or committing themselves. Linguistic disciplines that deal with the analysis of all types of discourse, including political and media discourse, are pragmatics and critical discourse analysis, which represent the theoretical basis of this paper. Examining political interviews in English and Serbian, our goal has been to classify and describe multiple hedges used by politicians in conversations and determine their discursive functions, as well as to perform a contrastive analysis of the use of hedges in these two languages. The results have generally confirmed the initial hypotheses about the main functions of multiple hedges.","PeriodicalId":33797,"journal":{"name":"Reci Beograd","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reci Beograd","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5937/reci2215024n","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper deals with multiple hedges with non-factive verbs and phrases in political interviews in Serbian and English. Political interview, as a specific type of political discourse, is increasingly present in the media and is becoming the main form of communication between political actors and the public. This type of interview is both a source of information for the public and a means for conducting political campaigns. Since politicians are responsible to their voters for their every action and statement, they must choose carefully what to say and how to say it. One of the important characteristics of their discourse is the hedging of propositional content, because they sometimes cannot or do not want to give an explicit answer to delicate questions. In these cases, they use one or more hedges to make their statements acceptable to the public without compromising or committing themselves. Linguistic disciplines that deal with the analysis of all types of discourse, including political and media discourse, are pragmatics and critical discourse analysis, which represent the theoretical basis of this paper. Examining political interviews in English and Serbian, our goal has been to classify and describe multiple hedges used by politicians in conversations and determine their discursive functions, as well as to perform a contrastive analysis of the use of hedges in these two languages. The results have generally confirmed the initial hypotheses about the main functions of multiple hedges.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
政治采访中的多重模棱两可
本文研究了塞尔维亚语和英语政治访谈中非主动动词和短语的多重限制语。政治采访作为一种特殊的政治话语形式,越来越多地出现在媒体中,成为政治行动者与公众沟通的主要形式。这种采访既是公众的信息来源,也是进行政治运动的手段。因为政治家们要为他们的每一个行动和声明对选民负责,他们必须仔细选择说什么和怎么说。他们话语的一个重要特征是对命题内容的模棱两可,因为他们有时不能或不想对微妙的问题给出明确的答案。在这些情况下,他们使用一种或多种对冲,使他们的陈述为公众所接受,而不妥协或承诺自己。处理各种类型话语分析的语言学学科,包括政治话语和媒体话语,是语用学和批评话语分析,它们代表了本文的理论基础。通过研究英语和塞尔维亚语的政治访谈,我们的目标是对政治家在对话中使用的多种模糊限制语进行分类和描述,并确定其话语功能,同时对这两种语言中模糊限制语的使用进行对比分析。研究结果基本上证实了关于多重模糊限制的主要功能的初步假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Ksenija Atanasijevic on ethical foundation of feminism Intertextuality in the short story "The Death of Robert Browning" by Jane Urquhart Education as the way to "A Woman's Liberation": One of Ursula Le Guin's four ways to forgiveness The use of literary contents in English language teaching The first impasse, a drop of darkness: Influence of gnostic teachings on Emil Cioran's antinatalistic thought
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1