Construction and negotiation of voter-friendly identities in electoral debates

  1. Díez-Prados, Mercedes 2
  2. Cabrejas-Peñuelas, Ana Belén 1
  1. 1 Universitat de València
    info

    Universitat de València

    Valencia, España

    ROR https://ror.org/043nxc105

  2. 2 Universidad de Alcalá
    info

    Universidad de Alcalá

    Alcalá de Henares, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04pmn0e78

Revista:
Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación

ISSN: 1576-4737

Año de publicación: 2020

Título del ejemplar: Monográfico: Representación de la fraseología en herramientas digitales: problemas, avances, propuestas

Número: 82

Páginas: 93-106

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5209/CLAC.68967 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación

Resumen

En este artículo analizamos la construcción de la identidad de dos políticos en el debate preelectoral español de 2011 utilizando cuatro de las herramientas lingüísticas de Bucholtz y Hall (2005): evaluación, implicaturas, negociación interactiva y relaciones de identidad complementarias. Para el análisis adoptamos el modelo de evaluación de Martin y White (2005) y la Lingüística de Corpus. La identidad positiva del candidato socialista lo postula como defensor de la identidad de Padre Nutriente, al mismo tiempo que contribuye a crear una identidad emergente para Rajoy como político deshonesto. Sin embargo, el político conservador minimiza las inferencias de identidad del otro candidato, se presenta como Padre Nutriente y personifica la identidad del cambio. Esta identidad positiva contribuyó a la construcción de su ethos en el debate, lo que dio como resultado una victoria abrumadora.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Atkinson, David and Ramblado, Cinta. 2018. Democratic credentials and the ‘other(s)’ in the discourse of the Spanish Partido Popular, 1977-2015. Journal of Language and Politics, 17.1, 5-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17012.atk.
  • Baxter, Judith. 2016. Positioning language and identity: Poststructuralist perspectives. In Preece, Siân, ed., The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity, 34-49. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315669816.
  • Bucholtz, Mary and Hall, Kira. 2005. Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7.4-5, 585-614. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054407.
  • Cabrejas-Peñuelas, Ana B. and Mercedes Díez-Prados. 2014. Positive self -evaluation versus negative other-evaluation in the political genre of pre-election debate. Discourse and Society, 25.2, 159-185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513515601.
  • Carrera Boleas, Valentín. 2012. El formato y la estrategia en el Debate 2011. [The format and the strategy in the 2011 debate].” In Academia TV, ed., Debate del Debate 2011, 121-133. España: ACOP y Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.
  • Díez-Prados, Mercedes. 2016. The use of metaphor and evaluation as discourse strategies in pre-electoral debates: Just about winning votes. In Romano, Manuela y Porto, M. Dolores, ed., Exploring Discourse Strategies in Social and Cognitive Interaction: Multimodal and Cross-Linguistics Perspectives, 215-244. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.262.09die
  • Duranti, Alessandro. 2006. Narrating the political self in a campaign for U.S. Congress. Language in Society, 35, 467-497. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404506060222
  • Fairclough, Norman. 1994/2003. Conversationalization of public discourse and the authority of the consumer. In Keat, Russell, Whiteley, Nigel and Abercrombie, Nicholas, ed., The Authority of the Consumer, 235-249. London: Routledge.
  • Fetzer, Anita and Weizman, Elda. 2006. Political discourse as mediated and public discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 143-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.014.
  • García Gómez, Antonio. 2010. Lexical encoding of gender relations and identities. In Jiménez Catalán, Rosa M., ed., Gender Perspectives on Vocabulary in Foreign and Second Languages, 238–263. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274938_11.
  • Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.
  • Grice, Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In Grice, Paul, ed., Studies in the Way of Words, 22-40. Cambridge: Harvard UP.
  • Hunston, Susan and Thompson, Geoffrey, eds. 2000/2003. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: OUP.
  • Johansson, Marjut. 2008. Presentation of the political self: Commitment in electoral media dialogue. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27.4, 397-408. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X08322482.
  • Lakoff, Geoff. 1996/2002. Moral Politics: What Conservatives Know that Liberals don't. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria. 2011. Spanish at Work: Analysing Institutional Discourse Across the Spanish Speaking World. London: Palgrave.
  • Martin, James R. 2000/2003. Beyond Exchange: Appraisal Systems in English. In Hunston, Susan and Thompson, Geoffrey, ed., Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, 142-175. Oxford: OUP.
  • Martin, James R., and White, Peter R.R. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Partington, Alan and Taylor, Charlotte. 2018. The Language of Persuasion in Politics. An Introduction. Oxford: Routledge.
  • Ponton, Mark. 2010. The female political leader: A study of gender-identity in the case of Margaret Thatcher. Journal of Language and Politics, 9.2, 195-218. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.9.2.02pon.
  • Ponton, Mark. 2011. For Argument’s Sake: Speaker Evaluation in Modern Political Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.
  • Radio y Televisión Española (RTVE). 2011. Elecciones Generales 2011. 20-N. http://www.rtve.es/noticias/elecciones/ generales/debate
  • Scannell, Paddy. 1998. Media-language world. In Bell, Alan & Garrett, Peter, eds., Approaches to Media Discourse, 252-267. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Sornig, Karl. 1989. Some remarks on linguistic strategies of persuasion. In Wodak, Ruth, ed., Language, power and ideology: Studies in political discourse, 95-114. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ct.7.09sor.
  • Stamou, Anastasia G. 2018. Studying the interactional construction of identities in Critical Discourse Studies: A proposed analytical framework. Discourse and Society, 29.5, 568-589. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926518770262.
  • Thompson, Geoffrey and Alba-Juez, Laura. (Eds.). 2014. Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242.
  • Thompson, Geoffrey and Hunston, Susan. 2000/2003. Evaluation: An introduction. In Hunston, Susan & Thompson, Geoffrey, eds., Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, 1-27. Oxford: OUP.
  • Turner, Graeme. 2004. Understanding Celebrity. London: Sage.
  • University Autónoma de Madrid. n.d. UAM Corpus Tool: Text Annotation for the 21st Century. http://www.wagsoft.com/CorpusTool/
  • Van Dijk, Teun. 2005. War rhetoric of a little ally: Political implicatures and Aznar’s legitimization of the war in Iraq. Journal of Language and Politics, 4.1, 65-91. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/bct.3.05dij.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet