Abstract
The study of argumentation in context has led to the investigation of persuasive strategies that may be regarded as (proto)typical of specific practices and genres. Combining argumentative analysis with genre theory, this chapter aims to explore one aspect of the persuasive process that parallels argumentation proper, belonging to the realm of ethical means of proof: the construction of discursive identities.
After introducing genre as a pragmatic notion and its relation to persuasion, three theoretical aspects will be examined: the selection of the audience and the construction of agreement; strategies of enunciation and pronominal choices; the exploitation of metaphors and myths.
These aspects of persuasive discourse will be investigated in two institutionalised genres of political communication in the US: the Presidential Announcement and the Victory Speech, choosing former US President Barak Obama as a case study. The aim of the research is to explore how the arguer constructs his ethical identity in the different generic contexts, constructing at the same time that of his audience. As is often the case in political discourse, beside the leader and his/her followers, the Enemy is brought on stage as a third fundamental character, thus completing a triad that is considered crucial in the narrative of contemporary political myths.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Examples: Doctor/nurse to patient:” how do we feel today?”; waiter to (habitual) customer: “What are we having today?”; etc.
- 2.
Full text of the speech at: https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/barackobamacandidacyforpresident.htm (last accessed April 20th, 2020).
- 3.
Full transcript of the speech at: https://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/04/obama.transcript/ (last accessed April 20th, 2020).
- 4.
Unless differently indicated, emphasis in the quotations is mine.
References
Amossy, R. (2005). The argumentative dimension of discourse. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Argumentation in practice (pp. 87–98). John Benjamins.
Amossy, R. (2006). L’argumentation dans le discours (2nd ed.). Colin.
Benveniste, É. (1966a [1946]). Structure des relations de personne dans le verb. In Problèmes de linguistique générale (pp. 225–236). Gallimard.
Benveniste, É. (1966b [1959]). Les relations de temps dans le verb francais. Problèmes de linguistique générale (pp. 237–255). Gallimard.
Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric. The persuasive power of metaphor. Palgrave Macmillan.
Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Palgrave Macmillan.
Beaugrande, D., Robert-Alain, Dressler, & Wolfgang. (1981). Einfürung in die Textlinguistik. Niemeyer.
De Cock, B. (2011). Why we can be you: The use of 1st person plural forms with hearer reference in English and Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2762–2775.
Desideri, P. (1999). La comunicazione politica. In S. Gensini (Ed.), Manuale della comunicazione. Roma.
Edelman, M. (1971). Politics as symbolic action. Academic.
Flood, C. (1996). Political myth: A theoretical introduction. Garland.
Gardelle, L., & Sorlin, S. (Eds.). (2015). The pragmatics of personal pronouns. John Benjamins.
Geis, M. L. (1987). The language of politics. Springer Verlag.
Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. Arnoldt.
Halmari, H., & Virtanen, T. (Eds.). (2005). Persuasion across genre. John Benjamins.
Helmbrecht, J. (2015). A typology of non-prototypical uses of personal pronouns: Synchrony and diachrony. Journal of Pragmatics, 88, 176–189.
Hodge, R., & Kress, G. (1993). Language as ideology. Routledge.
Maingueneau, D. (2002). Problèmes d’ethos. Pratiques, 113-144, 55–67.
Maitland, K., & Wilson, J. (1987). Pronominal selection and ideological conflict. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(4), 495–512.
Mantovan, L. (2020). E pluribus unum: The detection of political persuasion through discourse analysis. International Journal of Linguistics, 12(3).
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique, Paris, PUF; English translation (1969): The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. University of Notre Dame Press.
Plantin, C. (2003). Argumentation studies in France. A new legitimacy. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, C. A. Willard, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Anyone who has a view. Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation (pp. 173–187). Kluwer.
Prieto, L. J. (1977). Una nota de gramatica : ‘Nosotros’ plural de ‘yo’? In Estudios ofrecidos a Emilio Alarcos Llorach (pp. 209–216). Universidad de Oviedo.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). Comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.
Santulli, F. (2020). We shall fight: speaker-exclusive we as a grammatical metaphor. International. Journal of Linguistics, 12/4, 43–64.
van Eemeren, F., et al. (1996). Fundamentals of argumentation theory. Laurence Erlbaum.
van Eemeren, F., et al. (2014). Handbook of argumentation theory. Springer.
van Eemeren, F. H. (2010). Strategic Manoeuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. John Benjamins.
Werlich, E. (1975). Typologie der Texte. Entwurf eines Textlinguistischen Modells zur Grundlegung einer Textgrammatik. Quelle und Meyer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Santulli, F. (2023). Genre as a Context for Persuasion: The Construction of Identities in Different Forms of Institutionalised Discourse. A Case Study. In: Capone, A., Penna, A. (eds) Exploring Contextualism and Performativity. Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12543-0_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-12543-0_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-12542-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-12543-0
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)