In Your Face! Investigating Facework, Criticism, and Humour with Corpora in Electoral Debates

In political debates, the media[tisation] can determine the use of language with the aim to increase their spectacularisation and polarisation, possibly by means of criticism and humour, respectively. These linguistic strategies are often used in order to shape what was defined by Goffman as one’s face. Politicians, in particular, can recur to facework in a double sense: shaping their own face positively and/or that of their opponents negatively. Starting from the sociologic theory of face by Goffman and Levinson, with the help of corpus analysis tools, this research investigated the ways in which various forms of criticism and forms of humour were conducted in 3 electoral debates on a national scale (Germany, Ireland, and New Zealand) and 1 debate for the municipal election in Rome. The transcripts were revised after automatic transcriptions were extracted or found online, of which the audio-visual content is available on the Internet. The CADS research aimed to investigate the role that criticism and humour played within each participant’s discourse, and to identify differences and similarities among the strategies used by political leaders and moderators in different countries, and in different cultural, political, and media contexts.

Translanguaging in linguistic mediation

Translanguaging is quite common both in bilingual conversation and in interpreted discourse and poses challenges that mediators need to address in their work, training, and in the theoretical study of this activity. The impact of translanguaging on communication is very significant and affects the nature and workings of conversational exchanges, the identity of multilinguals, and the concept of language. This paper will examine how this plays a role in interaction and, specifically, in interpreter-mediated communication, arguing that linguistic and cultural mediation should consider such multilingual practices.

Involvement and detachment in David Cameron and Ed Miliband’s political discourse. An analysis of deictic shields on the pronoun ‘I’ in UK 2015 General Election news interviews

The goal of my study is to investigate the relationship between selected deictic shields on the pronoun ‘I’ and the involvement/detachment dichotomy in a sample of television news interviews. I focus on the use of personal pronouns in political discourse. Drawing upon Caffi’s (2007) classification of mitigating devices into bushes, hedges and shields, I focus on deictic shields on the pronoun ‘I’: I examine the way a selection of ‘I’-related deictic shields is employed in a collection of news interviews broadcast during the electoral campaign prior to the UK 2015 General Election. My purpose is to uncover the frequencies of each of the linguistic items selected and the pragmatic functions of those linguistic items in the involvement/detachment dichotomy. The research is structured as follows. Chapter 1 provides an account of previous studies on the three main areas of research: speech event analysis, institutional interaction and the news interview, and the UK 2015 General Election television programmes. Chapter 2 is centred on the involvement/detachment dichotomy: I provide an overview of nonlinguistic and linguistic features of involvement and detachment at all levels of sentence structure. Chapter 3 contains a detailed account of the data collection and data analysis process. Chapter 4 provides an accurate description of results in three steps: quantitative analysis, qualitative analysis and discussion of the pragmatic functions of the selected linguistic features of involvement and detachment. Chapter 5 includes a brief summary of the investigation, reviews the main findings, and indicates limitations of the study and possible inputs for further research. The results of the analysis confirm that, while some of the linguistic items examined point toward involvement, others have a detaching effect. I therefore conclude that deictic shields on the pronoun ‘I’ permit the realisation of the involvement/detachment dichotomy in the speech genre of the news interview.