Reported Speech And Argumentative Functions: Royal and Sarkozy In the Second-Round Debate (notice n° 513572)
[ vue normale ]
| 000 -LEADER | |
|---|---|
| fixed length control field | 02032cam a2200229 4500500 |
| 005 - DATE AND TIME OF LATEST TRANSACTION | |
| control field | 20250121092242.0 |
| 041 ## - LANGUAGE CODE | |
| Language code of text/sound track or separate title | fre |
| 042 ## - AUTHENTICATION CODE | |
| Authentication code | dc |
| 100 10 - MAIN ENTRY--PERSONAL NAME | |
| Personal name | Sandré, Marion |
| Relator term | author |
| 245 00 - TITLE STATEMENT | |
| Title | Reported Speech And Argumentative Functions: Royal and Sarkozy In the Second-Round Debate |
| 260 ## - PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC. | |
| Date of publication, distribution, etc. | 2012.<br/> |
| 500 ## - GENERAL NOTE | |
| General note | 43 |
| 520 ## - SUMMARY, ETC. | |
| Summary, etc. | This article focuses on reported speech in the second-round debate of the 2007 French presidential election between Nicolas Sarkozy and Ségolène Royal. Three types of reported speech are distinguished: when speakers quote their own speech, when they quote the interlocutor's speech and when they quote someone else. The study shows how different forms and argumentative functions of reported speech are produced during the debate. The first type - quotation of candidate's own discourse - is mainly used by Ségolène Royal: she thus illustrates the consistency of her discourse during all the presidential campaign and the debate. The argumentative function gives value to her own candidacy. The second type - quotation of the interlocutor's discourse - is used by both candidates when agreeing or disagreeing. Nicolas Sarkozy quotes Ségolène Royal mainly polemically: his argumentative strategy is to criticize her standpoint. Finally, the third type of reported speech - quotation of someone else's discourse - is used by both candidates, indicating which other persons they agree or disagree with. Analysis shows that reported speech is much used in the debate but that each candidate uses it differently. It has two main argumentative functions: enhancing one's own discourse and criticizing one's opponent's. |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | reported speech |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | dialogism |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | discourse analysis |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | politics |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | debate |
| 690 ## - LOCAL SUBJECT ADDED ENTRY--TOPICAL TERM (OCLC, RLIN) | |
| Topical term or geographic name as entry element | enunciation |
| 786 0# - DATA SOURCE ENTRY | |
| Note | Langage et société | o 140 | 2 | 2012-06-11 | p. 71-87 | 0181-4095 |
| 856 41 - ELECTRONIC LOCATION AND ACCESS | |
| Uniform Resource Identifier | <a href="https://shs.cairn.info/journal-langage-et-societe-2012-2-page-71?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080">https://shs.cairn.info/journal-langage-et-societe-2012-2-page-71?lang=en&redirect-ssocas=7080</a> |
Pas d'exemplaire disponible.
Réseaux sociaux