A Pragmalinguistic and Sociopolitical Analysis of Vague Language in Two Iranian Presidents’ International Interviews

نوع مقاله : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان
Hamid Allami 1
Mohammd Ghasemi 2
Najmeh Barzegar 3
1 Associate Professor, Department of English Language Teaching, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
2 PhD Candidate, English Department, Faculty of Languages and Literature, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
3 MA, English Department, Faculty of Languages and Literature, Yazd University, Yazd, Iran
10.52547/LRR.12.5.9
چکیده
Standard political discourse is replete with ambiguity and vagueness. Politicians frequently use vague language to hide their inadequate knowledge, show their low interest in the issue, and/or evoke emotion. This study reports on a qualitative content analysis of vagueness in two Iranian presidents' political interviews within a pragmalinguistic and sociopolitical paradigm. The data consisted of nine question-answer exchanges extracted from seven internationally live broadcast interviews. A total of 57 instances of vague language use were analyzed in terms of 21 pragmalinguistic vagueness strategies. Implications are that vagueness in political discourse is motivated by a multiplicity of factors such as face management, sociopolitical and situational adaptation, conflict avoidance, and personal characteristics of the interviewers and the respondents. Vagueness was also found to be a sign of diplomatic prudence or wisdom.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

Alfahad, A. (2016). Equivocation in Arabic news interviews. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35(2), 206 –223.
Al-Rassam, E. (2010). Analyzing political discourse: Towards a pragmatic approach. College of Basic Education Researchers Journal,10(1), 528-552.
Aristotle. (1946). The works of Aristotle. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Bryson, L., & Mullett, J. (1988). Political equivocation: A situational explanation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 7(2), 137-145.
Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovil, N., and Mullett, J. (1990). Equivocal communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Bowers, J. W., Elliott, N., & Desmond, R. J. (1977). Exploiting pragmatic rules: Devious messages. Human Communication Research, 3(3), 235-242.
Brown, P., and Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Bull, P. (2008). Slipperiness, evasion, and ambiguity: Equivocation and facework in noncommittal political discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 27(4), 333-344.
Channell, J. (1994). Vague language. Oxford: England, Oxford University Press.
Clementson, D. (2015). Why do we think politicians are so evasive? Insight from theories of equivocation and deception with a content analysis of U.S. presidential debates, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35(3), 247-267.
Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. New York, NY: Blackwell.
Gruber, H. (1993). Political language and textual vagueness. Pragmatics, 3(1), 1-28.
Hornby, A (2015.). Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago, illinois: University of Chicago Press.
Li, S. (2008). A performative perspective of flouting and politeness in political interviews. Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 5(2): 32-47.
Ma, M., & Li, Y. (2016). Multidimensional interpretation of speech indirectness. English Language and Literature Studies, 6(1), 133-138.
McGee, P. (2018). Vague language as a means of avoiding controversy. Training, Language, and Culture, 2(2), 40-54.
Martinovski, B. (2006). A framework for analysis of mitigation in courts. Journal of Pragmatics, 38 (12), 2065–2086.
Obeng, S. G. (1997). Language and politics: Indirectness in political discourse. Discourse & Society, 8(1), 49-83.
Paltridge, B. (2012), Discourse analysis: An introduction. London, England: Continuum.
Plato, S. (1914). Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo, Phaedrus. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Sabet, P. & Zhang, G. (2015). Communicating through vague Language. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Trappes- Lomax, H. (2007). Vague language as a means of self-protective avoidance: Tension management in conference talks. In J. Cutting (Ed.), Vague language explored (pp.117–137). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Van Dijk. T.A. (2005). Political implicatures and Aznar's legitimization of the war in Iraq. Journal of Language and Politics, 4(1), 65-91.
Wodak, R. (2007). Pragmatic and critical discourse analysis: A cross-disciplinary inquiry. Pragmatics & Cognition, 15(1), 203-225.
Youzhen, Y. (2012). Question on the assumption of fussiness of meaning. Journal of Tianjin Foreign Studies University, 19(5), 39-43.
Zhang, G. (2011). Elasticity of vague language. Intercultural Pragmatics, 8(4), 571–599.
جستارهای زبانی
دوره 12، شماره 5 - شماره پیاپی 65
آذر و دی 1400
صفحه 205-237