Part of
Let's talk politics: New essays on deliberative rhetoricEdited by Hilde Van Belle, Kris Rutten, Paul Gillaerts, Dorien Van De Mieroop and Baldwin Van Gorp
[Argumentation in Context 6] 2014
► pp. 63–80
Edited by Hilde Van Belle, Kris Rutten, Paul Gillaerts, Dorien Van De Mieroop and Baldwin Van Gorp
[Argumentation in Context 6] 2014
► pp. 63–80
Dialogic voices
A pragma-dialectical approach to R. G. Mugabe’s ceremonial speeches
This chapter critically examines Mugabe’s two speeches. The one he delivered at the United Nations (UN) climate change summit that was held in Copenhagen in 2009 and the other one he delivered at the 2008 Zimbabwean independence celebrations. The chapter argues that not only conversations with explicit participants can be regarded as argumentative (van Eemeren, 2010). Thus, to achieve the purpose, the pragma-dialectic theory of argumentation is employed. The analysis of the speeches show how Mugabe utilised the podium to dialogically interact with the audience, both outside and inside, persuasively inviting them to align with him (speaker) and disalign with the ‘negative’ voices. The analysis also confirms that stance taking and value positioning is a factor in argumentative discourse.
References (24)
Akpabio, E. (2008). Framing of the Zimbabwean Crisis in Botswana Print Media. Paper Presented at the International Association of Media and Communication Research (IAMCR) Conference, University of Stockholm, Sweden, July 2008.
Chari, T. (2010). Salience and Silence: Representation of the Zimbabwean Crisis in the Local Press.
African Identities,
8 (2), 131–150. 
Chigora, P. (2006). On Crossroads: Reflections on Zimbabwe’s Relations with Britain at the New Millennium.
Alternatives: Journal of International Relations,
5(3), 61–76.
Chiumbu, S., & Musemwa, M. (2012).
Crisis! What Crisis? The Multiple Dimensions of the Zimbabwean Crisis
. Cape Town: Human and Sciences Research Council.
Hohmann, H. (2002). Rhetoric and Dialectic: Some Historical and Legal Perspectives. In F. H. van Eemeren, & P. Houtlosser (Eds.),
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis
(pp. 41–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Ilie, C. (2003). Discourse and Metadiscourse in Parliamentary Debates.
Journal of Language and Politics,
1(2), 269–291.
Jakaza, E. (2009). This Poll has not Happened Yet: Temporal Play in Election Predictions, A Discourse Analysis Approach. Paper Presented at the International Conference of the African Languages Association of Southern Africa (ALASA), University of Western Cape, South Africa, July 2009.
Krabbe, E. C. W. (2002). Meeting in the House of Callias: An Historical Perspective on the Rhetoric and Dialectic. In F. H. van Eemeren, & P. Houtlosser (Eds.),
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis,
(pp. 29–40). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Leff, M. (2002). The Relation between Dialectic and Rhetoric in Classical and Modern Perspective. In F. H. van Eemeren, & P. Houtlosser (Eds.),
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis
, (pp. 53–64). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005).
The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English
. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Santibāñez, C. (2010). Metaphors and Argumentation: The Case of Chilean Parliamentarian Media Participation.
Journal of Pragmatics,
42, 973–989.
van Eemeren, F. H. (Ed.). (2009).
Examining Argumentation in Context: Fifteen Studies on Strategic Manoeuvring
. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2008). Controversy and Confrontation in Argumentative Discourse. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.),
Controversy and Confrontation: Relating Controversy Analysis with Argumentation Theory
. (pp. 1–24). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1984).
Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion
. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.
. (1992).
Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective
. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
. (2004).
A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (Eds.). (2002).
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis
. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
. (2002). Strategic Manoeuvring: Maintaining a Delicate Balance. In F. H. van Eemeren, & P. Houtlosser (Eds.),
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis
, (pp. 131–159). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
. (2009). Strategic Manoeuvring: Examining Argumentation in Context. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.),
Examining Argumentation in Context: Fifteen Studies on Strategic Manoeuvring
, (pp. 1–24). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
van Eemeren, F. H., Houtlosser, P., & Snoeck Henkemans, F. A. (2007).
Argumentative Indicators in Discourse: A Pragma-Dialectical Study
. Dordrecht: Springer.
van Rees, A. M. (2000). Comments on the ‘Rhetoric and Dialectic in the Twent- First Century.
Argumentation,
14(3), 255–259.
. (2009).
Dissociation in Argumentative Discussions: A Pragma- Dialectical Perspective
. Dordrecht: Springer.
www.newzimbabwe.com/news-1503-Full+Text+Mugabe+Copenhagen+speech/news.aspx
www.newzimbabwe.com/opinion
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
Shura, Tawanda & Ernest Jakaza
2024. Brand and Reputation Management During Political Crises: The Zimbabwe Challenge. In The Palgrave Handbook of Language and Crisis Communication in Sub-Saharan Africa, ► pp. 63 ff. 
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.