The metadiscourse of “voice”
Legitimizing participation in dialogue
Discourse analysis of a sample of arguments about “voice” found in online searches supports tentative conclusions about the normative structure of this concept in ordinary metadiscourse. Centrally concerned with “voice” in the sense of “having voice” (legitimate participation) in a communicative process, the study finds that “voice” in ordinary metadiscourse: (1) is positively valenced; (2) implies a participation framework of principal/principle, agency, communicative process, and dialogized others; and (3) encounters pragmatic problems of legitimacy, strength, and identity that become topics of metadiscursive argumentation. A closer examination of arguments about legitimacy finds that voices are rhetorically (de)legitimized through appeals to (a) abstract principles, (b) personal (un)worthiness, and (c) beneficial or harmful consequences. Keywords: Metadiscourse; voice; argumentation; participation framework; normative valence; legitimation; internet discourse; pragmatics
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Robles, Jessica S. & Bingjuan Xiong
Bartesaghi, Mariaelena & Jessica M.F. Hughes
Boromisza-Habashi, David
2013.
Which Way Is Forward in Communication Theorizing? An Interview With Robert T. Craig.
Communication Theory 23:4
► pp. 417 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 january 2025. 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.