Article published In:
Conflict and violence in pragmatic researchEdited by Charles L. Briggs
[Pragmatics 7:4] 1997
► pp. 461–497
Edited by Charles L. Briggs
[Pragmatics 7:4] 1997
► pp. 461–497
Tropic aggression in the Clinton-Dole presidential debate
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
References (6)
Bauman, Richard & Charles Briggs (1990) Poetics and performance as critical perspectives on language and social life. Annual Review of Anthropology 191: 59-88. 
BoP
BoPErvin-Tripp, Susan (1976) Is Sybil there? The structure of some American English directives. Language in Society 51: 25-66. BoP
BoPGoffman, Erving (1981) Footing. In Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, pp. 124-159. BoP
Putnam, Hilary (1975) The meaning of “meaning”. In Philosophical Papers, vol. 2: Mind, Language and Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 215-271.
Ricoeur, Paul (1979) The Rule of Metaphor. Toronto: University of Toronto Press
Silverstein, Michael (1981) The limits of awareness. Sociolinguistic Working Paper, no. 84. Austin, TX.: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
Cited by (32)
Cited by 32 other publications
La Mattina, Nicco A.
2023. Transposition, not translation: Recuperating attentionality on Pantelleria, Sicily. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 33:3 ► pp. 311 ff. 
Neshkovska, Silvana
2020. Impoliteness on the political stage: The case of the 2019 final Macedonian presidential debate. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 16:2 ► pp. 285 ff.
Fernández García, Francisco
2016. Being impolite while pretending to be polite. The rupture of politeness conventions in electoral debates. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 67 ► pp. 136 ff.
Kádár, Dániel Z. & Siân Robinson Davies
2016. Ritual, aggression, and participatory ambiguity. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict 4:2 ► pp. 202 ff.
Sorlin, Sandrine
2016. Concluding Remarks: Reciprocation and (Im)Politeness. In Language and Manipulation in House of Cards, ► pp. 229 ff.
Sorlin, Sandrine
2017. The pragmatics of manipulation: Exploiting im/politeness theories. Journal of Pragmatics 121 ► pp. 132 ff.
Adams, Karen L.
2015. Chapter 9. Governors debating. In Discourse, Politics and Women as Global Leaders [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 63], ► pp. 217 ff.
Adams, Karen L.
2018. Mediated campaign debate subgenre and their importance for analytic considerations. In Doing Politics [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 80], ► pp. 281 ff.
Adams, Karen L.
2022. Deliberate dispute and the construction of oppositional stance. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 231 ff.
Alexis, Lucie & Jérôme Ravat
2015. Désactiver la violence verbale : pacification et disqualification au moyen de la politesse dans Ce soir (ou jamais !). Semen :40
Blommaert, Jan
2015. Chronotopes, Scales, and Complexity in the Study of Language in Society. Annual Review of Anthropology 44:1 ► pp. 105 ff.
Greco, Luca
2015. Analyse de conversation, anthropologie linguistique et analyse critique du discours : historiciser les débats, intégrer les approches. Langage et société N° 153:3 ► pp. 135 ff.
Moïse, Claudine & Alina Oprea
2015. Présentation. Politesse et violence verbale détournée. Semen :40
Moss, Natalie & Alasdair O'Hare
2014. Staging democracy: Kenya's televised presidential debates. Journal of Eastern African Studies 8:1 ► pp. 78 ff.
Pardo, Rebecca
2013. Reality Television and the Metapragmatics of Racism. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 23:1 ► pp. 65 ff.
Agha, Asif
2011. Large and small scale forms of personhood. Language & Communication 31:3 ► pp. 171 ff.
Agha, Asif
2023. Norm and trope in social indexicality. Chinese Semiotic Studies 19:4 ► pp. 569 ff.
Stasch, Rupert
2011. Ritual and Oratory Revisited: The Semiotics of Effective Action. Annual Review of Anthropology 40:1 ► pp. 159 ff.
Constantin de Chanay, Hugues & Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni
2010. Les interruptions dans les débats médiatiques : une stratégie interactionnelle. Pratiques :147-148 ► pp. 83 ff.
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine
2010. L’impolitesse en interaction. Lexis Special issue 2
Bucholtz, Mary & Kira Hall
2008. All of the above: New coalitions in sociocultural linguistics1. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12:4 ► pp. 401 ff.
Halmari, Helena
2008. On the language of the Clinton-Dole presidential campaign debates. Journal of Language and Politics 7:2 ► pp. 247 ff.
Lempert, Michael
2007. Conspicuously past: Distressed discourse and diagrammatic embedding in a Tibetan represented speech style. Language & Communication 27:3 ► pp. 258 ff.
LEMPERT, MICHAEL
2008. The poetics of stance: Text-metricality, epistemicity, interaction. Language in Society 37:4 ► pp. 569 ff.
Lempert, Michael
2012. Where the action isn't. Language in Society 41:2 ► pp. 259 ff.
Lempert, Michael & Sabina Perrino
2007. Entextualization and the ends of temporality. Language & Communication 27:3 ► pp. 205 ff.
Lempert, Michael P.
2005. Denotational Textuality and Demeanor Indexicality in Tibetan Buddhist Debate. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 15:2 ► pp. 171 ff.
Lempert, Michael P.
2006. Disciplinary theatrics: Public reprimand and the textual performance of affect at Sera Monastery, India. Language & Communication 26:1 ► pp. 15 ff.
Blas Arroyo, José Luis
2002. En los límites de la (des)cortesía. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 137-138 ► pp. 181 ff.
Blas-Arroyo, José Luis
2003. `Perdóneme que se lo diga, pero vuelve usted a faltar a la verdad, señor González': Form and Function of Politic Verbal Behaviour in Face-to-Face Spanish Political Debates. Discourse & Society 14:4 ► pp. 395 ff.
Reyes, Angela
2002. “Are you losing your culture?”: poetics, indexicality and Asian American identity. Discourse Studies 4:2 ► pp. 183 ff.
Goodwin, Charles
2000. Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 32:10 ► pp. 1489 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 december 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.