Search

This paper analyzes the pragmatic intensification as an argumentative strategy in the discourse delivered by the King of Spain Felipe VI on October 3rd, 2017, two days after the illegal independence referendum held in Catalonia on October 1st. The analysis of the different intensifying mechanisms, governed by the expressive and appellative functions in illocutionary and perlocutionary speech acts, shows, in the global discursive strategy, the confrontation between the constitutionalist and the independence ideologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this paper is to propose a new concept, discursive interpersonality, as a flexibilized model of interpersonal metadiscourse (IM). Departing from the proven validity of IM (Hyland, 2005a, 2005b) as a framework to analyse interpersonal relations between writers/speakers and readers/listeners, our argumentation is grounded on our research results, stemming from the study of different academic and professional genres. Since interpersonal metadiscourse is conditioned by contextual variables, such as genre, discipline, language and corpus, as an array of authors suggest (Dahl, 2004; Sala, 2006; Yakhontova, 2006; Giannoni, 2007; Mapelli, 2008; Crismore & Abdollazadeh, 2010; Gotti, 2010; Lorés-Sanz, 2011a; Ivorra Pérez, 2015, 2016; Suau-Jiménez, 2016; Mattiello, 2018; Turiman et al., 2018; Herrando-Rodrigo, 2019), IM would need to be redefined or readapted, including new markers, new lexico-grammatical realizations. As a result and very importantly, propositionality should be considered a theoretical central feature that contributes to interpersonal interactions but that traditional approaches of IM do not accept as such. So, a new, more encompassing concept needs to be coined that accounts for all these essential aspects. Assuming how interpersonal metadiscourse has been defined conventionally (Mauranen, 1993a, 1993b; Hyland, 2005a, 2017), we propose two integrative concepts: discursive turn (Jaworski & Pritchard, 2005), not in its philosophical sense but in one that sees discourse as an identity axis or departure point for analysis, and interpersonality (Lorés-Sanz et al., 2010), considered as an umbrella term broader than IM. Discursive interpersonality might thus open more satisfactory paths for further research in a variety of genres, domains and languages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research article is about a genre almost ignored by the researchers as the training book review. The purpose of the study is to analyse its rhetorical-linguistic structure using genre analysis in the spirit of Swalesian tradition. In this frame, this paper presents an empirical qualitative research, in which 96 Spanish training book reviews, produced by the population of students from the complete degree of Modern Languages, are analysed. In this corpus produced for the study, higher level communicative purposes (rhetorical moves) and lower level communicative purposes (steps and substeps) from these training book reviews are identified and analysed. This model is a useful tool to assess the progression of students in selecting and organising information and in the development of the description and the argumentation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Argumentation from consequences plays a central role in the justification and critical scrutiny of legislative proposals. With a view to contributing to the ex ante evaluation of legislation in Chile, this paper proposes instruments for analysing and evaluating argumentation from consequences in the general discussion of a bill. The theoretical starting points are the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation and informal logic. The analytic instrument is an argument scheme to identify arguments from consequences in legislative discourse and reconstruct implicit premises. The evaluative instrument is a set of critical questions to determine the quality--specifically, the sufficiency--of an argument from consequences put forward in the general discussion of a bill. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]