LOS ASPECTOS ARGUMENTATIVOS DE LAS RESPUESTAS DE RAJOY A UN GRUPO DE CIUDADANOS EN EL PROGRAMA DE TELEVISIÓN ESPAÑOLA TENGO UNA PREGUNTA PARA USTED.

This paper analyses the arguments put forward by Mariano Rajoy, the leader of the Partido Popular (currently Spain's major opposition party and the principal representative of the country's right wing), in response to questions about the atmosphere of tension posed by a group of citizens during Tengo una pregunta para usted (2007), a television programme in which 100 representatives from a cross section of society quiz leading politicians on a wide range of issues. The theoretical-methodological approach is based on concepts taken from discourse analysis and a cognitive perspective, as well as from rhetoric, argumentation theory and pragmadialectics. This interdisciplinary approach enables us to better address the complexity of the various levels of discursive significance and their interrelation with ideological meaning in discourse whose persuasive intentionality targets agreement between the speaker and recipients. The analysis and interpretation of the data reveals Rajoy's general lack of attention to the citizen's point of view and his tendency to break the frameworks they activate, repeatedly replacing them with his own. This indicates his interest in presenting his political programme before the television audience, rather than offering each citizen a coherent (and well-structured within a critical argument) response. In establishing his ideological position, he frequently resorts to the use of supposedly objective data (extrinsic proof), as well as the use of argumentative places, and especially the overuse of the place of essence (which for Rajoy has an overriding argumentative value). From a pragmatic perspective, he breaks the expectations generated by the speech acts used by the citizens in their questions, thereby failing to answer what he has been asked. In addition, he fails to comply with several rules by misinterpreting the citizen's intention and digressing inappropriately. Where he does accept die approach put forward, he tends to minimise die possible threat the act represents to his party's image by using a range of attenuating elements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]