Reported speech as an element of argumentative newspaper discourse

8/9/2019 Reported speech as an element of argumentative newspaper discourse

1/26

http://dcm.sagepub.com/ Discours e & Comm unication

http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79The online version of this article can be foun d at:

DOI: 10.1177/1750481308098765

2009 3: 79DISCOURSE & COMMUNICATION Alla Vitaljevna Smirnova

Reported speech as an element of argumentative newspaper discourse

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Discourse & Communication Additional services and information for

http://dcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://dcm.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79.refs.htmlCitations:

at Tehran University on December 2, 2010dcm.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79http://www.sagepublications.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://dcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://dcm.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://dcm.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79.refs.htmlhttp://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79.refs.htmlhttp://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://dcm.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://dcm.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/content/3/1/79http://dcm.sagepub.com/


2/26

Smirnova: Reported speech as an element of argumentative newspaper discourse 79

Discourse & CommunicationCopyright 2009

SAGE Publications.(Los Angeles, London, New Delhi,Singapore and Washington DC)

www.sagepublications.comVol 3(1): 79103

10.1177/1750481308098765

Reported speech as an element ofargumentative newspaper discourse

A L L A V I TA L J E V N A S M I R N O VAI N D E P E N D E N T S C H O L A R , R U S S I A

A B S T R A C T The present article deals with reported speech as an elementof argumentation in the newspaper discourse of Great Britain viewed inthe unity of its syntactic and semantic characteristics and argumentativefunctions. Theoretically, the research is based on the dialogic understandingof quotations, the dialogue theory by Bakhtin and contemporaryargumentation theory. The proposed integral approach to reported speechcombining linguistics with logic and argumentation theory revealed therelations between purely linguistic (syntactic and semantic) characteristicsof reported speech with its functioning in argumentative discourse ofcontemporary British press.

K E Y W O R D S : argumentation, discourse (argumentative/newspaper discourse),quotations, reported speech, semantic characteristics, syntactic structures

1. IntroductionNowadays a strong impact of mass media on every human being is an indisput-

able issue, the language being the main tool of this influence (especially for theprinted media). Mass media discourse in general and newspaper discourse as oneof its varieties have two main functions: to inform and to persuade the reader.Newspaper discourses with prevailing persuasion function are aimed at regu-lation of the addressees behaviour and thinking and are thus argumentativeby their nature. Another characteristic feature of such newspaper discoursesis their multi-dimensional dialogic nature. Alongside the dialogue between thetext of the article and the reader, the former is also a reflection of dialoguesexisting in another real communicative space. This reflection is formally ex-

pressed by inserting into the text the utterances of other people in the form ofreported speech.By reported speech we understand incorporation of another persons words

into the authors discourse. The result of this incorporation is a (syntactic)structure with reported speech.

A R T I C L E

http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/


3/26

80 Discourse & Communication 3(1)

The aim of the present research is to reveal semantic and functional potentialof reported speech as an element of argumentation in British newspaperdiscourse. This aim can be achieved only by means of interdisciplinary research.We propose an integrative approach to reported speech based on the assumptionthat all functional aspects of reported speech are determined by the overalltask of persuasion.

Theoretically the research is based on the dialogue theory by Bakhtin (1981,1984, 1986), on the dialogic (non-autonymous) approach to quotations (Buttny,1998; Ducrot, 1984; Goffman, 1981; Perrin, 1994; Thompson, 1996) and oncontemporary argumentation theory (Anscombre and Ducrot, 1983; Blair and Johnson, 1997; Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, 1969; Toulmin, 1958; VanEemeren and Grootendorst, 1984, 1992).

To accomplish the aim, we have followed the following procedure:

1. We have determined the linguistic characteristics of reported speech thatenable it to function in newspaper argumentation:

Syntactic structures used to introduce reported speech; Semantic characteristics of these structures;

2. We have revealed the possible positions of reported speech in the argumentativestructure of newspaper discourse (position of thesis and/or argument);

3. For each of these positions we have analysed peculiarities and functions ofreported speech.

The empirical basis of the present research is contemporary press of GreatBritain.

For the sampling purposes we used only newspapers focusing on politicalreporting (i.e. what is generally known as quality newspapers or broadsheets).Popular newspapers or tabloids were not included as such newspapers pre-ferably use means of persuasion dif ferent from argumentation. We selectedthree nationwide daily newspapers with the highest market share ( The Times, The Financial Times , The Guardian ) and one regional (Scottish) newspaper ( The Herald ).The print editions of four daily newspapers were analysed during a six-year period(20016), 12 non-consecutive issues of each newspaper every year.

Data for analysis, however, did not include all items of the newspapers. Fromthe variety of newspaper discourses of different genres we selected those withargumentative structure (opinion articles, editorials and letters to the editor).Typically each newspaper issue contained around 20 items of argumentativenature, one of them being normally a large-size article (more than half a page),about two-thirds small-size (less than one eighth of a page) and one-thirdmedium-size articles (between one-eighth and one half of a page).

2. Theoretical frameworkMental opposition I the others is one of the earliest and most important op-positions for human beings. In the 20th century it gained special acuteness inthe existentialism philosophy that shifted the focus from the social approach toman to the personal one, to interpersonal interaction. The philosophic conceptof the other developed in existential philosophy influenced linguistic ideas and

http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/http://dcm.sagepub.com/


4/26


caused a surge of interest to reported discourse. The problem of what belongs tooneself and what belongs to others in literary discourse was raised by Bakhtin inthe mid-1930s, but was not generally acknowledged until 196070s when hisworks appeared in print. According to Bakhtins theories of dialogism and poly-glossia (1981, 1984, 1986), reported speech is one of the means of intertextualitycreation. The study of reported speech in the framework of intertextualitytheory further continued both in literary criticism (Derrida, 1978; Kristeva,1969; , 1994; , 1981) and linguistics (Bolden, 2004; Calsamigliaand Ferrero, 2003; Gordon, 2006; Guenthner, 1999; Waugh, 1995; ,1999; , 2001; , 1986; , 1996).

However, there is no unanimity in understanding the nature of this linguisticphenomenon. In European linguistics, reported speech was traditionally viewedas an autonymous sign, a kind of meta-representation informing about itself,but not about the world. It was a principle to ignore the contents of the quoted

words as well as the relations between the reported and the reporting utterances(Authier-Revuz, 1997; Rey-Debove, 1978; Rosier, 1997).This approach did not appear fruitful and was disproved by discursive prac-

tice. Theoretically the autonymy theory was refuted by such linguists as Buttny(1998), Clark and Gerrig (1990), Ducrot (1984), Goffman (1981), Holt (2000),Perrin (1994), Roberts (2004), Thompson (1996), and others.

We fully share this second non-autonymous approach, and our research isbased on the assumption that relations between the quotation and its context arethat of dialogue and evaluation. By the mere act of quotation the author showshis/her attitude to other texts and authors and tries to evoke a similar attitude inthe reader. What the author thinks necessary and important to tell the audienceof this initial situation predetermines the perception and further interpretationof the quotation by the reader. Even if this evaluation is not shown explicitly, itmay be deduced from the linguistic properties of the structures with reportedspeech. Thus, the following aspects play an important role in the argumentativeuse of reported speech:

1. Choice of syntactic structure of reported speech;2. Semantic characteristics of structures with reported speech:

Data about the initial context of the reported utterance; Choice of the quoted segment of reported utterance.

In the next section of this article we shall analyse syntactic and semanticcharacteristics of reported speech in our corpus of argumentative Britishnewspaper discourses.

3. Syntax and semantics of reported speech in Britishargumentative newspaper discourses3.1. SYNTACTIC CHARACTERISTICS OF REPORTED SPEECH IN ARGUMENTATIVE NEWSPAPER DISCOURSEThere have been numerous attempts in linguistics to provide a universalclassification of syntactic structures used to introduce reported speech, but nouniversal approach has so far been achieved and accepted.



5/26


On the basis of the previous typologies on the one hand and the results of ourcorpus analysis on the other we made our own attempt at creating a structuralclassification of reported speech types for argumentative newspaper discourseof Modern British English.

The proposed classification is based on the criterion of literalness defined asexact rendering of lexicon and syntax of the reported utterance as opposed toaccuracy that deals with the retention of information contained therein.

Our structural classification consists of two levels.On the first level the structures used for reported speech are divided into

literal and liberal ones. Literal structures incorporate the quoted utterance asan utterance belonging to someone else and aim at a verbatim reproduction ofthe initial message:

(1) Salby Whittingham, a Turner scholar, said: Serota naturally wants to buymodern art and contemporary pictures. Its rather doubtful how their reputationwill last. ( The Times , Wednesday 12 November 2003, p. 9)

Liberal structures are characterized by greater freedom of reproduction ofreported words:

(2) The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) says thatannual losses from ring rot have been as high as 50% in America. ( The Herald ,Friday 14 November 2003, p. 12)

The differentiation between these types of structures may be of some dif-ficulty, as newspaper discourse contains mainly fragments of oral discourses, and

it may be problematic to determine literalness and accuracy of their rendering.We propose differentiation according to the formal criterion (presence/absenceof quotation marks).

There are also combined structures uniting literal and liberal ones:

(3) John Jackson of the Scottish Development Center for Mental Health insisted theunit would not pose significant risk to the community: There hasnt been onesingle case across the UK of a patient escaping from a medium-care unit and theyfunction very safely. ( The Herald , Friday 14 November 2003, p. 10)

At the next level of structural classification we introduce the syntactic cri-terion. All grammatical forms of literal and liberal structures will be describedin more detail further on in this section.

The proposed classification of structural types of reported speech is shownin Figure 1. It is based on the analysis of argumentative newspaper discourseof modern English and thus does not include such structural types of reportedspeech as references, characteristic mainly for the scientific discourse, andindependent quotations (like epigraphs) used in fiction.

As can be seen in Figure 1, literal structures are represented in our corpus by suchgrammatical forms as direct speech, indirect speech and segmented quotations.

The most widely used form among the abovementioned is direct speech : (4) John Brennan, director of further education development at the Association of

Colleges, said last night: Its a national imperative to improve the supply of skillsat this level. ( The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 5)



6/26


Frequent use of this structure can be explained by several reasons. First,the use of direct speech is the evidence of authenticity of the quoted utterance.Second, it indirectly shows respect and trust of the author to the quoted sourceand his/her words. Besides, it is a convenient structure for introducing lengthyquotations.

In literal indirect speech and segmented quotations words belonging to anotherperson are embedded in the authors speech as its constituent units. Literalindirect speech follows the pattern of indirect speech:

(5) Peter Wood, pioneer of the telephone insurance and founder of Direct Line,believes basic education is better and the workforce happier. ( The Herald ,Monday 27 May 2002, p. 17)

In segmented quotations extracts from other peoples discourses are includedinto the structures generally not used for reported speech. The quoted segments

are fully integrated into the authors syntax: (6) The government is to press ahead with the launch of an official index of house

prices this September. ( The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 17)

Analysis showed that in our corpus authors as a rule quote separate wordsor phrases, often of evaluative character, or, on the contrary, neutral words thatgain evaluative semantics by being placed in the quotation marks. The generalvocabulary words, constantly used in newspaper discourse, formally do not needto be put into the quotation marks. By emphasizing with the use of the quot-ation marks the foreignness of the quoted words the journalist can express awhole range of attitudes from admiration for successful wording to (much morefrequent) irony. And the less the volume of the quoted segment, the more thefunction of the quotation shifts from reliability function to attitude function(Weizman, 1984; see words official, happier in the examples cited above).

Report ed spee ch

Literal structur es Liberal structur es

Direct spee ch

Indir ect spee ch

Indir ect spee ch

Topical r eport ed spee ch

Seg ment ed quotation

Direct spee ch

Combin ed structur es

Compl ex structur es

F I G U R E 1 . Classification of structures with reported speech in argumentative newspaperdiscourse of Modern British English



7/26


Liberal structures are represented in our corpus by such grammatical formsas indirect speech, liberal direct speech, topical reported speech and complexliberal structures.

Liberal indirect speech , unlike direct speech, renders the quoted utterance fromthe viewpoint of the author of the discourse rather than provides a word-for-word repetition of the initial utterance. This leads to numerous transformations ofthe initial discourse (deictic changes, neutralization of expressive means, etc.):

(7) But trading standards officers revealed yesterday that complaints about holidaycompanies had trebled compared to the year before. ( The Herald , Monday 27 May2002, p. 3)

Indirect speech renders the quoted words with the degree of exactness re-quired for argumentative goals of the author.

Liberal direct speech is built according to the pattern of direct speech, but differs

from the latter formally by the absence of quotation marks. In our corpus it wasrepresented by a small number of examples characteristic almost exclusively forleads or headlines:

(8) The Western Kingdom of Bunyoro was devastated during a five-year guerrillauprising against the British, said Ernest Kizza, speaker of the small BunyoroParliament. ( The Herald , Saturday 6 March 2004, p. 9)

Topical reported speech renders only the general content or macrostructure(Van Dijk, 1980) of the quoted utterance:

(9) We talked about human fallibility and human courage. ( The Herald , Friday 14November 2003, p. 18)

Complex liberal structures combine several liberal structures in one sentence(topical reported speech and indirect speech in the following example):

(10) Mr. Clement described the fall as an encouraging sign, but said it was too soonto suggest the economy has turned the corner. ( The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July2003, p. 10)

Sometimes literal and liberal structures can be united in various combin-

ations forming

a separate group

of combined structures :

(11) Professor Andrew Calder, professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at EdinburghUniversity, says women should not worry about safety: The operation itself isvery safe. ( The Herald , Monday 27 May 2002, p. 10)

Inconvenience of these large-volume structures prevents their wide use innewspaper discourse in spite of the fact that they combine advantages of literaland liberal structures.

Syntactic structures with reported speech in British argumentative news-paper discourse and their frequency of use obtained as a result of corpus analysisare summarized in Figure 2.

As we can see, for introducing reported speech journalists of British paperssomewhat prefer literal structures to liberal and combined ones. Selection ofa specific structure depends on the authors argumentative intentions. Literal



8/26


structures create the effect of maximum accuracy of rendering information. Byusing liberal structures journalists get an opportunity to highlight key pointsand to emphasize what they consider important in the reported utterance. But at

the same time the measure of their personal responsibility increases. Combinedstructures are used rarely.

3.2. SEMANTICS OF REPORTED SPEECH IN ARGUMENTATIVE NEWSPAPER DISCOURSEIn contemporary press we deal not with reported speech as such, but withspecially prepared reported speech. The quoted words are presented in such away that they would most effectively influence the audience according to theauthors intentions. The context of the initial quoted utterance through whichand in which this utterance gets its meaning becomes known to the reader onlythrough the authors description. This description is inevitably incomplete andsubjective, but it determines further interpretation of the quotation by the reader.Semantics of structures with reported speech determines how the quoted wordsare perceived by the readers and how they influence them.

In order to determine semantic characteristics of reported speech in news-paper discourse we turned to semantic syntax, a theoretical framework foundedby Fillmore (1968).

In semantic syntax the critical element of any semantic structure is the pre-dicate that determines the relations between all other elements. The predicateplays an equally important role in persuasion of the reader. It transmits infor-mation about the authors attitude to the quoted utterance and tries to generatean identical attitude in the readers. As it has been remarked earlier (Kerbrat-Orecchioni, 1979; Perrin, 1994), it is impossible to solve the problem of the sourceof subjective information contained in the predicate introducing reported speech.

Topical r eport edspee ch1.6 %

Liberal dir ectspee ch12. 8%

Liberal indir ectspee ch26. 8% Seg ment ed

quotations9.0 %

Literal indir ectspee ch7. 8%

Literal dir ectspee ch36.1 %

Compl ex liberalstructur es

0.2 %Combin edstructur es

5.6 %

Lite ral structur e s (52. 8% )

Libe ral structur e s (41.4 % )Combin ed structur es (5. 8% )

F I G U R E 2 . Syntactic structures with reported speech in British argumentative newspaperdiscourse



9/26


We cannot unambiguously determine if the journalist has adequately chosen thepredicate and correctly interpreted the illocutional force of the utterance. Thusthe predicate simultaneously describes the relation to the reported speech of thespeaker and of the author of the article.

For example, mental predicates combined with the actually pronounced wordsprovide the reader with implicit information that the quoted person speaks his/hermind (emphasis is laid on the speakers sincerity), render his/her thoughts andfeelings on the question discussed:

(12) Religious groups fear that the plans would lend status and credibility to same-sexpartnerships. ( The Times , Wednesday 12 November 2003, p. 18)

However, such predicates are not very often used in our corpus. In the majorityof cases the journalist does not undertake responsibility for the sincerity of thequoted source and prefers to use predicates of speaking that present the utterance

as a fact of reality:(13) Farming leaders have warned that ring rot, which has never previously occurred

in Britain, could have a catastrophic impact on the countrys 3.2 bn potatocrop. ( The Herald , Friday 14 November 2003, p. 12)

At the same time the careful selection of the predicate of speaking gives the journalist vast opportunities in the range from total abstraction from the reportedutterance (predicates say , write , add , respond , etc.), to the enforcement on thereader of personal unequivocal evaluation thereof (predicates intone , bleat , pant , hint , etc.). More details on the semantic types of predicates used in structureswith reported speech in the British newspaper discourse, their semantics andfrequency of occurrence can be found in (2004).

Semantics of the predicate defines the possibility of other elements, but theiractual presence in discourse is determined by their importance for argumen-tative purposes.

Characteristics of the quoted source play a very important role for function-ing of reported speech in argumentation. The quoted person should be proved topossess sufficient competence to give his/her judgement as an authority. Agentand the appositive component related to it are the semantic elements responsiblefor presenting the speaker to the readers. The former may be described in detailor stay almost anonymous according to the journalists intent.

Analysis of our corpus showed that in order to relevantly characterize theperson quoted in the newspaper discourse, journalists in Great Britain use pro-fessional and personal characteristics. Professional characteristics (position,place of work, academic degree, profession, membership of a political party) arebased on power as authority and prestige and portray the speaker as a personcompetent in the questions discussed. Professional characteristics possess amuch bigger argumentative value than personal ones, and are used much more

frequently. Personal characteristics (title, nationality, place of origin, age, maritalstatus, family relations) are based on power as charisma and promote emotionalperception of the speaker as a distinct personality. They are viewed as less rele-vant for a sound argumentation. In Great Britain the greatest emphasis is laid



10/26


on such professional characteristics as position (Vincenti Todoli, director of TateModern . . ., The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 9), place of work (TheFourth Estuary Transport Authority . . ., The Guardian , Thursday 9 December2004, p. 17) and academic degree (Tom Baldwin, professor of philosophy at theuniversity of York . . ., The Times, Wednesday 12 November 2003, p. 6). Suchpersonal characteristic as title is also often used, but more as a tribute to tradition(Gordon, Lord of Strathblane, . . ., The Times, Friday 20 October 2006, p. 10).More details about characteristics of the quoted source in the British press aregiven in (2007).

The selection of the quoted segment of the other persons utterance is evenmore important for the readers persuasion than the information provided in theintroductory syntagm. The semantic element of the Content contains the maininformation that is supposed to influence the addressee.

Depending on the argumentative intentions of the author the quoted words

may form an utterance of one of the three existing logical types: descriptive,evaluative and normative. The main task of descriptive utterances is to describethe past, present or future status of objective reality.

(14) However, Lambert states that this was more than countered by the rise in the priceof store cattle last spring. ( The Herald , Saturday 6 March 2004, p. 17)

Evaluative utterances ascribe absolute or comparative value to some phe-nomenon, event or object.

(15) The barrister Noel Whelan insists: The basis for this ban is neither rational, nor

objective. ( The Herald , Tuesday 10 July 2001, p. 14)

Normative utterances set the rules of behaviour.

(16) We need to guarantee people employability for life, said a Whitehall official lastnight. ( The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 5)

The choice of this or that type of the quoted utterance depends on furtherfunctions of reported speech in argumentative discourse.

Other elements are not semantically obligatory, but contain the authors implicitcomment on the quoted utterance and are used for argumentative purposes.

Information about the Beneficiant adds credibility to the quoted words: thereader tends to give more trust to the words uttered before a competent respectedaudience:

(17) In March 1995, Lord Gil told the Law society: Our system of civil procedure is acontemporary relic of a vanished age which ill-serves the litigant. ( The Herald ,Friday 14 November 2003, p. 19)

Additional information about the initial context of the quoted utterance (time,place and other consequences) emphasizes the topicality of the problem dis-

cussed and creates the effect of accuracy of rendering the quoted words:(18) Elizabeth Stone, head of archaeology department at Stony Brook University in

New York, said in London yesterday: I think you have got to kill some people tostop this. ( The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 6)



11/26


Thus, every semantic component of a quotation in contemporary newspaperdiscourse plays its important role in persuasion of the target audience.

To sum up, we can say that both form (syntactic structure) and contents(semantic characteristics) of reported speech are important for the readers per-suasion and determine the role of reported speech in argumentative discourse.

Having determined the linguistic parameters of structures with reportedspeech, we can now turn to the question of how reported speech functions innewspaper argumentation.

4. Reported speech in argumentative discourseArgumentative discourses follow certain patterns, or structures, consisting ofthe following elements:

1. Thesis, or claim the statement, validity/acceptability of which is beingproved; standpoint advanced by the writer.

2. Arguments, or reasons, statements by means of which validity of the thesisis proved.

In the present article the types of theses and arguments are determinedaccording to the definitions generally accepted in rhetoric (van Eemeren andGrootendorst, 1992; , 2000). However, success of argumentation indiscourse depends not only on the type of thesis and arguments, but also on theirinterrelations. That is why one of the central problems in research concerningthe analysis of argumentative discourse is determination of the structure ofargumentation, the way in which the arguments that are advanced are relatedto each other and jointly support the thesis.

Argumentation supporting a standpoint may have a more or less complexstructure. In the simplest case one argument can suffice. But in most cases thesisis supported by a number of arguments characterized by complex interrelations.In our research we used the classification of structural relations between ele-ments of argumentation proposed by Van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1992).Apart from simple argumentative structures containing one thesis and oneargument, they distinguish several types of complex structures: coordinativeargumentation (with a combined line of defence), multiple argumentation (withseparate lines of defence) and subordinative argumentation (with a continuedline of defence). 1

Analysing argumentative newspaper discourse we modelled the relationsbetween elements for each argumentative unit. By argumentative unit weunderstand a structure containing one thesis and arguments supporting orrefuting it. As to the main subject of interest of the present article reportedspeech research revealed that in newspaper discourse it can occupy both ofthe possible argumentative positions position of the thesis and that of an argu-ment. Approximately in one third of the reviewed argumentative units reportedspeech was in the position of the thesis. More characteristic, however, is the use



12/26


of reported speech in the position of an argument. Reported speech in each ofthese positions will be reviewed further on in this section of the article.

4.1. REPORTED SPEECH AS THE THESIS OF NEWSPAPER ARGUMENTATION

4.1.1. Logic types of theses represented by reported speech in newspaper discourseWhen reported speech is used as the thesis of newspaper argumentation, thestatement that is to be proved is contained in the quoted words, which, as it hasbeen mentioned in section 3.2., can be utterances of three logic types: normative,evaluative and descriptive. Semantics of the quoted words determines furtherargumentation.

Analysis showed that the majority of the quoted utterances used as the thesesof newspaper argumentation set the norms of behaviour (normative type).This fact looks quite natural as human reasoning is generally motivated by thenecessity to decide what to do (May, 1991; Mullen and Roth, 1991; Weddle,1991). That is why the majority of newspaper argumentations deal with accept-ability, expediency and necessity of this or that action, for example:

(19) There should be no radical overhaul of global trade rules that would let countriesimpose trade restrictions based on their social or environmental values, EuropeanUnion trade commission decided in Brussels yesterday.

Pasca l Lamy, Euro pean Union tra de commission er,told a conf er ence in Br ussels that giving countri es anuntramm eled right to a d o pt any m easur e th ey pleased , however unfair, unr easonab le or unr elat ed toany a gr eed int ernationa l fram ework wo uld lead toblinker ed , sel fish prot ectionism.

H e point ed out that th e pr esent r ulesof the Wor ld Trade Or ganizationalr ead y gave countri es much f lexibility to de f end th eir va lues.

( , 6 March/7 March 2004, p. 7)The Financia l Times

In example (19) the thesis of argumentation is a normative utterance pro-claiming undesirability of introducing new global trade rules. It is important tonote here that the passage cited above may at first sight look like an informative,

rather than an argumentative, one. However, the main goal of the writer isnot to keep the reader informed of the decision of the European Committee andof the arguments justifying it, but to make the audience share a certain attitude.The whole article published in the Comment/Opinion sections of a newspaperis aimed at persuading/convincing the reader, and the passages that at first sightappear informative, really are argumentative, as they serve the overall argu-mentative goal of the author. In contemporary British newspapers explicitargumentation is rare. The thesis (standpoint) and arguments may not be markedas such and even be disguised as informative. Thus, in example (19) the authormay deliberately want the passage to look informative. Though the standpointand the arguments are put into the mouths of other persons, still we considerthat the act of argumentation takes place there and the author of the articlemay still be held committed to it. Maybe in this and similar cases it is possible tospeak of the complex act, combining arguing and informing.



13/26


A sufficiently large group of the quoted utterances used as the thesis of news-paper argumentation are of evaluative type. Absolute or comparative value isattributed to this or that phenomenon, event or object:

(20) Senior coalition officials accuse the Iraqi body of being an ineffective government.

In this example the thesis is an absolute evaluative utterance ascribing to

the Iraqi government the evaluation ineffective. The use of predicate accuse revealing authors understanding of the nature of the quoted speech act mayshift the readers attention to the speech act itself rather than the contents ofthe quoted words. However, in line with dialogic understanding of quotations,the main argumentative focus in the thesis lies in the quoted utterance proper,but not in the fact that it was said by somebody. Thus, in example (20) what isbeing further proved is that the Iraqi government is ineffective (it has failed toprevent attacks on US troops, to convene a constitutional conference to preparefor elections, to develop as an effective administration and to sell itself to the

Iraqi people via media), but not that the coalition officials accuse it. The use ofpredicate presenting the words of the quoted sources as the speech act of accus-ation is indeed an indicator of the authors attitude and can serve as a markerthat the journalist himself/herself fully shares the viewpoint and is going toargue for it.

It is important to note that both of the above described types of theses(normative and evaluative) require dialectic rather than formally logic type ofreasoning and thus determine the further type of argumentation.

Propositions describing past, present or future status of reality (descriptive

type) are seldom used as the thesis of newspaper argumentation:(21) Now, he says there is a realistic chance Mr. Howard could oust Tony Blair.

As the example cited above, the majority of descriptive theses in the form ofreported speech speak about the future and thus go beyond formal logic.Thus, in contemporary British press journalists use reported speech as the

thesis of argumentation to introduce normative and evaluative utterances as



14/26


well as judgements about the future. Prescription of certain actions as well asmaking evaluations and especially forecasts are ungrateful and risky things todo, and the use of reported speech allows imposing responsibility for them onanother person.

4.1.2. Functions of reported speech as the thesis of newspaper argumentationAs the thesis of argumentation, reported speech performs the following functions:function of additional support of the thesis at the very stage of its proclamation,function of the shift of responsibility, aesthetic function and indication of theauthorship of the article.

Function of additional support of the thesis at the very stage of its proclam-ation is the most important one. Here thesis partially gains characteristics of anargument. As soon as the thesis is proclaimed it is immediately supported by theauthority of a person who said it.

(22) In Liverpool last week, Tony Blair himself said: We need to renew ourselves fortimes to come. ( The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 22)

As soon as we see such a thesis, even before any support is given, we alreadytend to believe it or at least take it less critically, especially if the quoted person isan authority to us (as Tony Blair is, or at least was at the time the article was pub-lished, to the majority of British citizens). At the same time the use of himself ,obviously redundant for informative purposes, serves as a linguistic indicatorshowing that the author is himself/herself committed to a viewpoint.

We called the next important function of reported speech the thesis of argu-mentation function of the shift of responsibility. By this we mean that the authorof the article uses reported speech to introduce antithesis that will be refutedfurther on in his/her article.

(23) History will forgive us, bleats Mr. Blair. ( The Herald , Monday 21 July 2003, p. 13)

The same person as in (22) is quoted, but the attitude to his words is quite dif-ferent. The selection of the word bleats clearly indicates the authors intentionsand serves as an argumentative marker of a standpoint. This function of reportedspeech is characteristic of the articles full of sharp criticism and denunciation.

The two functions discussed above can be figured out in newspaper argu-mentation using reported speech as its thesis most often. There are, however,two minor functions: aesthetic function and indication of the authorship of thearticle.

Sometimes an attractive utterance of some person helps to capture thereaders attention, makes them read the article, influences them:

(24) Britain should protect its citizens against injustice and wrong. ( The Guardian ,Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 22)

The quotation in this example clearly belongs to the bookish elevated styleand in this respect stands apart from the argumentation that follows. At the sametime the use of segmented quotation shows that the journalist is ready to be heldpersonally responsible for the advanced standpoint.



15/26


Sometimes reported speech as the thesis of argumentation simply introducesthe author of the article.

(25) The former teacher has taken a vital role in the presidents re-election campaign,writes James Harding. ( The Financial Times , 6 March/7 March 2004, p. 11)

It looks as if the thesis is introduced by the newspaper editorial board, andthe task to prove it is delegated to a certain journalist.

Thus reported speech as the thesis of argumentation can both add weightto the proposed claim and withdraw responsibility for the claim from the authorof the article, and is a convenient means of argumentative persuasion.

4.2. REPORTED SPEECH AS AN ARGUMENT OF NEWSPAPER ARGUMENTATION

4.2.1. Logic types of arguments represented by reported speechAny structure with reported speech consists of two parts: the authors wordsand the quoted words of another person. We have set up a hypothesis that in theposition of an argument reported speech functions as a two-faced unit, a unityof two types of arguments. The first is represented by the authors words and in-evitably is an argument to authority. The second argument is represented by thequoted words of the authority and is an argument of another type.

Corpus analysis confirmed this hypothesis and showed that reported speechas an argument in argumentative discourse of contemporary British press canbe either a pure argument to authority or a combination of an argument to au-thority with an argument of another type.

In general, appeal to authority in press is not devoid of reason and can be justified by the fact that the possibilities of every individual person are limited,and in many complex issues we can only rely on the experts opinion. Whenreported speech is a pure argument to authority it is a reference to the opinionof a person known as an expert in the questions discussed. In this case, thewords of the authority are a semantic repetition of the thesis:

(26) Rules aimed at preventing money laundering are not enough. Blezzard, atNational Criminal Intelligence Service, stressed that regulation was not enough.(The Herald , Monday 28 January 2002, p. 19)

Cases of pure appeal to authority are not numerous in argumentativenewspaper discourse of Great Britain. Western European culture is based on theconcept of multiple paradigms (Morawski, 1970). People rely on authority notbecause something is said by an expert, but because it is well grounded. That iswhy in the dominating majority of cases reported speech functions as a com-bination of an argument to authority and an argument of another type.

Most widely used is the combination of argument to authority and logic proof(arguments of formal or informal logic). Of all the argumentative patterns of

formal logic, newspaper discourse as represented by the reviewed material usesonly four: induction, analogy, Modus ponens and Modus tollens .In the following example appeal to authority is combined with proof by

analogy:



16/26


(27) A 20-storey tower block should be built 50 meters from the entrance of the TateModern.

Vincenti Todoli, director of Tate Modern: It is like putting a sky-scraper next to the

Eiffel Tower, or the Coliseum in Rome.(The Guardian , Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 9)

The example cited above is taken from an opinion article devoted to the dis-cussion of the proposed plan to build a multistoried building near Tate Modern.The issue is rather controversial, and the journalist cannot ignore the existence oftwo opposite viewpoints. So this is an example of an article with extended argu-mentation containing arguments both for and against the proclaimed thesis (seealso example (29)). The journalist seemingly refrains from enforcing his view-point upon the reader and lets him/her take the final decision independentlyhaving considered argumentation presented in the article. However, as in allargumentative articles, his actual goal is to shift the public opinion in a certaindirection, to form a certain attitude to the discussed issue. The persuasion isnot straightforward and is supposed to influence the reader indirectly (see alsocomment to (29)). In (27) the quoted argument refutes the thesis of the writer.On the basis of implicit premises that it is not allowable to built multistoriedbuildings near the objects or art and history (it is supposed that the readers ofthe newspaper share these initial premises) the director of Tate Modern makesa classic proof by analogy. Direct speech of the authority is used in the positionof an argument, the predicate is omitted to focus the readers attention on theargument contained in the quoted words.

In general, arguments of formal logic are used in newspaper discourse muchmore rarely than arguments of informal logic. This confirms the need to go beyondformal logic when dealing with argumentation in real discourse (Perelmanand Olbrechts-Tyteca, 1969; Toulmin, 1958; Van Eemeren and Grootendorst,1984, 1992). Arguing on everyday issues in real life we use arguments basedon relations existing in reality between the phenomena that are often ruled outby formal logic as incorrect. Thus, formal logic prescribes strict differentiation of

facts and evaluations. But it is natural for us to evaluate phenomena or eventsbased on facts, because we know from experience that certain facts deserve cer-tain evaluations. Informal argumentation deducing values from facts is oftenused in newspaper discourse:

(28) Jackson, despite all, is still to be regarded as one of the most extraordinaryperformers of all times.



17/26


In this example, evaluation of Michael Jackson is proved by the facts of hiscontribution into pop culture. All facts are given on behalf of a person competentin the sphere discussed (Simon Frith, professor of pop at Stirling University) inthe form of direct speech.

Combination of argument to authority with teleological proof takesthe second place in the frequency of use among the cases when reported speechincludes two types of arguments. Teleological proof justifies certain actionsby the positive value of the aims achieved by these actions (the end justifiesthe means). This argumentative pattern is used mainly for normativetheses.

For example, this type of proof is used in the article cited above devoted tothe problem of construction of a new multistoried building near Tate Modern.In spite of his attempts to look unbiased the journalist actually sees himself as aprotagonist of the proposed plan. In order to form a positive attitude to the con-struction the writer recurs to teleological proof:

(29) A 20-storey tower block should be built 50 meters from the entrance of the TateModern.

Here the proposed action is justified by its ends, and these ends are importantto the readers as they potentially affect them personally (affordable homes,development of the area, environmental improvements). All these benefits arepromised by important people whose words are quoted in the article, and theirauthority serves as a guarantee that these ends will be actually achieved. If wecompare examples (27) and (29) we shall clearly see the authors preferences. Onlyone argument is given against, and two arguments for the advanced standpoint.

Moreover, the arguments for the construction are supported by authority of thequoted sources holding higher positions in the social hierarchy than the sourcepresenting the argument against. The arguments contained in the quoted wordsof the sources are also supposed to have different respective impact on the readers.While the teleological proof of the expediency of construction refers to the goalswithin the sphere of personal interests of the readers, the argument againstis based on abstract analogy.

The next group of combined arguments in the form of reported speechincludes as its second component arguments appealing to different emotions

of the readers. The following example contains arguments combining appealto authority with appeal to financial interests of the readers:



18/26


(30) The SNP yesterday unveiled plans to replace the council tax with a new systemof local income tax . . . The implementation of this system will have the mostunpleasant consequences for the majority of population.

The aim of the author of this article is to form the negative attitude of thereadership to the proposed introduction of a new tax system. To achieve his/herargumentative goal the journalist cites the words of prominent politicians clearlystating that if the new tax system is introduced people will have to pay more.

The next group of arguments is built according to the pattern argumentto authority and appeal to public opinion. In this case, there is a multistagesequence of appeals: the journalist appeals to some authority that in his/her turnalso appeals to the authority of law, to traditions and morals, to the opinion ofthe majority, to fashion, taste or common sense:

(31) We have a parliamentary system that is unfair.

Challenged in front of the liaison committee yesterday, Tony Blair dismissed thecomplaint on the grounds that we have a constitutional settlement and partof that settlement is we dont have two classes of members. ( The Guardian ,Wednesday 9 July 2003, p. 23)

In this case, the journalist puts forward a certain thesis, and then refutes it pre-senting arguments against it and thus proving his real viewpoint that is oppositeto the one initially proclaimed. Thus, to support his/her standpoint concerningthe quality of the existing parliamentary system the journalist appeals to theauthority of Tony Blair (apparently well known as an authority on political issuesto all the readers), and Tony Blair in his turn appeals to the authority of Con-stitution. Such a method of proof by contradiction is recommended by the rulesof rhetoric in cases when it is supposed that the audience strongly adheres to aviewpoint, and if the opposite viewpoint is proclaimed from the very beginningwould reject any further argumentation, however sound the latter may be.

Appeal to public opinion is based on the sentiment of belonging to a specificgroup, on conformism. As identification of oneself with a group is not a priorityin individualistic Western European society, such arguments are not often usedin newspaper discourse.

The last group of arguments includes as the second component empiricalproof (reference to statistical data). According to Kara-Murza, this argument is



19/26


efficient because numbers tend to stick in human mind ( - , 2001:98). However, this type of proof can be used only in such cases (not numerousin British newspaper discourse) when thesis is a descriptive utterance:

(32) David Wood, Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland deputy director, said:

There is a heightened awareness of money laundering among members and anincrease in the skepticism with which they view clients business.

According to the Law Society of Scotland, its members made 64 disclosures of sus-pected money laundering in 2000. ( The Herald , Monday 28 January 2002, p. 19)

As early as at the stage of proclaiming the thesis the writer supports hisoptimistic standpoint on the existing status of struggle with money-launderingby the authority of the quoted source (David Wood, Institute of CharteredAccountants of Scotland depute director . . .). Further on, at the stage ofadvancing arguments, another reference to authority is made (According to theLaw Society of Scotland), as well as reference to statistical data on disclosuresof money-laundering. Taken together, that constitutes a sound proof of theadvanced thesis.

Detailed information about types and subtypes of arguments introduced byreported speech can be found in and (2005).

Patterns of combination of arguments within structures with reported speechare summarized in Table 1.

So, in British newspaper discourse reported speech in the position of an

argument can represent two types of patterns: a pure argument to authority ora combination of an argument to authority with an argument of another type.Due to European mentality, the first pattern is not very convincing to the readerand is not often used. The second pattern allows the journalist to effectively influ-ence the readers and is characteristic of newspaper discourse.

4.2.2 Functions of reported speech in the position of an argument in newspaperdiscourseReported speech in the position of an argument fulfils first of all the function of

conviction and persuasion. At the same time convincing and persuading as ap-pealing to reason and emotions of the audience, respectively, seem in this case

TA B L E 1 . Patterns of combination of arguments within structures with reported speech

Patterns of combinations of arguments% of structures with reported speech

in the position of an argument

Argument to authority 13.5%Argument to authority & logic proof 39.5%

Argument to authority & teleological proof 28.7%Argument to authority & appeal to emotions 12.8%Argument to authority & appeal to public opinion 4.5%Argument to authority & empirical proof 1.0%



20/26


inseparable: a good argument convinces and persuades at the same time. Besidethese main functions, analysis of our corpus revealed additional functions ofreported speech in the position of an argument: function of concealing logicalfallacies and function of refutation. These two functions are auxiliary and arenot present in all cases.

As any structure with reported speech consists of the authors words andthe quoted words of another person, a question naturally arises as to what is therelative contribution of each of these parts in the overall impact on the reader. Wehave set up a hypothesis that the reader is primarily inf luenced by the contentsof the quoted utterance. Reference to authority can only increase the overalleffect. To confirm this hypothesis we have conducted an experiment with theaim to determine the convictive force of each component of these two-facedunits. 2 By convictive force we understand the capacity of an argument to executethe perlocutionary effect of the argumentation act to change the conscious

attitude of the addressee to the problem in question by means of persuasion(Stern, 1991).Our experiment showed that though the readers mainly become convinced

by an argument contained in the quoted words, a reference to authority adds theconvincing power to these arguments (on average 1.25 times).

As an example let us look at an argument that in the course of the experi-ment showed the greatest difference between its convincing power with andwithout reference to authority:

(33) Tom Baldwin, deputy HFEA Chairman and professor of philosophy at the Univer-

sity of York, said that they were worried about the potential psychological damageto a child born by such techniques. What if the child is born of the wrong sexbecause no technique is 100% reliable? he asked There is anxiety about whatkind of future that child would have, given that those parents have invested moneyand time in trying to have the child of the other sex. ( The Times , Wednesday, 12November 2003, p. 6)

Making reference to authority the author of the article first of all proves theright of the quoted source to express his opinion as an expert. For this purpose,the journalist mentions the high position Mr Baldwin holds in a relevant organ-ization (deputy HFEA (Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority)Chairman). Besides, the right of the quoted person to make his judgements onmoral and ethical issues is substantiated by his academic degree and another pos-ition he holds in a reputable institution (professor of philosophy at the Universityof York). The use of neutral predicates say and ask also allows the journalist tofocus the readers attention on characteristics of the authority. Reported speechis represented in the form of literal direct speech that is supposed to render theinitial utterance word for word. The use of this structure not only createsauthenticity effect, but allows the author to use for argumentative purposes therhetorically effective wording of the reported utterance (rhetorical question thatactivates the readers attention). All this taken together doubled the convictiveforce of the quoted utterance.

Another function of reported speech in the position of an argument is topermit the journalist to conceal his/her deliberate fallacies in argumentation from



21/26


the reader. Impressed by the authority of the person whose words are quoted thereader takes the argumentation less critically. By a logical fallacy we understandviolation of rules, laws and patterns of logic (Freeman, 1991; Van Eemeren andGrootendorst, 1984, 1992). Violation of communication maxims, moral codesand journalistic ethics are not included herein.

In the reviewed material reported speech was not infrequently used tointroduce fallacious arguments. For example, journalists proclaim one thesis andactually prove another such fallacy in logics got the name ignoratio elenchi :

(34) Commercial cultivation of genetically modified maize is to be approved.

The initially proclaimed discussion of pros and cons of commercial cultiv-ation of genetically modified maize turns into the argument about reliability of

the results of farm-scale evaluations of the effects of GM crops. The reader be-comes involved in the emotionally coloured exchange of arguments betweenreputable organizations ( the environmental audit committee, The Department forEnvironment, The Royal Society, the National Academy of Science). Using reportedspeech in the position of the argument the journalist prevents the reader fromnoticing the fact that the thesis has been changed.

More details about the use of reported speech with the aim to conceal dif-ferent types of fallacies can be found in (2005).

Besides, reported speech in the position of an argument can be used for thepurpose of refutation: the words of the opponent are quoted to reveal weak pointsin his/her argumentation and to put forward counter-arguments:

(35) In his spirited rejoinder, Michael Palmer makes the absurd statement that as ageneral rule, those who are clever, innovative and hard-working become morewealthy than those who are not.

A massive amount of wealth is simply inherited, and so it has nothing at all to dowith being clever, innovative and hard-working.

Take figures for the US: the richest 1% inherit about one-third of the inheritedwealth, the next 9% inherit another third, whereas the remaining 90% inheritwealth averaging $40,000. ( The Herald , Saturday 6 March 2004, p. 12)



22/26


In this argumentation the author first quotes the words of his antagonist whenintroducing the thesis (or, actually, antithesis) of his argumentation. Then in hisargument, which is further supported by quoting exact figures, he uses again thesection of the initial quotation that seems to him most unacceptable. He turns theantagonists proper words containing his evaluation of the rich against him.

5. ConclusionThe conducted research yielded the following results:

1. Reported speech is an important element of contemporary argumentativenewspaper discourse of Great Britain.

2. The integral approach to linguistic phenomena proposed in this article com-bines linguistics with logic and argumentation theory. This approach allowed

us to see the relations between purely linguistic (syntactic and semantic)characteristics of reported speech with its functioning in argumentativediscourse of British press.

3. Reported speech in argumentative newspaper discourse is presented to thereader in such a way that it would influence the addressee most efficientlyaccording to argumentative intentions of the author. Linguistic character-istics of reported speech (syntax and semantics) are subordinated to thisgeneral aim.

4. The choice of syntactic structure of reported speech depends on the argu-

mentative position of the author. A classification of syntactic structures usedfor reported speech in newspaper discourse of Modern British English basedon literalness criterion has been proposed. Literal structures are less risky inthe way of responsibility of the author for the content of the quoted words.Liberal structures are more obedient to the author and let him/her enforceupon the reader the required attitude to the reported utterance. Combinedstructures uniting literal and liberal ones are used more rarely due to theirlarge volume.

5. In the way of semantics, all elements of structures with reported speech playtheir role in the overall impact on the reader. Thus, the predicates replacedirect authors comment and serve as a clue for further interpretation of thequotation. The agent and the appositive element provide characteristics ofthe quoted person and justify his/her right to make judgements on the issuesdiscussed as an authority. The selection of the quoted segment of utteranceand its logic type are also important for influencing the readers.

6. Reported speech can be both a thesis and an argument of newspaper argu-mentation. The use of reported speech as an argument is more common.

7. As a thesis of argumentation reported speech introduces mainly normativeand evaluative utterances or descriptive utterances about future events. Allthese types of utterances in the position of thesis call for dialectic rather thanformally logic reasoning. As the thesis of argumentation, reported speechperforms the following functions: function of additional support of the thesis



23/26


at the very stage of its proclamation, function of the shift of responsibility,aesthetic function and indication of the authorship of the article.

8. Reported speech in the position of an argument in British newspaper discoursecan be either a pure argument to authority or a combination of an argu-ment to authority with an argument of another type. Worship of authorityis not characteristic of European culture, and pure appeal to authority is notvery convincing to the reader and is not often used. Reference to authorityis usually combined with other arguments: logic proof, teleological proof,appeal to emotions, appeal to public opinion and empirical proof. The con-ducted experiment showed that the reader is primarily influenced by thecontents of the quoted utterance. However, reference to authority is an effec-tive argumentative strategy that can considerably increase the overall effect.Reported speech in the position of an argument fulfils first of all the func-tion of conviction and persuasion and two additional functions: function of

concealing logical fallacies and function of refutation.

N O T E S

1. Notation conventions:

relations of support between the thesis and an argument or between twoarguments.

relations of refutation between thesis and argument or between twoarguments.

* reconstructed implicit elements of argumentation. coordinative relations between arguments.

2. For the experiment native-speakers were divided into two groups. Each group wasgiven a text of the article Ban on Parents Using Science to Select Childs Sex takenfrom The Times (Wednesday 12 November 2003, p. 6) devoted to the question of howethical it is to select the sex of your future baby by means of modern medical tech-niques. To support the claim that this is unacceptable the author puts forward eightarguments in the form of reported speech. In the texts presented to the first group,structures with reported speech were left as they were in the newspaper, and in thetext presented to the second group the appeal to authority was withdrawn the text

contained only the quoted words themselves. Respondents were asked to react to thesearguments and characterize their reaction using a scale from strongly agree (5) tostrongly disagree (1). It is already common knowledge that reaction to argumentationlargely depends on the initial opinion of the recipients on the question discussed, theirdemands, experience, knowledge, background, philosophy, etc. They tend to acceptmore readily the arguments that coincide with their initial opinion and vice versa.Taking this into consideration before presenting the arguments we asked the par-ticipants of our experiment to express their initial opinion on the problem in question(in favour/more in favour/indifferent/more against/against). At the stage of resultsanalysis we introduced coefficients that were supposed to minimize the effect of the

readers prejudice on his/her evaluation of arguments. If opinions of the reader andthe journalist coincide, the latter tends to give higher evaluation to the arguments.That is why for these cases we used coefficients 1. Finally, averageconvictive force of each argument for both groups of respondents was calculated.



24/26


R E F E R E N C E S

Anscombre, J.-C. and Ducrot, O. (1983) Largumentation dans la langue . Brussels: Mardaga.Authier-Revuz, J. (1997) Modalisation autonymique et discours autre, Modles

linguistiques 35(XVIII) fas.1: 3351.Bakhtin, M.M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays . Austin: University of Texas Press.Bakhtin, M.M. (1984) Problems of Dostoevskys Poetics . Minneapolis, MN: University of

Minnesota Press.Bakhtin, M.M. (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays . Austin: University of Texas Press.Blair, J.A. and Johnson, R.H. (1997) Argumentation as Dialectical, Argumentation 1(1):

4156.Bolden, G. (2004) The Quote and Beyond: Defining Boundaries of Reported Speech in

Conversational Russian, Journal of Pragmatics 36(6): 1071118.Buttny, R. (1998) Putting Prior Talk into Context: Reported Speech and the Reporting

Context, Research on Language and Social Interaction 31(1): 4558.Calsamiglia, H. and Ferrero, C.L. (2003) Role and Position of Scientific Voices: Reported

Speech in the Media, Discourse Studies 5(2): 14773.Clark, H.H. and Gerrig, R.J. (1990) Quotations as Demonstrations, Language 66(4):

764805.Derrida, J. (1978) Writing and Difference . London: Routledge.Ducrot, O. (1984) Le dire et le dit . Paris: Minuit.Fillmore, C.J. (1968) The Case for Case, in E. Bach, C.J. Fillmore, R.T. Harms, P. Kiparsky

and J.D. Maccawley (eds) Universals in Linguistic Theory , pp. 188. New York: Holt,Rinehart & Winston.

Freeman, J.B. (1991) Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments: A Theory of ArgumentStructure. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Goffman, E. (1981) Forms of Talk . Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Gordon, C. (2006) Reshaping Prior Text, Reshaping Identities, Text & Talk 26(45):

54571.Guenthner, S. (1999) Polyphony and the Layering of Voices in Reported Dialogues:

An Analysis of the Use of Prosodic Devices in Everyday Reported Speech, Journal ofPragmatics 31(5): 685708.

Holt, E. (2000) Reporting and Reacting: Concurrent Responses to Reported Speech,Research on Language and Social Interaction 33(4): 42554.

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1979) De la semantique lexicale a la semantique de lenonciation. Lille: Universit de Lille.

Kristeva, J. (1969) Le mot, le dialogue et le roman, in Smiotik, Recherches pour unesmanalyse , pp. 82112. Paris: Seuil.

May, J.D. (1991) Practical Arguments, in Proceedings of the Second International Conferenceon Argumentation , vol. 1, pp. 25966. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Morawski, S. (1970) The Basic Function of Quotation, in Sign. Language. Culture , pp.690705. The Hague: Mouton.

Mullen, J.D. and Roth, B.M. (1991) Decision Theoretic Models of Practical Reasoning, inProceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation , vol. 1, pp. 27180.Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969) The New Rhetoric: A Treatise On Argumentation. Notre Dame, IN: Indiana University Press.

Perrin, L. (1994) Mots ou enonces mentionnes dans le discours, Cahiers de linguistique franaise 15: 21748.

Rey-Debove, J. (1978) Le metalangage . Paris: Le Robert.



25/26


Roberts, K.G. (2004) Liminality, Authority, and Value: Reported Speech in EpideicticRhetoric, Communication Theory 14(3): 26484.

Rosier, L. (1997) Le discours rapporte entre binarite et continuum?, Modles linguistiques 35(XVIII), fas. 1: 716.

Stern, K. (1991) Argument and Convictive Force, in Proceedings of the Second Inter-

national Conference on Argumentation , vol. 1, pp. 11722. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Thompson, G. (1996) Voices in the Text: Discourse Perspectives on Language Reports,Applied Linguistics 17(4): 5013.

Toulmin, S.E. (1958) The Uses of Argument . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Van Dijk, T.A. (1980) Macrostructures: An Interdisciplinary Study of Global Structures in

Discourse, Interaction, and Cognition . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Van Eemeren, F.H. and Grootendorst, R. (1984) Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions .

Dordrecht: Foris.Van Eemeren, F.H. and Grootendorst, R. (1992) Argumentation, Communication, and

Fallacies . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Waugh, L.R. (1995). Reported Speech in Journalistic Discourse: The Relation of Functionand Text, Text 15(1): 12973.Weddle, P. (1991) Resurrecting the Practical Argument, in Proceedings of the Second Inter-

national Conference on Argumentation , vol. 1, pp. 26770. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Weizman, E. (1984) Some Register Characteristics of Journalistic Language: Are they

Universals?, Applied Linguistics 5(1): 3950., .. (1999) . . . : -

., .. (2001) . : -

. - .

, . (1994) : . . : ., .. (2000) . .: .-, .. (2001) . : - ., .. (1986) . : -

. - ., .. (1981) , IV. . 567,

318. : - . - ., .. (2004)

, . 21625. : . . . .

, .. (2005) , ,935. : .

, .. (2007) . - , ,358. . 2 : . .. .

, .., , .. (2005) , , , - .. 9. . . . . 4 .

, .. (1996) . .



26/26


A L L A V I TA L J E V N A S M I R N O VA , born in Samara, Russia, was educated at gymnasiumNo. 11 and Samara State University, Philological Faculty, English Department. In 2002

she graduated with honours and the same year entered St Petersburg State University,Philological Faculty, Chair of English Philology and Translation for postgraduate studiesin linguistics. In 2006 she obtained the degree of the candidate of philological sciences(equivalent to PhD in linguistics). Since then she has worked as an independent scholarand translator for Rosneft Oil Company. A D D R E S S : ul. Novo-Sadovaya, 42721, Samara443110, Russia. [email: [email protected]]

Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	elentsche
View:	237 times
Download:	0 times

Reported speech as an element of argumentative newspaper discourse

Documents