The role of misused concepts in manufacturing consent

Allott, Nicholas

doi:10.1075/dapsac.17.08all

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Il est remarquable d'ailleurs qu'à certains, Vandel ne se contente pas de dire que le «Nouvel An» 2000 tombera un vendredi 13, mais précise même que «le 1 er janvier 2000 tombera un vendredi 13», l'explicitation complète de la date n'affectant pas l'effet obtenu. 10 Le traitement superficiel de l'information (shallow processing) se produit lorsque le contenu d'une expression conceptuelle se trouve réduit à une information minimale qui permet de maintenir la présomption de pertinence (pour la notion de shallow processing, voir Carpenter & Just 1983; pour une discussion de son application au discours persuasif, voir Allott 2005). La fameuse «blague des survivants» est un exemple classique de traitement superficiel de l'information: on demande à la victime où doivent être enterrées les survivants d'un crash d'avion qui se produit exactement à la frontière entre deux pays (voir aussi Oswald 2010).…”

Section: Pertinence D'arrière-plan: Deux Exemplesunclassified

Rhétorique et cognition - Rhetoric and Cognition

Herman¹,

Oswald²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mis en lumière. Il s'inscrit dans la ligne directrice de cet ouvrage: les effets cognitifs de stratégies linguistiques dans des contextes rhétoriques de tentatives de persuasion.Avec la contribution de Louis de Saussure, la réflexion sur l'importance de la présupposition dans les mouvements persuasifs est prolongée. Examinant les questions d'accommodation des présuppositions, Saussure considère le phénomène de présupposition de manière large en ce que des contenus inférés peuvent aussi être considérés comme des présuppositions. sur laquelle il repose indétectable, soit, en termes cognitifs, non pertinente (difficilement accessible et épistémiquement faible).Au final, même si certaines contributions diffèrent profondément, nous avons voulu un livre traversé d'une part par l'interdisciplinarité nécessaire entre sciences du langage, sciences cognitives et sciences sociales qu'exige la rhétorique et, d'autre part, par l'examen de multiples schèmes argumentatifs, fallacieux ou non, dans leurs formes, leurs effets et, pour certaines contributions, dans le cadre de pratiques discursives délimitées. Adoptant une posture descriptive et explicative visant à comprendre la mécanique de ces schèmes, les contributeurs de ce volume montrent, explicitement ou non, l'avantage de reconsidérer la rhétorique sous l'angle cognitif, avantage qui nous semblait assez peu mis en valeur dans les publications récentes révélant, elles, toute la vivacité et l'actualité de la rhétorique. Plusieurs propositions originales ou hypothèses stimulantes émaillent cet ouvrage: on espère qu'elles inspireront tant les chercheurs spécialisés en rhétorique et sciences du langage à aller voir du côté de la psychologie cognitive que les spécialistes de ce domaine à mettre en évidence la rhétoricité de leurs recherches.hypotheses emerge throughout this volume: we hope that these will inspire researchers in the language sciences who specialise in rhetoric to take on board cognitive scientific insights and also researchers in cognitive science to engage with the rhetoricity of their own research.

show abstract

Section: Pertinence D'arrière-plan: Deux Exemplesunclassified

Rhétorique et cognition - Rhetoric and Cognition

Herman¹,

Oswald²

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is here a similarity with continental and other trends in philosophy that see discourse, language and speech as means of power -or as being a form of power itself. On the other hand, Utterance approaches have also showed that semantic and pragmatic features of the utterance itself are a key to manipulative uses of language (see Allott 2005, Choi and Nisbett and Smith 1997, Saussure 2005b, still without commitment to the notion of 'discourse' as a structured whole, and without the generalization that discourse or language is always in relation with power, as claimed by trends in continental philosophy. 3 This last point is important since Discourse approaches are more like tools for the analyst than explanation of natural language understanding procedures, although some theories aim at bridging the gap between the two, following the pioneering work of Searle when he, so to speak, made the Austin-Grice interface through the architecture of illocutionary force applied to a propositional content that could take into account intentional implicit meaning.…”

Section:  Discourses As Wholes Discourses As Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Procedural pragmatics and the study of discourse

Saussure

2007

P&C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term discourse is generally used either as a technical equivalent for 'verbal communication' or as referring to a particular scientific notion, where discourses are spans of texts or of utterances obeying specific principles of organisation. The aim of this paper is to suggest that an account of discourse is possible, in both cases, only through a theory of utterance-meaning construction. If discourse stands for verbal communication, then it can be explained only with regard to speaker's intended meaning. If discourse stands for organised spans of texts or utterances, then they must be meaningful spans of texts or meaningful utterances. Yet it is argued that a pragmatic explanation of meaning provides all the elements that discourse analysis describes. In the end, the paper claims that a theory of context combined with a theory on the semantic-pragmatic interface should prove sufficient to explain discourse, in whichever sense, along the idea that discourse should be viewed as a process, not as a whole, following the claims of a number of scholars in the field. A possible way to tackle this process is proposed in terms of procedures through the approach of procedural pragmatics. (2003) he developed an algorithmic method inspired by cognitive pragmatics in order to account for the interpretive procedures and thus increase the operability of the philosophical concepts and principles proposed by such approaches. He is now also interested in wider problems of language and cognition such as manipulative and fallacious discourse; he recently co-edited a book on this topic, Manipulation and Ideologies in the 20th century: Discourse, language, mind (2005).

show abstract

“…Allott (2005) also suggests that pragmatic features are key to revealing manipulative uses of language (cited in de Saussure, 2007: 183).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Manipulative uses of pragmatic markers in political discourse

Furkó

2017

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pragmatic markers comprise a functional class of linguistic items that do not typically change the propositional meaning of an utterance but are essential for the organization and structuring of discourse, for marking the speaker's attitudes to the proposition being expressed as well as for facilitating processes of pragmatic inferences. Pragmatic marker research has been characterised by descriptive approaches: even case studies that take their data from political discourse tend to focus on linguistic patterns of co-occurrence and sequentiality rather than social-institutional norms or broader societal concerns. The novelty of this article is, therefore, in linking pragmatic marker research, a primarily discourse analytical, language-oriented field to the broader field of Discourse Studies with a focus on manipulative social practices and their manifestations in discursive strategies. This article analyses evidential markers, general extenders, quotation markers and markers of (un)certainty 1 in political interviews broadcasted by the BBC, CNN and Hungarian ATV. After a short overview of the formal and functional characteristics of pragmatic markers and their relevance to Discourse Studies in general and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) research in particular, characteristics of the political interview as political discourse, institutional discourse and media(tised) discourse are discussed. In the second part, the results of previous (primarily descriptive and genre analytical) research are reconsidered from the perspective of CDA and particular pragmatic markers are associated with manifestations of manipulative intent, such as suppression, polarization, recontextualising, conversationalisation and intended ambiguity. An important finding of this study is that a single pragmatic marker can serve several manipulative functions, while a given manipulative strategy is potentially realized by a variety of pragmatic items. Potential manipulative uses are exemplified with a view to applying the heuristic to the analysis of representations of particular political events and happenings, which is a direction for further research.

show abstract

The role of misused concepts in manufacturing consent

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Rhétorique et cognition - Rhetoric and Cognition

Rhétorique et cognition - Rhetoric and Cognition

Procedural pragmatics and the study of discourse

Manipulative uses of pragmatic markers in political discourse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About