This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Galasinski, D. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Strategies of Talking to Each Other

Rule Breaking in Polish Presidential Debates

University of Wolverhampton

Two television debates between candidates for the Polish presidency, Aleksander Kwasniewski and Lech Wa4psa were held in the week preceding the second round of elec-tions in 1995. At the beginning of both debates, the moderator explained the rules-agreed to by the two candidates-strictlyapportioning communicative rights. The candidates were not to address each other or refer to each other's statements, restricting their utterances to answering questions posed by the moderator and journalists. In both debates, however, the candidates either addressed the other candidate directly to ask a question or challenge a point, or they directly responded to the opponent's statement, even though the response was irrelevant to the question they had been asked. These actions were usually accompanied by mitigatingdevices. An analysis of these devices is presented and explanation offered as to why in some cases none were used. The devices are discussed as instances of the pretence of cooperation.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. JAWORSKI and D. GALASINSKI Vocative Address Forms and Ideological Legitimization in Political Debates Discourse Studies, February 1, 2000; 2(1): 35 - 53. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. B. Bavelas Theoretical and Methodological Principles of the Equivocation Project Journal of Language and Social Psychology, June 1, 1998; 17(2): 183 - 199. [Abstract]