Difference between revisions of "Wai2018"
BogdanaHuma (talk | contribs) (BibTeX auto import 2018-11-02 11:29:57) |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
| − | | | + | |BibType=ARTICLE |
| − | | | + | |Author(s)=Brian Lap-ming Wai; Foong Ha Yap; |
|Title=Inclusivity and exclusivity in the use of Cantonese ngo5dei6 (‘we’) in evasive replies in Hong Kong political discourse | |Title=Inclusivity and exclusivity in the use of Cantonese ngo5dei6 (‘we’) in evasive replies in Hong Kong political discourse | ||
| − | |||
|Tag(s)=adversarial questioning; evasion; exclusive “we”; footing shift; inclusive “we”; institutional talk; political; question-answer | |Tag(s)=adversarial questioning; evasion; exclusive “we”; footing shift; inclusive “we”; institutional talk; political; question-answer | ||
| − | | | + | |Key=Wai2018 |
|Year=2018 | |Year=2018 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Discourse & Society | |Journal=Discourse & Society | ||
|Volume=29 | |Volume=29 | ||
|Number=6 | |Number=6 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=691–715 |
| − | |URL=https://doi | + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0957926518802917 |
|DOI=10.1177/0957926518802917 | |DOI=10.1177/0957926518802917 | ||
|Abstract=Politicians frequently face adversarial questions during election time. They often provide evasive replies to veer away from the controversial issues, but such equivocation also distances them from the audience. To deal with this problem, politicians often use the inclusive ‘we’ to identify themselves with the interest of the general public when they equivocate, or they sometimes use the exclusive ‘we’ to shift the responsibility of controversial policies to their political parties. The choice of inclusive versus exclusive ‘we’ in equivocation is not random but is governed by contextual factors, for example, the speech topic, the politician’s affiliation (if any) and the political system within a given culture. In Hong Kong, the Chief Executive Election candidates often do not belong to any political party. In this article, we examine how this unique contextual factor affects the choice of inclusive and exclusive ‘we’ in the evasive replies of politicians in the 2012 Hong Kong Chief Executive Election debates. | |Abstract=Politicians frequently face adversarial questions during election time. They often provide evasive replies to veer away from the controversial issues, but such equivocation also distances them from the audience. To deal with this problem, politicians often use the inclusive ‘we’ to identify themselves with the interest of the general public when they equivocate, or they sometimes use the exclusive ‘we’ to shift the responsibility of controversial policies to their political parties. The choice of inclusive versus exclusive ‘we’ in equivocation is not random but is governed by contextual factors, for example, the speech topic, the politician’s affiliation (if any) and the political system within a given culture. In Hong Kong, the Chief Executive Election candidates often do not belong to any political party. In this article, we examine how this unique contextual factor affects the choice of inclusive and exclusive ‘we’ in the evasive replies of politicians in the 2012 Hong Kong Chief Executive Election debates. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 04:50, 11 January 2020
| Wai2018 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Wai2018 |
| Author(s) | Brian Lap-ming Wai, Foong Ha Yap |
| Title | Inclusivity and exclusivity in the use of Cantonese ngo5dei6 (‘we’) in evasive replies in Hong Kong political discourse |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | adversarial questioning, evasion, exclusive “we”, footing shift, inclusive “we”, institutional talk, political, question-answer |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2018 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse & Society |
| Volume | 29 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 691–715 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/0957926518802917 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Politicians frequently face adversarial questions during election time. They often provide evasive replies to veer away from the controversial issues, but such equivocation also distances them from the audience. To deal with this problem, politicians often use the inclusive ‘we’ to identify themselves with the interest of the general public when they equivocate, or they sometimes use the exclusive ‘we’ to shift the responsibility of controversial policies to their political parties. The choice of inclusive versus exclusive ‘we’ in equivocation is not random but is governed by contextual factors, for example, the speech topic, the politician’s affiliation (if any) and the political system within a given culture. In Hong Kong, the Chief Executive Election candidates often do not belong to any political party. In this article, we examine how this unique contextual factor affects the choice of inclusive and exclusive ‘we’ in the evasive replies of politicians in the 2012 Hong Kong Chief Executive Election debates.
Notes
