Advertisement

Locations of Controversy

  • Peter A. Cramer
Chapter
Part of the Argumentation Library book series (ARGA, volume 19)

Abstract

The narrated news event and the news reading situation are two key locations of controversy that are highlighted in the study of controversy as news discourse. In contrast to the direct dialogue of the classical speaking situation, the indirect dialogues of news discourse toggle attention between the narration of the journalist and the pragmatic interaction of the narrated interlocutors. If the classical speaking situation depicts an ideal pragmatic interaction, news discourse depicts a pragmatic engagement that is mediated by a reporting situation and situated in historical and social contexts. In narrated news events, controversy appears as a constituent of the these various levels of context. When approached with certain genres of reading, the formulas of news discourse help to position the reader and the text artifact in a larger public space in which controversy unfolds.

Keywords

News Article News Event Speech Event Speech Situation Reading Event 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Agha, A. 2007. Language and social relations, Studies in the social and cultural foundations of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Allport, F. 1924a. Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  3. Allport, F. 1924b. The group fallacy in relation to social science. American Journal of Sociology 29: 688–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andrus, J. 2011. Beyond texts in context: Recontextualization and the co-production of texts and contexts in the legal discourse, excited utterance exception to hearsay. Discourse & Society 22(2): 115–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bell, A. 1991. The language of news media. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  6. Biber, D. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge, UK/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Blair, J.A. 1998. The limits of the dialogue model of argument. Argumentation 12: 325–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Clark, C.D. 1933. The concept of the public. Southwestern Social Science Quarterly 13: 311–320.Google Scholar
  9. Dewey, J. 1927. The public and its problems. New York: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
  10. Elliott, W. 1931. The possibility of a science of politics: With special attention to methods suggested by William B. Munro and George E.G. Catlin. In Methods in social science, a case book, 70–94. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eubank, E. 1927. The concepts of sociology. Social Forces 5: 386–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hauser, G. 1999. Vernacular voices. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  13. Haviland, J.B. 1996. Text from talk in Tzotzil. In Natural histories of discourse, ed. M. Silverstein and G. Urban, 45–78. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  14. Holcombe, A. 1925. National conference on the science of politics round table on political statistics: The measurement of public opinion. The American Political Science Review 18: 123–126.Google Scholar
  15. Lippmann, W. 1925. The phantom public. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
  16. Lunberg, G.A. 1930. Public opinion from a behavioristic viewpoint. American Journal of Sociology 36: 387–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Macdowall, I., and Reuters Ltd. 1992. Reuters handbook for journalists. Oxford/Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.Google Scholar
  18. Plato, R.W. Sterling, and W.C. Scott. 1996. The republic. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  19. Schudson, M. 1978. Discovering the news: A social history of American newspapers. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  20. Silverstein, M. 1976. Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. In Meaning in anthropology, 11–56. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
  21. Silverstein, M. 1979. Language structure and linguistic ideology. In The elements: A parasession on linguistic units and levels, April 20–21, 1979: [proceedings], Conference on Non-Slavic Languages of the USSR, ed. P.R. Clyne, C.L. Hofbauer and W.F. Hanks, 193–247. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
  22. Silverstein, M. 1993. Metapragmatic discourse and metapragmatic function. In Reflexive language: Reported speech and metapragmatics, 33–58. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Silverstein, M. 1996. The secret life of texts. In Natural histories of discourse, ed. M. Silverstein and G. Urban, 81–105. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  24. Tannen, D. 1986. Introducing constructed dialogue in Greek and American conversational narrative. In Direct and indirect speech, 311–332. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Urban, G. 1996. Entextualization, replication, power. In Natural histories of discourse, ed. M. Silverstein and G. Urban, 21–44. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Wichelns, H.A. 1966. Literary criticism of oratory. In The rhetorical idiom; essays in rhetoric, oratory, language, and drama, 5–42. New York: Russell & Russell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EnglishSimon Fraser UniversityBurnabyCanada

Personalised recommendations