Page 225 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 225
Analysis of Insulting Practices 225
– Sticks and Stones in the Croatian
Parliament
Alma Vančura, University of Osijek
and Diana Tomić, University of Zagreb
“It’s interesting how people cling to insults or what they think is an insult.“
(House M.D., S07/E15)
Summary
The aim of this paper is to study the forms and functions of insults in the Croatian
Parliament and compare them with recorded instances of insults found in the British
and the Swedish parliaments. The corpus for analysis includes transcripts of two ses-
sions of the 6th Parliamentary assembly and 5 randomly selected sessions from each
of the previous assemblies. The corpus includes Aktualno prijepodne (i.e. Question
time) as well. Levels of analysis are: forms of (un)parliamentary polarization, mitiga-
tion strategies and identification of convergence (between a group of like-minded
politicians) and divergence (between opposing groups) by usage of insults and de-
rogatory terms. Reactions to the insults were analyzed as part of the identification
process, as it was noted that the Members of Parliament (MPs) were often offend-
ed by the insult and wanted to comment on it, even when the insult was not person-
ally addressed to them.
The results show, as expected, that the MPs of the Croatian Parliament are polar-
ized. The offensive expressions are based on pathos in first Assemblies, while later
change to ethos-oriented logos, mainly trying to discredit the MPs’ credibility, with
occurrences of ad hominem arguments. The preferred mitigation strategies are at-
tribution transfer, followed by formulation of insults as questions rather than state-
ments. Unification of politicians is purely along the party-line and is shown through
forms of address, the procedures to respond to offensive phrases, labelling and ste-
reotypes.
Key words: insults, insulting practices, Croatian parliament, mitigating strategies,
logos, pathos and ethos
– Sticks and Stones in the Croatian
Parliament
Alma Vančura, University of Osijek
and Diana Tomić, University of Zagreb
“It’s interesting how people cling to insults or what they think is an insult.“
(House M.D., S07/E15)
Summary
The aim of this paper is to study the forms and functions of insults in the Croatian
Parliament and compare them with recorded instances of insults found in the British
and the Swedish parliaments. The corpus for analysis includes transcripts of two ses-
sions of the 6th Parliamentary assembly and 5 randomly selected sessions from each
of the previous assemblies. The corpus includes Aktualno prijepodne (i.e. Question
time) as well. Levels of analysis are: forms of (un)parliamentary polarization, mitiga-
tion strategies and identification of convergence (between a group of like-minded
politicians) and divergence (between opposing groups) by usage of insults and de-
rogatory terms. Reactions to the insults were analyzed as part of the identification
process, as it was noted that the Members of Parliament (MPs) were often offend-
ed by the insult and wanted to comment on it, even when the insult was not person-
ally addressed to them.
The results show, as expected, that the MPs of the Croatian Parliament are polar-
ized. The offensive expressions are based on pathos in first Assemblies, while later
change to ethos-oriented logos, mainly trying to discredit the MPs’ credibility, with
occurrences of ad hominem arguments. The preferred mitigation strategies are at-
tribution transfer, followed by formulation of insults as questions rather than state-
ments. Unification of politicians is purely along the party-line and is shown through
forms of address, the procedures to respond to offensive phrases, labelling and ste-
reotypes.
Key words: insults, insulting practices, Croatian parliament, mitigating strategies,
logos, pathos and ethos
