Page 232 - 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. 232
What Do We Know about the World?
site notions, insults formed as questions, attribution transfer strategy)
devices. All the aforementioned levels of analysis were then placed ac-
cording to Ilie’s (2004) division into layers of (un)parliamentary polar-
ization 4.1., (un)parliamentary mitigation strategies 4.2., and interplay
between in-group identity and inter-group dissent 4.3., expanded by di-
achronic aspect of parliamentary discourse.
Furthermore, we have compared insults in the Croatian Parliament
with the recorded instances of British and Swedish Parliaments (Ilie,
2004; 2009; 2010a) to see whether they vary in forms and functions and
to identify culture-specific correlations between them.
Finally, to get a deeper insight of the possible temporal change of
parliamentary discourse in Croatia, we have observed different sessions
through a period of time in order to get a diachronic perspective that
would show the possible development in the deliberative genre (Habi-
nek, 2005; Ilie, 2004).
4. Results and Discussion
Results show that Croatian MPs use different insulting strategies
to establish the trustworthiness of their party and their own credibility
i.e. their “(rhetorical ethos), primarily by displaying consistency between
their statements and their actions“ (Ilie, 2009: 72) as opposed to other
MPs, representing other parties.
In spite of political and organizational differences between Swed-
ish, British and Croatian Parliaments, we can say that they display some
common features, such as tendency of MPs to exchange rude remarks in
heated debates which are then kept under control by the Speaker. The
possibility of comparison lies in the fact that “rudeness seems to be a
universally occurring phenomenon“ (Ilie, 2004: 51) and that basic rhet-
oric patterns and insulting strategies are shared by the MPs of the previ-
ously mentioned institutions.
4.1. Direct Insulting Strategies: (Un)parliamentary Polarization
Croatian MPs show similar strategies in debates to British MPs in
the sense that they both show a “confrontation-seeking tendency“ (Ilie,
2004: 54) and are not that keen on trying to minimize disagreement as
is the case with the Swedish MPs. The political polarization is based on
party membership, which can be supported by the fact that no instance
of an MP insulting another MP that belongs to his/her party has been
documented. However, polarization in terms of political orientation is
quite common and depends solely on the coalition formed during a par-
site notions, insults formed as questions, attribution transfer strategy)
devices. All the aforementioned levels of analysis were then placed ac-
cording to Ilie’s (2004) division into layers of (un)parliamentary polar-
ization 4.1., (un)parliamentary mitigation strategies 4.2., and interplay
between in-group identity and inter-group dissent 4.3., expanded by di-
achronic aspect of parliamentary discourse.
Furthermore, we have compared insults in the Croatian Parliament
with the recorded instances of British and Swedish Parliaments (Ilie,
2004; 2009; 2010a) to see whether they vary in forms and functions and
to identify culture-specific correlations between them.
Finally, to get a deeper insight of the possible temporal change of
parliamentary discourse in Croatia, we have observed different sessions
through a period of time in order to get a diachronic perspective that
would show the possible development in the deliberative genre (Habi-
nek, 2005; Ilie, 2004).
4. Results and Discussion
Results show that Croatian MPs use different insulting strategies
to establish the trustworthiness of their party and their own credibility
i.e. their “(rhetorical ethos), primarily by displaying consistency between
their statements and their actions“ (Ilie, 2009: 72) as opposed to other
MPs, representing other parties.
In spite of political and organizational differences between Swed-
ish, British and Croatian Parliaments, we can say that they display some
common features, such as tendency of MPs to exchange rude remarks in
heated debates which are then kept under control by the Speaker. The
possibility of comparison lies in the fact that “rudeness seems to be a
universally occurring phenomenon“ (Ilie, 2004: 51) and that basic rhet-
oric patterns and insulting strategies are shared by the MPs of the previ-
ously mentioned institutions.
4.1. Direct Insulting Strategies: (Un)parliamentary Polarization
Croatian MPs show similar strategies in debates to British MPs in
the sense that they both show a “confrontation-seeking tendency“ (Ilie,
2004: 54) and are not that keen on trying to minimize disagreement as
is the case with the Swedish MPs. The political polarization is based on
party membership, which can be supported by the fact that no instance
of an MP insulting another MP that belongs to his/her party has been
documented. However, polarization in terms of political orientation is
quite common and depends solely on the coalition formed during a par-
