NAGIOS: RODERIC FUNCIONANDO

Disagreement, epistemic stance and contrastive marking in Catalan parliamentary debate

Repositori DSpace/Manakin

IMPORTANT: Aquest repositori està en una versió antiga des del 3/12/2023. La nova instal.lació está en https://roderic.uv.es/

Disagreement, epistemic stance and contrastive marking in Catalan parliamentary debate

dc.contributor.author	Cuenca Ordiñana, Maria Josep
dc.date.accessioned	2023-11-14T08:09:30Z
dc.date.available	2023-11-15T05:45:07Z
dc.date.issued	2022	es_ES
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/10550/91093
dc.description.abstract	The aim of this paper is to offer a qualitative analysis of the relationship between disagreement, epistemic stance and contrast in parliamentary debate. To this end, all disagreeing moves including both an epistemic stance marker and a contrastive marker equivalent to but have been identified in a corpus of parliamentary debates in Catalan. The epistemic stance markers have been classified considering three main factors: type of marker (epistemic, evidential, attitudinal), epistemic scale (certainty-uncertainty) and position (either in the thesis or in the antithesis). The approach adopted encompasses interactional linguistics and pragmalinguistics as it considers how context variables, such as those related to genre, have an influence on the use and discourse effects of markers of epistemic stance and contrast. The main research questions are two: (i) how genre norms have an incidence on the expression of disagreement and the interpretation of epistemic stance markers, and (ii) how epistemicity and contrast interact with disagreement in parliamentary debate in order to reinforce the speakers' argumentation and block the opponent's opinion, as either questionable or shared knowledge. The analysis shows that disagreeing moves in the corpus establish a long-distance relation with a previous stretch of discourse and trigger a polyphonic strategy that can be expressed through a contrastive construction where epistemic markers qualify either the thesis or the antithesis. In both cases, the disagreeing argument (i.e. the antithesis) is thus reinforced not only when the epistemic stance marker expresses certainty but also when it expresses uncertainty.	es_ES
dc.description.sponsorship	PID2020-119102RB-I00	es_ES
dc.language.iso	en	es_ES
dc.publisher	Elsevier B.V.	es_ES
dc.source	Maria-Josep Cuenca, "Disagreement, epistemic stance and contrastive marking in Catalan parliamentary debate", Journal of Pragmatics, Volume 203, 2023, Pages 1-13.	es_ES
dc.subject	Disagreement	es_ES
dc.subject	Epistemic stance	es_ES
dc.subject	Contrast	es_ES
dc.subject	Parliamentary debate	es_ES
dc.subject	Intensification	es_ES
dc.subject	Catalan	es_ES
dc.title	Disagreement, epistemic stance and contrastive marking in Catalan parliamentary debate	es_ES
dc.type	journal article	es_ES
dc.subject.unesco	UNESCO::LINGÜÍSTICA	es_ES
dc.identifier.doi	10.1016/j.pragma.2022.11.001	es_ES
dc.accrualmethod	HU	es_ES
dc.embargo.terms	0 days	es_ES
dc.type.hasVersion	VoR	es_ES
dc.rights.accessRights	open access	es_ES