in contemporary foreign linguistics (2010–2018)
The new insights into studies of political communication that have been coming from the tradition
of cognitive linguistics have rested mainly on the methodologies already standard in the
field of political linguistics overall. However, scholars continue applying traditional rhetoric
methods to political communication analysis. This paper reviews the methodology of rhetorical
analysis of political communication in contemporary foreign linguistics within 2010−2018. The
main trends of rhetorical researches are delineated, namely rhetorical criticism, reframing, semiotic
analysis, and textual analysis. The widely spread topics of rhetorical studies are identified:
theoretical and methodological investigations; studies of political leaders’ idiolects; metaphorological
studies; researches into institutional discourses; analysis of rhetorical strategies;
contrastive investigations. The distinctive feature of the contemporary rhetorical approach is that
its methodological boundaries are diffusive. The contemporary rhetorical approach to political
communication covers both traditional rhetoric methodology and heuristics of other approaches
such as cognitive linguistics and discourse analysis.
Anikin E. E., Budaev E. V., Chudinov A. P. Historical dynamics of metaphoric systems
in Russian political communication // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2015.
№ 3. С. 26–32.
Antelmi D., Santulli F. The presentation of a new Government to Parliament from
ritual to personalisation: A case study from Italy // European Parliaments under Scrutiny.
Discourse strategies and interaction practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010.
P. 111–134.
Arthur D., Woods J. The Contextual Presidency: The Negative Shift in Presidential
Immigration Rhetoric // Presidential Studies Quaterly. 2013. Vol. 43, issue 3. P. 468–
489.
Baur J. E., Parker E., Buckley M. R., Ferris G. R. More than one way to articulate
a vision: A configurations approach to leader charismatic rhetoric and influence //
The Leadership Quarterly. 2016. Vol. 27, issue 1. P. 156–171.
Benoit W. A functional analysis of presidential television advertisements. Lanham:
Lexington Books, 2014a. 284 p.
Benoit W. Political Election Debates: Informing Voters about Policy and Character.
Lanham: Lexington Books, 2014b. 144 p.
Bevitori C. Negotiating conflict: Interruptions in British and Italian parliamentary
debates // Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse / Ed. by P. Bayley.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004. P. 87–110.
Bruteig Y. M. Czech parliamentary discourse: Parliamentary interactions and the
construction of the addressee // European Parliaments under Scrutiny. Discourse strategies
and interaction practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. P. 265–302.
Budayev E. V., Chudinov A. P. Zarubezhnaya politicheskaya lingvistika [Foreign political
linguistics]. Moscow, Flinta, Nauka, 2008, 352 p.
Budayev E. V., Chudinov A. P. Metafora v politicheskoy kommunikatsii [Metaphor in political
communication]. Moscow, Flinta, Nauka, 2012, 248 p.
Budayev E. V., Chudinov A. P. Ritoricheskoye napravleniye v issledovanii politicheskoy
metafory [Rhetorical direction in the study of political metaphors]. Respectus Philologicus. 2006,
no. 9 (14), pp. 10–19.
Coe K., Schmidt A. America in Black and White: Locating Race in the Modern Presidency,
1933–2011 // Journal of Communication. 2012. Vol. 62, issue 4. P. 609–627.
Debras C., L’Hôte E. Framing, metaphor and dialogue: A multimodal approach to
party conference speeches // Metaphor and the Social World. 2015. Vol. 5 (2). P. 177–
204.
Didriksen A., Gjesdal A. M. On what is not said and who said it: Argumentative
connectives in Nicolas Sarkozy’s speeches to the European Parliament // Speaking of
Europe. Approaches to complexity in European political discourse / Ed. by K. Fløttum.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2013. P. 85–110.
Ewald P. Rostock, das Sydney der Ostsee – Zur Spezifik von Namenmetaphern //
Methoden der Metaphernforschung und –analyse / M. Junge (Hrsg.). Wiesbaden:
Springer, 2014. S. 197–213.
Gherairi J. Persuasion durch Protest. Protest als Form erfolgsorientierter, strategischer
Kommunikation. Wiesbaden: Springer, 2015. 612 S.
Gries L. Still Life with Rhetoric: A New Materialist Approach for Visual Rhetorics.
Logan: Utah State University Press, 2015. 336 p.
Hernández-Guerra C. Textual, intertextual and rhetorical features in political discourse:
the case of President Obama in Europe // Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas
Aplicadas. 2013. Vol. 8. P. 59–65.
Ilie C. Insulting as (un)parliamentary practice in the British and Swedish parliaments:
A rhetorical approach // Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse
/ Ed. by P. Bayley. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004. P. 45–86.
Ilie C. Managing dissent and interpersonal relations in the Romanian parliamentary
discourse // European Parliaments under Scrutiny. Discourse strategies and interaction
practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. P. 193–222.
Inigo-Mora I. Rhetorical Strategies in the British and Spanish parliaments // European
Parliaments under Scrutiny. Discourse strategies and interaction practices. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins, 2010. P. 329–372.
Kjeldsen J. E. Speaking to Europe: A Rhetorical approach to Prime Minister Tony
Blair’s speech to the EU Parliament // Speaking of Europe. Approaches to complexity
in European political discourse / Ed. by K. Fløttum. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2013.
P. 19–42.
Lorda C. U. The Government control function of the French National Assembly in
Questions au gouvernement // European Parliaments under Scrutiny. Discourse strategies
and interaction practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. P. 165–190.
Mandziuk R. M. Whither the good wife? 2016 presidential candidate spouses in the
gendered spaces of contemporary politics // Quarterly Journal of Speech. 2016. Vol. 4.
P. 1–24.
Marques M. A. The public and private sphere in parliamentary debate: The construction
of the addresser in the Portuguese Parliament // European Parliaments under Scrutiny.
Discourse strategies and interaction practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010.
P. 79–108.
McComiskey B. Dialectical Rhetoric. Logan: Utah State University Press, 2015. 228 p.
Middleton M., Hess A., Endres D., Senda-Cook S. Participatory Critical Rhetoric.
Theoretical and Methodological Foundations for Studying Rhetoric in Situ. Lanham,
MD: Lexington Books, 2015. 240 p.
Nilsson B., Lundgren A. Logics of rurality: Political rhetoric about the Swedish
North // Journal of Rural Studies. 2015. Vol. 37. P. 85–95.
Ornatowski C. M. Parliamentary discourse and political transition: Polish Parliament
after 1989 // European Parliaments under Scrutiny. Discourse strategies and interaction
practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010. P. 223–264.
Plug H. J. Ad-hominem arguments in the Dutch and the European Parliaments: Strategic
manoeuvring in an institutional context // European Parliaments under Scrutiny.
Discourse strategies and interaction practices. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2010.
P. 305–328.
Ritchie L. D., Thomas M. A “glowing marble”: “brushed with clouds” or “parched,
scorched, and washed away”? Obama’s use of contrasting metaphors and stories in
framing climate change // Metaphor and the Social World. 2015. Vol. 5. P. 1–19.
Simpson P., Mayr A. Language and Power. London; New York: Routledge, 2010.
272 p.
Stuckey M. Political Rhetoric. A presidential briefings. New Brunswick: Transaction
Publishers, 2015. 125 p.
Trager R., Vavreck L. The Political Costs of Crisis Bargaining: Presidential Rhetoric
and the Role of Party // American Journal of Political Science. 2011. Vol. 55, issue 3.
P. 526–545.
Zarefsky D. Rhetorical Perspectives on Argumentation. New York: Springer, 2014.
265 p.
Zima E., Brône G., Feyaerts K. Patterns of interaction in Austrian parliamentary debates:
On the pragmasemantics of unauthorized interruptive comments // European Parliaments
under Scrutiny. Discourse strategies and interaction practices. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins, 2010. P. 135–164.
in contemporary foreign linguistics (2010–2018) // Сибирский филологический журнал. 2019. № 4. Pp. 187–196. DOI: 10.17223/18137083/69/16.