Main Article Content
This study pragmatically investigates incivility in the first Trump-Biden American political debate. This topic is chosen for its significant negative impact on both individuals and society as a whole, particularly in the political arena. The current study endeavors to achieve the following aims:(1) Specifying the types of incivility used in the Trump-Biden first American political debate, (2) Identifying the prevailing functions of incivility in the chosen data, (3) Finding out the pragmatic strategies employed by the two rivals. To achieve these aims, the following procedures are adopted: (1) Presenting a literature review about the pragmatics of incivility, (2) Adopting an eclectic model to analyze the chosen data pragmatically, and (3) Analyzing the data both qualitatively and quantitatively to come up with some conclusions. The fundamental conclusion of the current study is that debaters in American political debates employ three types of incivility, namely, invectives and ridicule, hyperbole and distortion, and emotionality and histrionics. These three types are pragmatically realized through different pragmatic strategies, such as speech acts, non-observance of maxims, impoliteness strategies, and argumentative appeals.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
This open-access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
You are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format. Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
How to Cite
Bentivegna, S., Regas, R., & Artieri, G. B. (2022). Evaluations and Perceptions of
Political Incivility. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Political Science Association, Montréal, September 15-18
Burkhardt, M.A.,& Nathaniel, A., K.(2020).Ethics & Issues in Contemporary Nursing:
Nursing Ethics for the 21st Century . Beijing :Elsevier.
Chen, G. M., & Lu, S. N. (2017). Online Political Discourse: Exploring Differences in
Effects of Civil and Uncivil Disagreement in News Website Comments. Journal
of Broadcasting &Electronic Media,61(1),108-125.
Ciocco, M.(2018).Facts on Combating Nurse, Bullying, Incivility and Workplace
Violance. New York: Springer.
Clark, C.(2022).Core Competencies of Civility in Nursing & Healthcare.
Indianapolis: Sigma Theta Tau International.
Cortina, L. M .& Magley ,V. J.(2009). Patterns and Profiles of Response to Incivility in
the Workplace. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology , Vol. 14,
Coopman, S. J. and J. Lull (2012). Public Speaking: The Evolving Art (2nd ed.).
Boston: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. London: Longman
Donald, K. (2013). Engaging with workplace incivility through valuable actions: A
conflict transformation and care-focused perspective(Doctoral dissertation).
Durvasula, R.S.(2019). How to Stay Sane in An Era of Narcissism,
Entitlement, and Incivility. New York: Post Hill Press.
Fury, C.( 2005). Invective and Discernment in Martin Luther, D. Erasmus, and Thomas
More. Harvard Theological Review, 98(4): 469-488
Gervais,B.T. (2016). More than mimicry? The role of anger in uncivil reactions to elite
political incivility. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29(3),
Herbst, S. (2010). Rude Democracy: Civility and Incivility in American Politics.
Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Hopp, T. (2019). A network analysis of political incivility dimensions. Communication
and the Public, 4(3), 204-223, https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047319877278.
-lItzkovich, Y., Alt ,D.,& Dolev, N.(1996). The Challenges of Academic Incivility:
Social, Emotional Competencies and Redesign of Learning Environments as
Remedies. New York :Springer.
Leiter, M.(2013). Analyzing and Theorizing the Dynamics of the Workplace Incivility
Crisis. New York: Springer.
Nelson ,D.L., & Quick, J. C.(2013). Organizational Behavior: Science, the Real World,
and You . Mason, OH: Cengage Learning.
Porath, C. (2016).Mastering civility: A manifesto for the workplace. New York: Grand
Shabo, M. E. (2010). Rhetoric, Logic, and Argumentation: A Guide for Student Writers.
Clayton de: Prestwick House, Inc.
Shevchenko, I., Goncharova, T.,& Gutorov, V. (2020). Cognitive pragmatics of
American presidential debates: A case for economic metaphors. Cognition,
Communication, Discourse, 21(3), 36-49.
Twale,D.,& De Luca,B.(2008). Faculty Incivility: The Rise of Academic Bully Culture
and What to Do About I .San Francisco:Jossey –Bass
Van Dijk,T.A. (1997). The Study of Discourse. In: Van Dijk, T. A. (Ed.), Discourse as
Structure and Process. London: Sage Publications, pp. 1-34
----------------.(2002).”Ideology:Political Discourse and Cognition”. In P.Chilton and
Ch.Schaffner (eds.).Politics as Text and Talk .Amsterdam :Benjamines :
Walter, A.S.(2021).Political Incivility in the Parliamentary Electroral and Media
Arena. New York: Routledge.