A cross-cultural approach to the negotiation of individual and group identities: parliamentary debates and editorial meetings

Abstract

This article draws on interactional pragmatics and a cross-cultural approach (UK, France, Spain) to investigate the negotiation of individual and group identities in two different speech events, parliamentary debates and editorial meetings. The cross-cultural examination of the use of linguistic resources for signalling ‘social role, boundaries and bonds’ (Chilton, P., Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge, 2004, p. 48) serves to explore how speakers use language strategically to position themselves and others, renegotiate or resist positioning, offer rallying points and forge ‘defensible alignments’ (Goffman, E., Forms of Talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1981, p. 325). In the case of personal deixis, it shows that both quantitative and qualitative methods can be used to pinpoint cultural specificities – for example, a more frequent use of explicit performatives in the Spanish and, particularly, the French data to hedge commitment to propositions, and, in English-language parliamentary debate, a use of truth hedging signalling strong commitment for coercive interactive positioning. In the case of indeterminacy of reference, in, for example, the use of ‘asides’, in the English-language editorial meeting humour was used to bond participants in the pursuit of common goals; cultural allusion and references in Latin and English were used in the Spanish parliament for positioning; verbal wit and virtuosity were particularly important in the community of practice of the French parliament.