JoLIE 18:2/2025

 

Back to issue page

 

 

 

UN/RATIFIED IMPOLITENESS. WAYS OF BEING

IMPOLITE IN THE PORTUGUESE PARLIAMENT

 

 

Maria Aldina MarquesA green circle with white letters AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Escola de Letras, Artes e Ciências Humanas, Universidade do Minho

 

 

 

Abstract

 

This paper examines the manifestations of impoliteness in debates within the Portuguese Parliament, with particular attention to both verbal and non-verbal impolite acts. We conceptualise this integration of verbal (linguistic) and non-verbal (im)politeness within the broader multimodal discursive context as discursive (im)politeness. The analysis adopts an interactional perspective, conceptualising impoliteness as a phenomenon that may be either ratified or unratified by addressees during verbal interaction. At the macro level, impoliteness is treated as a parameter of genre, anticipated and regulated both by the parliamentary rules of procedure and by the informal conventions of parliamentary tradition. At the micro level, within each interaction, impoliteness emerges as both a potential strategic choice of the speaker and an interpretative judgment by the addressees, who may or may not ratify the impolite act. The analysis shows that verbal impoliteness is the most frequent; however, nonverbal impoliteness appears to challenge the traditional boundaries of Portuguese parliamentary tolerance more markedly than verbal impoliteness. In the parliamentary debates analysed, impoliteness is primarily instrumental, functioning as an argumentative strategy that the adversary may also strategically ignore. Therefore, specific acts of impoliteness must be analysed in relation to how ongoing interactions are managed, as well as to the Parliament’s capacity to establish itself as a forum for debate. For the purposes of this study, we examine political debates transcribed in the official records of the Portuguese Parliament (Diário da Assembleia da República), covering the country’s current democratic period.

 

Keywords: Dissent; Politeness; Discursive genre; Portuguese parliamentary debates; Ratified and unratified impoliteness.

 

 

References

 

Ayala, S. P. (2001). FTAs and Erskine May: Conflicting needs? Politeness in question time. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(2), 143-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00002-3

 

Blas Arroyo, J. L. (2001). “No diga chorradas…” La descortesía en el debate político cara a cara. Una aproximación pragma-variacionista. Oralia, 4, 9-46. https://doi.org/10.25115/oralia.v4i1.8468

 

Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in interaction. John Benjamins.

 

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge University Press.

 

Charaudeau, P. (2011). Les medias et l’information. L'impossible transparence du discours. De Boeck Supérieur.

 

Cosnier, J. (1997). Sémiotique des gestes communicatifs. Nouveaux Actes Sémiotiques, 52-53-54, 7-28.

 

Culpeper, J. (2011a). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offense. Cambridge University Press.

 

Culpeper, J. (2011b). Politeness and impoliteness. In G. Andersen, & K. Aijmer (Eds.), Pragmatics of society (pp. 391–436). De Gruyter Mouton.

 

Culpeper, J. (2010). Conventionalized impoliteness formulae. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 3232-3245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.05.007

 

Culpeper, J., & Tantucci, V. (2021). The principle of (im)politeness reciprocity. Journal of Pragmatics, 175, 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.01.008

 

Culpeper, J., & Hardaker, C. (2021). Impoliteness. In J. Culpeper, H. Michael, & D. Kadar (Eds.) Palgrave handbook of (im)politeness (pp. 199–225). Palgrave. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-37508-7_9

 

Culpeper, J., Bousfield, D., & Wichmann, A. (2003). Impoliteness revisited: With special reference to dynamic and prosodic aspects. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(10-11), 1545–1579. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00118-2

 

Fuentes, C. & Alcaide, E. (2008). (Des)cortesía, agresividad y violencia verbal en la sociedad actual. Universidad Internacional de Andalucía.

 

Ilie, C. (2004). Insulting as (un)parliamentary practice in the British and Swedish parliaments: A rhetorical approach. In P. Bayley, (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse (pp. 45-86). John Benjamins.

 

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2010). L’impolitesse en interaction. Lexis. (Special issue 2). https://doi.org/10.4000/lexis.796

 

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2005). Le discours-en-interaction. Armand Colin.

 

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2004). ¿Es universal la cortesía? In D. Bravo, & A. Briz, (Eds.), Pragmática sociocultural: estudios sobre el discurso de cortesía en español (pp. 39-54). Ariel.

 

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1997). Variations culturelles et universaux dans le fonctionnement de la politesse linguistique. In D. Luzzatti, J.-C. Beacco, R. Somii, M. Murat, & M. Vivet (Eds.), Le dialogique. Peter Lang.

 

Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (1995). La construction de la relation interpersonnelle : quelques remarques sur cette dimension du dialogue. Cahiers de Linguistique Française, 16, 69-88.

 

Lakoff, R. (1989). The limits of politeness: Therapeutic and courtroom discourse. Multilingua, 8(2-3), 101-130. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1989.8.2-3.101

 

Marques, M. A. (2015). Argumentar em tempos de crise no Parlamento português. Revista Portuguesa de Humanidades | Estudos Linguísticos, 19(1), 115-136.

 

Marques, M. A. (2014). Cortesia, formas de tratamento e géneros discursivos: Condições de ocorrência e de uso. In I. Seara (Ed.), Cortesia: Olhares e reinvenções (pp. 145-172). Chiado Editora.

 

Marques, M. A. (2012). Emotions and argumentation in the Portuguese parliament. In L. Ionescu-Ruxandoiu (Ed.) (in collaboration with M. Roibu and M.-V. Constantinescu), Parliamentary discourses across cultures: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 117-132). Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

 

Marques, M. A. (2009). Quando a cortesia é agressiva. Expressão de cortesia e imagem do Outro. In F. Oliveira, & I. M. Duarte (Eds.), O fascínio da linguagem (pp. 277-296). FLUP/Universidade do Porto.

 

Marques, M. A. (2008). Arrogância e construção do ethos no discurso político português. Actas do III simpósio internacional de análise do discurso [CD-ROM] (pp. 1-10). UFMG. Retrieved 23 January, 2025 from https://hdl.handle.net/1822/27048

 

Marques, M. A. (2005). Os apartes no discurso político parlamentar: vozes ‘off’. In M. A. Marques, E. Koller, J. Teixeira, & A. Lemos (Eds.), Ciências da Linguagem: 30 anos de investigação e ensino (pp. 193-216). Universidade do Minho/ ILCH/CEHUM.

 

Marques, M. A. (2000). Funcionamento do discurso político parlamentar. A organização enunciativa no debate da interpelação ao governo. Universidade do Minho/ CEHUM.

 

Marques, M. A. & Duarte, I. M. (2024). Formas de tratamento e papéis sociodiscursivos em debates políticos televisivos em Portugal: 1975-2022. LaborHistórico v.10, n.2, e63403, 1-24.

 

Marques, M. A., Duarte, I. & Seara, I. (2019). Argumentação ad hominem, formas de tratamento e protesto político. REDIS: Revista de Estudos do Discurso, 8, 122-138.

 

Plantin, C. (2011). Les bonnes raisons des émotions. Principes et méthode pour l’étude du discours émotionné. Peter Lang.

 

 

How to cite this article: Marques, M. A. (2025). Un/ratified impoliteness: Ways of being impolite in the Portuguese Parliament. Journal of Linguistic and Intercultural Education – JoLIE, 18(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.29302/jolie.2025.18.2.6

 

For details on subscription, go to: http://jolie.uab.ro/index.php?pagina=-&id=19&l=en