The Building Blocks of Defensive and Accusatory Language in Canadian Question Period
The idea that there are grammatical structures which form accusations and defenses in language has been explored in the context of isolated instances of political debate (Rasiah 2009). This paper goes beyond that, looking at the specific linguistic strategies that compose such a structure, and evaluating those strategies over time. A discourse analysis is used to isolate, contrast and compare argumentative strategies in two different sections from the Canadian Hansard corpus. The first section consists of transcriptions of question period recorded in 2005 while the second is from 2014, allowing for a comparison that explores these trends through time. The strategies found in each section consist of specific linguistic elements which are relevant in the context of grammar structure analysis. Beyond this the individual strategies can also be sorted into larger groups, such as temporal distancing and diverting agentivity, which map the grammar of evasion on a more general scale. These groups expose language trends in political debate, and allow for an analysis of general evasion tactics used in Canadian government. By exploring the implications of said trends, this paper raises the question of political integrity in our Country’s leadership. A presentation of this thesis would explore the specific strategies, however would focus on the general groups, the trends that they expose and their implications. This information could be found relevant in many academic contexts including sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, politics, and English studies.