The Involuntary Mask of the Poet

This essay examines historical perspectives of the Poet persona (traditionally defined and articulated by poets themselves) alongside a contemporary depiction of the Poet in the novel-sphere. More specifically, it considers the protagonist from P.D. James’s Adam Dalgliesh mysteries (14 novels spanning from 1962 – 2008), as Dalgliesh is the perfect character to analyse in this respect. James’s character reflects a notable shift of the persona in the contemporary through a construction that relies upon both personally and publicly constructed features. Dalgliesh exists at the nexus of detective and poet, a contradiction embodied through the dual personas of a professional and celebrity, each of which takes on a life of its own. Because his fame is not of his own making, this raises questions about how this publicly constructed aspect of the Poet persona manifests itself as what Portuguese poet, Fernando Pessoa (2006, p. 273) refers to as the “involuntary masks” of the poet. These “masks” are cultivated beyond Dalgliesh’s control and combine with his own strategic maneuvering to illustrate the dual nature of a persona reliant upon constructions of the self that atypically balance both self-defined and publicly constructed features. This essay argues that Dalgliesh thus not only serves as an exemplification of the modern Poet but also reveals those aspects of the Poet persona which have withstood the perceived distortions of time.

Demosthenes’ strategic maneuvering in the First Olynthiac

The article focuses on the analysis of Demosthenes’ strategic maneuvering in the First Olynthiac delivered in the Athenian Assembly of the People in 349 BC. It is a case study of the famous § 24 in which Demosthenes calls for the attack on Philip of Macedonia, based on a hypothetical reciprocal scenario: Philip would attack Athens in a similar situation. The first part of the paper offers an argumentative characterisation of the Assembly of the People. Subsequently, the historical and situational circumstances of the speech are described, and an argumentative reconstruction of Demosthenes’ speech is presented. The evaluation of the speech’s context serves as a reference point for the analysis of strategic maneuvering by putting forward the argument in § 24. The argument is analysed in terms of three strategic maneuvering aspects: choice of topical potential, adaptation to audience demands, and presentational devices.

Strategic maneuvering in extended polylogues

This paper presents the analysis of the Hungarian nuclear expansion controversy using a conceptual framework that links strategic maneuvering with an extended polylogical controversy and evaluates the strategic maneuvering of political, environmentalist and expert actors. The paper aims to show that the three aspects of strategic maneuvering (audience demand, topical potential, presentational devices) are flexible enough that they can be analyzed when the object of study is not a spatially and temporally localized argumentative situation, but a decade-long debate with multiple actors. In 2014, Hungary signed a deal with Russia to finance 80% of the investment costs and supply two new reactors to maintain the 40–50% of nuclear energy in the national energy production.

Audience Demands as a Strategic Maneuver in Imam Al-Hassan's Speech after his Truce with Muaawiya

Strategic maneuvering is an extended version of pragma-dialectics. It manifests itself in three basic aspects, p. topical potential, audience demands, and presentational devices. These aspects are interrelatedly used with each other. The aspect of audience demands, which is the concern of this study, indicates the use of cultural, conventional and common-sense knowledge of the audience’s preferences, following particular presentational devices as strategies. Thus, in their attempts to reasonably and effectively persuade the audience, speakers resort to this strategy in their endeavor to win the audience support. The use of this strategic manoeuvre in this concern seems to have not received its due scholarly attention from a pragmatic angle, particularly in religious discourse. Hence, this study attempts to bridge this gap in the literature via scrutinizing the speech of Prophet Muhammad’s (PBUH) grandson, Imam Al-Hassan son of Ali Bin Abi Talib (PBUT). This speech is considered as one of the most notable speeches in the Shiite theology. Imam Al-Hassan (PBUH), as the caliphate of Muslims, delivered this speech after the truce which was held between him and Muaawiya, the leader of the Umayyad people. To unravel the pragmatic features of strategic maneuvering in this speech, the current work addresses fulfilling audience demands by using certain presentational devices in this speech. In so doing, the study attempts to find out the persuading manifestations and rhetorical effects that influence the audience and change their attitude. To achieve those aims, the study appeals to Emeren and Houtlosser’s (2002) model for the pragmatic analysis of the speech in question. This analysis yields certain findings among which is Imam Al-Hassan’s (PBUH) exploitation of specific cultural issues related to Muslims as pragmatic strategic maneuvers that fulfill their demands.

Vectors of Argumentative Orientation in the Study of Language Aspects Dynamic of Political Media Discourse

The article presents an attempt to analyze the argumentative constants and variations in the analytical genre of a political media discourse from the point of view of focusing on the formation of different opinions of the audience. This task is solved by using the concept of strategic maneuvering. This concept contains a theoretical tool that allows you to identify violations of dialectical standards of argumentation in the form of rhetorical goals in the author's reasoning. Using the method of random selection, a corpus of examples was formed as fragments of speeches of political leaders. Examples were taken from the website of the Munich Security Conference 2016-2020. An evaluative-critical analysis of theoretical literature has revealed the main characteristics of the political media discourse. It was found that this social practice presupposes an argumentative way of organizing a discourse. The article states that any forms of the analytical genre of the political media discourse presuppose a certain standard of rationality in terms of its logical presentation and the quality of arguments. Using the method of pragma-dialectical reconstruction of the text, the authors illustrate the rational goal of argumentation realized by the speaker. However, the specificity of the genre inevitably leads to the desire of the addressees to present arguments in their favor. This is manifested in the rhetorical analogue of the logical dimension of the text-reasoning. It is concluded that the norm and violations in argumentation show how the language system functions in the formation of vectors of audience attitude.

Shifting Reputations for “Moderation”: Evidence from Qatar, Jordan, and Morocco

The article examines the monarchies of Qatar, Jordan, and Morocco to demonstrate how specific policies and ideologies do not necessarily correspond with the label of “moderate,” which instead primarily reflects a reputational strategy. Prior to 2011, Qatar had cultivated an image as a relatively “liberal” Gulf monarchy, but although few policy changes occurred, after 2011 the emirate was seen as sponsoring terrorism. The government of Morocco developed a reputation for promoting “moderate Islam,” yet religious intolerance persists, while the Jordanian regime has focused less on cultivating a moderate image than previously. Government efforts to develop a specific reputation reflect strategic maneuvering for both international religious soft power as well as consolidation of domestic control. Combining nine months of ethnographic fieldwork involving interviews with government officials, religious bureaucrats, and embassy personnel, the paper offers insights into how the strategic use of reputation has shifted in the post-2011 context.

The pen is mightier than the sword

On October 9, 2012 Malala Yousafzai, a Pakistani schoolgirl, was severely wounded by a Taliban assassin’s bullet. This was the culmination of a history of conflict in the Swat valley region of north-western Pakistan. The historical, ethnic, political and religious reasons for this conflict are manifold. After several surgeries in Pakistan and Great Britain, Malala Yousafzai miraculously recovered from her serious injuries and was even able to give a speech at the United Nations Youth Assembly on her 16th birthday on July 12, 2013. In this paper, Malala Yousafzai’s speech will be analysed in some detail regarding her main arguments and verbal presentation strategies. Furthermore, I will focus on the way Malala Yousafzai deals with both the verbal and non-verbal aggression of the Taliban. I would also like to show how determined she is to argue against the Taliban’s escalation of the conflict without letting herself getting entangled in a spiral of verbal violence. The theoretical framework for this analysis and the critical evaluation of the speech will be the concept of “strategic maneuvering” as developed by van Eemeren (2010, 2018) within his framework of Pragma-Dialectics. This concept has frequently been applied to the analysis of political discourse (see e.g. Kienpointner 2013, 2017).