Argumentation in Nigerian investigative public hearings
- 28 October 2020
- journal article
- research article
- Published by John Benjamins Publishing Company in Journal of Argumentation in Context
- Vol. 9 (2), 199-218
- https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.19004.ola
Abstract
This paper examines defendants’ argumentative discourse in the 2008 Nigerian investigative public hearings on the Federal Capital Territory administration. The data, which consist of nine defendants’ presentations, are analyzed qualitatively, using a combination of the pragma-dialectical and extended pragma-dialectical theories of argumentation. The findings show that the hearing panel initially starts of as the institutional protagonist and defendants as the antagonists, and but later serve as the institutional antagonist and protagonists, respectively. The defendants tend to use analogy and causal argumentation schemes while employing subordinative and complementary coordinative argumentation structures. The defendants also employ different strategic maneuvers at different argumentative stages of the critical discussion. Due to the politico-forensic communicative domain and information-seeking genre of the investigative public hearing discourse, the concluding stage is suspended. Thus, the study shows the influence of communicative activity type on the argumentative activities in a critical discussion.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- An analysis of what has been "lost" in the interpretation and transcription process of selected TRC testimoniesStellenbosch Papers in Linguistics Plus, 2012
- Code-switchingInterpersonal Meaning, 2011
- Redundancy and markers of belief in the discourse of political hearingsLanguage Sciences, 2011
- The audience as actor: the participation status of the audience at the victim hearings of the South African TRCDiscourse Studies, 2009
- Reformulation and Conflict in the Witness Examination: The Case of Public InquiriesInternational Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 2009
- “I Think, Therefore . . .”Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 2008
- 'Language has a Heart': Linguistic Markers of Evaluation in Selected TRC TestimoniesJournal of Multicultural Discourses, 2008
- Narrative inequality in the TRC hearingsJournal of Language and Politics, 2006
- Critical discourse analysis as an analytic tool in considering selected, prominent features of TRC testimoniesJournal of Language and Politics, 2006
- There?s Risks in Everything: Extreme-Case Formulations and Accountability in Inquiry TestimonyDiscourse & Society, 2004