{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02021336327905671, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.906976744186046, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Policy-oriented argumentation or ironic evaluation: A study of verbal quoting and positioning in Austrian politicians’ parliamentary debate contributions

This article explores the different uses of forms of direct verbal quotes (whole clauses, word groups, or single words/phrases) in follow-up utterances delivered during the parliamentary debates after the inaugural speech of a new chancellor in the Austrian parliament and investigates their positioning effects for members of parliament (MPs) who have the first opportunity of publicly ‘doing being a government or opposition MP’ in the new legislative term. Representing the first public confrontation between government and opposition MPs, the debates foreshadow topical and interpersonal aspects of the political frontstage communication in the beginning legislative term. The main purpose of this article is to investigate the relations between formal properties of direct verbal quotes, recontextualization practices, their pragmatic function, and the specific aspect of the public personae speakers foreground by their use in the inaugural debates. Although direct quotations in follow-up utterances of MPs do not occur very often, the analyses demonstrate that this specific form of discourse representation deserves attention not only because it is mainly opposition MPs who use direct quotations in uptaking discourse units, but also because of the different semiotic aspects of direct quotes (symbolic, content oriented vs indexical, reported speaker typifying) which are foregrounded in the investigated recontextualization practices. These practices result in MPs’ different public self-positionings toward their role of ‘being an opposition MP’, namely, either as policy-oriented arguers or as ironic evaluators.