{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01818181818181818, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.679611650485437, '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}}
Argumentative use of reported speech in British newspaper discourse

Abstract A reported utterance cannot be incorporated into the new discourse without undergoing certain transformations and losing some of its initial properties. Decision of representing or omitting information on certain aspects of the quoted utterance is not arbitrary, and this choice is subordinated to the writer's goals. In argumentative discourse the overall aim of convincing the addressee determines the way reported speech is presented to the readers. The present work analyzes those features of other discourses which are reproduced in argumentative discourse of the quality British press. Research revealed that of the six linguistic levels characterizing the initial utterance (phonetic, lexical, syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, and rhetorical), journalists choose only those relevant for the argumentative function the quotation performs. When reported speech is used as the thesis, the writer retains maximum control of the quotation by reproducing fewer levels, and focusing mainly on global semantics and pragmatics. When reported speech is used as an argument, the journalist, on the contrary, aims to show minimum control of the quoted utterance to increase its argumentative credibility. This is achieved by detailed reproduction of local semantics, lexica, and syntax of the quotation.