Taking a Stance on Stance: Metastancing as Legitimation

Abstract

Employing theoretical concepts and frameworks from pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis, this study shows how taking a stance on stance (henceforth: metastancing) can be used to as a legitimation strategy in political speeches. Based on a data collection extracted from Hitler speeches (1935-1941) I document how this speaker’s metastances serve two complementary “constructive strategies” (Van Leeuwen and Wodak 1999: 92), a polarized negative other-representation and positive self­-representation. Whereas negative references and predications are well-documented in this kind of discourse, the manner in which opponents of Nazi ideology (including Jews, communists/socialists, or the Allies) are disrespected or even ridiculed deserves special attention. Instead of derogatory or pejorative terms, conventionally positively evaluated references and predications are voiced with irony, sarcasm and mockery. By discrediting opponents and critics in this way, the speaker simultaneously voices and suppresses challenges to or criticisms of Nazi political action. Complementing this negative other-representation the speaker uses self-references and predications to enhance his or his party’s positive image. These references and predications in conjunction with framing and fallacious argumentation promote a polarized us-against-them mentality that invites the audience to align with the speaker. By showing oppositional stances as inferior to the speaker’s, the speaker seeks legitimation of Nazi policy and ideology. Keywords: (Meta-)stance, propaganda, legitimation, quotation, represented discourse

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.