Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Drawing on discursive psychology, critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis, this study examines the discursive procedures in which accusations and refutations are made in public discourse on hate speech against immigrants in the United States. The data under study are two extended interviews on CNN regarding illegal immigration. The matter of analytic interest in this article is the verbal formulations of rhetorical devices and their interactive uses in accusing and denying racial hatred. A close analysis of the argumentation in each debate reveals that the use of a rhetorical device may be interactively called for and contextually sensitive in relation to an interactional goal, and its local and global function may be inferred from the sequential procedures wherein participants make an effort at a particular juncture to constrain the course of interaction in an attempt to execute their respective agenda. It is argued here that the performance and the structure of a public discourse on race or ethnicity may be explained in reference to the US societal and cultural orientations to individuals’ positive and negative face wants.
Shiao‐Yun Chiang (Sat,) studied this question.