“Men så skedde inte i Sverige” – om anklagens anatomi
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52610/rhs.v25i82.13Nyckelord:
Accusatory rhetoric, Definition, Kategoria, Guilt, Narrative rhetoric, the coronavirusAbstract
Til trods for at forsvaret og undskyldningen har haft en central plads i retorik- og kommunikationsforskningen de seneste årtier, har det naturlige modstykke, anklagen, fået overraskende beskeden retorikfaglig opmærksomhed. Denne artikel bidrager til at udbedre dele af denne mangel, idet den opstiller en definition af anklagen som en situeret ytring, hvor nogen tilskriver skyld til en gruppe eller et individ. Definitionen knytter anklagen til udsagn om fortidige begivenheder, som har udgjort brud på skrevne eller uskrevne normer, og artiklen argumenterer for, at fortællingens logik smitter af på og er bestemmende for anklagens form og funktion. Artiklen bringer definitionen i spil gennem nærlæsninger af forskellige anklager fra den debat, der opstod i de skandinaviske lande i 2020 i forlængelse af coronakrisen. Spændt ud mellem nedslag i en strengt formel juridisk anklage for lovbrud og en uformel, privat anklage, vier artiklen det meste af sin analytiske opmærksomhed til en offentlig anklage, der dels er interessant i sig selv i kraft af sin komplekse komposition, dels er eksemplarisk for, hvordan anklager tilskriver skyld ved hjælp af fortællinger, nemlig en artikel fra Dagens Nyheter, hvor svenske forskere anklagede embedsmænd og den svenske regering for embedsforsømmelse.
Referenser
Arendt H. (1987). “Collective Responsibility”. I S.J.J.W. Bernauer (Red.), Amor Mundi. Explorations in the Faith and Thought of Hannah Arendt (s. 43-50). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3565-5_3
Benoit, W. L. (2017). “Criticism of Action and Character: Strategies for Persuasive Attack Extended”. Relevant Rhetoric, 8, s.1-17
Benoit, W. L. (2015). Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies, Second Edition: Image Repair Theory and Research (2. ed). Albany: SUNY Press
Benoit, W. L. & Dorries, B. (1996). “Dateline NBC’s Persuasive attack on Wal-Mart”. Communication Quarterly, 44(4), s. 463-477. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463379609370032
Bitzer, L. F. (1968). “The Rhetorical Situation”. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1, s. 1-14.
Burke, K. (1966). Language as Symbolic Action. Berkeley: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520340664
Burke, K. (1969). A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Burke, K. (1969b). A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520341715
Burke, K. (1970). The Rhetoric of Religion. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Carter, C. A. (1996). Kenneth Burke and the Scapegoat Process. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
Ellwanger, A. (2012). “Apology as Metanoic Performance: Punitive Rhetoric and Public Speech”. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 42(4), s. 307-329. doi: 10.1080/02773945.2012.704118
DiSanza, J. R. & Legge, N. J. (2016). “The Rhetoric of Persuasive Attack: Continuing the Development of a Taxonomy of Attack Strategies and Tactics”. Relevant Rhetoric, 7, s. 2-16.
Faulkner, R. (2001). Corporate Wrongdoing and the Art of the Accusation. London: Anthem Press
Fisher, W. R. (1970). “A Motive View of Communication”. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 56(2), s. 131-139. doi: 10.1080/00335637009382994
Garner, Bryan A. (2009). Black’s Law Dictionary (standard edition). St. Paul, MN: Thomson Reuters.
Irvine, J. (1979). “Formality and Informality in Communicative Events”. American Anthropologist, 81, s. 773-790. doi: 10.1525/aa.1979.81.4.02a00020
Kjeldsen, J. (2019). “Skammens retorik i indvandringsdebatten”. Rhetorica Scandinavica, 79, s. 112-134. https://doi.org/10.52610/IJFC5901
Legge, N. J. et al. (2012). “’He sounded like a vile, disgusting pervert …’ An Analysis of Persuasive Attacks on Rush Limbaugh During the Sandra Fluke Controversy”. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 19, s. 173-205. doi: 10.1080/19376529.2012.722468
Roer, H. & Klujeff, M. (2011). “Tema: Smæderetorik”. Rhetorica Scandinavica, 57, s. 9-18.
Ryan, H. R. (1982). “Kategoria and Apologia: On their rhetorical criticism as a speech set”. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 68, s. 254-261. doi: 10.1080/00335638209383611
Stein, K. A. (2008). “Apologia, Antapologia, and the 1960 Soviet U-2 Incident”. Communications Studies, 59(1), s. 19-34. doi: 10.1080/10510970701849362
Villadsen, L. (2008). “Speaking on Behalf of Others: Rhetorical Agency and Epideictic Functions in Official Apologies”. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 38(1), s. 25-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335630.2012.663501
Villadsen, L. (2014). “More than a nice ritual. Official apologies as a rhetorical act in need of theoretical re-conceptualization”. I H. Van Belle et al. (Red.), Let’s talk politics (s. 27-43). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.6.02vil
Villadsen, L. (2018). “Fy, skam dig ikke!”. Rhetorica Scandinavica, 78, s. 75-86. https://doi.org/10.52610/MRSP5084
Villadsen, L. og Edwards, J. (2020). The Rhetoric of Official Apologies. Lanham: Lexington Books
Walsh, R. (2018). “Narrative Theory for Complexity Scientists”. I R. Walsh & S. Stepney (Red.), Narrating Complexity (s. 11-25). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64714-2_2
Wodak, R. (2006). “Blaming and denying: Pragmatics”. I K. Brown (Red.), Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, vol. 2, (s. 59–64). Oxford: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/04307-8
Wright, E. (2019). “‘The Caprices of an Undisciplined Fancy’: Using Blame to Negotiate the “betweens” of Ethos via the Epideictic”. Rhetoric Review, 38(3), s. 271-284. https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198.2019.1618157
Young, I. M. (2011). Responsibility for Justice. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392388.001.0001
##submission.downloads##
Publicerad
Referera så här
Nummer
Sektion
Licens
Detta verk är licensierat under en Creative Commons Erkännande-Ickekommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0 Internationell-licens.
Open Access; CC Erkännande-IckeKommersiell-IngaBearbetningar 4.0
