STRATEGIES OF VERBAL AGGRESSION IN ENGLISH POLITICAL DEBATES: A DISCOURSE-PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS

Authors

  • Botirova Zebuniso Solijon kizi PhD student of Andijan state university English teacher of the department of English philology of Kokand university Andijan branch

Keywords:

verbal aggression, political discourse, impoliteness, face-threatening acts, discourse pragmatics, conflict talk, ad hominem strategy, negative evaluation, metaphorical aggression.

Abstract

This article examines the pragmatic and discourse-driven strategies of verbal aggression in contemporary English political debates. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of face theory, politeness and impoliteness models, and Critical Discourse Analysis, the study explores how politicians employ aggressive linguistic tactics to challenge opponents, construct authority, and influence public perception. The empirical analysis of debate transcripts reveals several dominant strategies, including ad hominem attacks, sarcasm, negative evaluation, threat-based expressions, and metaphorical aggression. The findings demonstrate that verbal aggression in political debates is not a spontaneous emotional reaction but a deliberate communicative tool aimed at shaping ideological positioning and reinforcing power dynamics within political discourse.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in interaction. John Benjamins.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.

Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 349–367.

Culpeper, J. (2011). Impoliteness: Using language to cause offence. Cambridge University Press.

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.

Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Anchor Books.

Hutchby, I. (1996). Confrontation talk: Arguments, asymmetries, and power on talk radio. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor and war: The metaphor system used to justify war in the Gulf. Journal of Urban and Cultural Studies, 2(1), 59–72.

van Dijk, T. A. (2006). Politics, ideology, and discourse. In R. Wodak (Ed.), Elsevier encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 728–740). Elsevier.

Downloads

Published

2025-12-14

How to Cite

Botirova Zebuniso Solijon kizi. (2025). STRATEGIES OF VERBAL AGGRESSION IN ENGLISH POLITICAL DEBATES: A DISCOURSE-PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS. Journal of Applied Science and Social Science, 15(12), 519–523. Retrieved from https://www.internationaljournal.co.in/index.php/jasass/article/view/2635

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 12 (2025): Volume 15 Issue 12

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

All content published in the Journal of Applied Science and Social Science (JASSS) is protected by copyright. Authors retain the copyright to their work, and grant JASSS the right to publish the work under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). This license allows others to distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon the work, even commercially, as long as they credit the author(s) for the original creation.