%0 Journal Article
%T La conflictualit¨¦ en discours : le recours ¨¤ l¡¯injure dans les ar¨¨nes publiques Conflict in Discourse: Resorting to Insults in Public Arenas
%A Claire Oger
%J Argumentation et Analyse du Discours
%D 2012
%I University of Tel-Aviv
%X Cet article s¡¯interroge sur les conditions de l¨¦gitimation de la violence verbale et sur la description des ar¨¨nes o¨´ elle est pratiqu¨¦e comme une forme licite de l¡¯adresse ¨¤ autrui. Il s¡¯appuie sur des recherches men¨¦es ant¨¦rieurement, et qui ressortissent ¨¤ deux types de corpus : les pol¨¦miques m¨¦diatis¨¦es d¡¯une part, et d¡¯autre part les ouvrages de femmes politiques qui d¨¦noncent le recours ¨¤ l¡¯injure comme forme de la violence sexiste en politique. On rappelle la mani¨¨re dont ces discours s¡¯appuient sur des d¨¦finitions antagonistes de l¡¯ethos l¨¦gitime dans le d¨¦bat public : d¡¯un c t¨¦ le recours assum¨¦ ¨¤ la conflictualit¨¦ comme   r¨¨gle du jeu politique  , de l¡¯autre la condamnation de l¡¯injure comme forme de violence symbolique. On propose ici des rapprochements avec des recherches men¨¦es dans plusieurs disciplines, et qui permettent d¡¯¨¦clairer les contextes dans lesquelles le recours ¨¤ l¡¯injure peut devenir licite, voire l¨¦gitime. On insiste plus particuli¨¨rement sur un certain nombre de travaux portant sur les mod¨¨les qui sous-tendent la prise de parole dans le d¨¦bat public ¨C et sur la place que peuvent y occuper la conflictualit¨¦ et la violence verbale. This paper aims at questioning the conditions under which verbal violence can appear as legitimate, and the description that is made of public spheres where it can appear as acceptable discourse. Our work builds on previous research about two types of corpora: controversies that received a lot of media coverage on the one hand, and books written by female politicians on the other hand, books that denounce the recourse to insults as a specific form taken by sexist violence in politics. Two different conceptions of the legitimate ethos in public debate underlie these types of discourse: on the one hand the debaters accept the recourse to offensive language as part of the rules of the political game, and on the other hand, verbal abuse is condemned as a form of symbolic violence. These conceptions are here confronted to a set of interdisciplinary publications, which can shed light on contexts in which insult can become acceptable or even legitimate. This paper particularly puts the emphasis on research dealing with the different models that underlie proceedings in public debate, and the place given to conflict or verbal violence within each of them.
%K interdisciplinarity
%K public debate
%K abuse
%K legitimate ethos
%K verbal violence
%K interdisciplinarit¨¦
%K d¨¦bat public
%K violence verbale
%K injure
%K ethos l¨¦gitime
%U http://aad.revues.org/1297