Jean-Marie Le Pen vs. Marine Le Pen : un ‘ethos émotif’ différent ?

• Authors: Fabienne Baider , Maria Constantinou

Title variants

EN

Jean-Marie Le Pen vs. Marine Le Pen: a different ‘emotive ethos’?

• Languages of publication: FR

Abstracts

EN

This paper examines how the Front National’s electoral victories could be explained, partially, in terms of a new discursive rhetoric adopted by Marine Le Pen. In order to compare rhetorical strategies used by both Marine and Jean-Marie Le Pen and their impact on their followers, we use comparable data, which consist of press articles published during the presidential campaigns of each politician and postings by online discussants related to interviews. Using corpus linguistics tools and lexical semantics, we assess how differently both leaders position themselves emotionally and how this emotional positioning is reconstructed within the postings of the viewers. Although no important quantitative difference can be observed in the number of emotion key-words they used respectively, a shift in both politicians’ rhetoric positioning can be observed when analyzing the context in which these keywords are embedded. If Jean-Marie Le Pen focuses on negative feelings towards the Other (anger, resentment), Marine Le Pen promotes a positive ethos (empathy) in order to detoxify the image of her party and broaden her electoral base.

Keywords

FR

emotive ethos; political discourse; You Tube comments; Front National; Le Pen; corpus linguistics; emotive ethos; political discourse; You Tube comments; Front National; Le Pen; corpus linguistics

EN

emotive ethos; political discourse; You Tube comments; Front National; Le Pen; corpus linguistics.

• Publisher: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Journal: Studia Romanica Posnaniensia
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 42
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 3-19

Dates

published

2015-12-01

Contributors

author

Fabienne Baider

• Université de Chypre

author

Maria Constantinou

• University of Cyprus, Department of French Studies and Modern Languages B.P. 20537 CY-1678 Nicosie Cyprus

References

• AMOSSY, R. (2008): « Modalités argumentatives et registres discursifs : le cas du polémique ». In : L. Gaudin-Bordes & G. Salvan (ed.), Les registres. Enjeux pragmatiques et visées stylistiques. Louvain-la-Neuve : Academia-Bruylant, 93-108.
• AVERILL, J. R. (1980): “A constructivist view of emotion”. In : R. Plutchik & H. Kelleman (ed.), Emotion: Theory, research and experience. New York: Academic Press, 305-339.
• BANKS, D. (dir.) (2005): Aspects linguistiques du texte de propagande. Paris : L’Harmattan.
• BANKS, D. (2007): “Ideology, context and text in a Systemic Functional model”. In : G. Girard (ed.), Texte(s), contexte(s), hors-texte(s). St Etienne : Presses Universitaires de St Etienne, 179-191.
• BARTHES, R. (1962): « L’ancienne rhétorique ». Communications, 16, 172-223.
• BEDNAREK, M. (2008): Emotion Talk across Corpora. Basingstoke – New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• BILLING, M. (1978): Fascists: A Social Psychological View of the National Front. London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
• BLUMENTHAL, P. (2002): « Profil combinatoire des noms. Synonymie distinctive et analyse contrastive ». Zeitschriftfür Französische Sprache und Literatur, 112, 115-138.
• CAMBON, E. (2006): « Le Pen disant “Le Pen” ou la construction du chef charismatique par lui-même ». In : D. Banks (ed.), Aspects linguistiques du texte de la propagande. Paris : L’Harmattan, 31-42.
• DAVIES, P. (1999): The National Front in France: Ideology, Discourse and Power. New York: Routledge.
• DELWIT, P. (dir.) (2012): Le Front national. Mutations de l’extrême droite française. Bruxelles : Editions de l’Université Libre de Bruxelles.
• FRIJDA, N. H. (2007): “What emotions might be? Comments on the comments”. Social science information sur les sciences sociales, 46, 433-443.
• FUSSELL, S. R. & MOSS, M. M. (1998): “Figurative language in descriptions of emotional states”. In : S. R. Fussell & R. J. Kreuz (ed.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1-30.
• HOLMES, M. (2004): “Feeling beyond rules: Politicizing the Sociology of Emotion and Anger in Feminist Politics”. European Journal of Social Theory, 7, 209-227.
• KECSKES I. (2008): “Dueling context: A dynamic model of meaning”. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(3), 385-406.
• KEMPER, TH. D. (2001): “A structural approach to social movement emotions”. In : J. Goodwin, J. M. Jasper & F. Polleta (ed.), Passionate Politics. Chicago: University Chicago Press, 58-73.
• KITAYAMA, S. & MASUDA, T. (1995): “Reappraising cognitive appraisal from a cultural perspective”. Psychological Inquiry, 6, 217-233.
• LAZARUS, R. (1997): “Acculturation isn’t Everything”. Applied Psychology, 46, 39-43.
• LYONS, W. (1985): Emotion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. MAYER, N. (2002): Ces Français qui votent Le Pen. Paris : Flammarion.
• MAYER, N. (2012): « De Jean-Marie à Marine Le Pen : l’électorat du Front national a-t-il changé ? » In : P. Delwit (ed.), Le Front national. Mutations de l’extrême droite française. Brussels : Editions Université de Bruxelles, 143-160.
• MAYER, N. (2013): “From Jean-Marie to Marine Le Pen: Electoral Change on the Far Right”. Parliamentary Affairs, 66(1), 160-178.
• MUDDE, C. (2007): Populist Radical Right Parties in Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• MUSOLFF, A. (2007): “Which role do metaphors play in racial prejudice?”. The function of anti- Semitic imagery in Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’. Patterns of Prejudice, 41(1), 21-44.
• MUSOLFF, A. (2008): “What can Critical Metaphor Analysis Add to the Understanding of Racist Ideology?”. Recent Studies of Hitler’s Anti-Semitic Metaphors. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines, 2(2), 1-10.
• OESCH, D. (2008): ”Explaining Workers’ Support for Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe”. International Political Science Review, 29(3), 349-373.
• OSTER, U. (2010): “Using corpus methodology for semantic and pragmatic analyses: What can corpora tell us about the linguistic expression of emotions?”. Cognitive Linguistics, 4, 727-763.
• PEGARD, C. (2002): « Etat de choc : la faute à qui ? ». Le Point, 25 April, 8-13.
• PLANTIN, CH. (2011): Les bonnes raisons des émotions. Principes et méthode pour l’étude du discours émotionné. Berne : Peter Lang.
• SHIELDS, J. (2013): “A Change of Style or of Substance?”. Parliamentary Affairs, 66(1), 179-196.
• TUTIN, A., NOVAKOVA, I., GROSSMAN, F. & CAVALLA, C. (2006): « Esquisse de typologie des noms d’affect à partir de leurs propriétés combinatoires ». Langue française, 150, 32-49.
• VAN DIJK, T. A. (2006): “Racism and the Press in Spain”. In : J. L. Blas, M. Casanova, M. Velando & J. Vellon (ed.), Discurso y Sociedad II. Nuevas contribuciones al estudio de la lengua en un contexto social. Castelló de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I, 59-99.
• WIERZBICKA, A. (1992): “Defining Emotion Concepts”. Cognitive Science, 16(4), 539-581.
• WILDAM, S. (2010): “Neo-nazi no longer? Marine Le Pen tones down France’s far right”. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/05/31/neo-nazis-no-longer-marine-le-pen-tones-down-frances-far-right/.
• WILLIAMS, M. H. (2011): “A new era for French far right politics?”. Análise Social XLVI, 201, 679-695.
• WODAK, R. (2006): “Mediation between discourse and society: assessing cognitive approaches in CDA”. Discourse Studies, 8(1), 179-190.
• YUS, F. (2011): Cyberpragmatics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Identifiers

DOI

10.14746/strop.2015.424.001