Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Research Practices and Operations in Studying Debates and Documents

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Debates, Rhetoric and Political Action

Part of the book series: Rhetoric, Politics and Society ((RPS))

  • 760 Accesses

Abstract

The chapter presents research practices and operations (or methods and techniques) that are useful in studying debates and documents as part, and as arenas and reflections, of political activity, political processes, strategies and actions. It contains first general considerations that are valid and helpful for most interpretative and textual analyses, with additional emphasis set on how to analyse political activity linked to texts: the research interest and research question target the moves, strategies, interests and actors involved in the political processes in question, rather than simply the contents of the text, and this in return crucially determines material selection, research questions, and setting and course of the analysis. The second part presents the core steps of this kind of analysis, using an exemplar case.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

Literature

  • Adamson, Sylvia, Gavin Alexander, and Karen Ettenhuber, eds. 2007. Renaissance Figures of Speech. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ankersmit, F.R. 1996. Aesthetic Politics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——— 2001. Historical Representation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——— 2002. Political Representation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkins, Judi, Alan Finlayson, James Martin, and Nick Turnbull, eds. 2014. Rhetoric in British Politics and Society, Series: Rhetoric, Politics and Society. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J.L. 1962 [1990]. How to Do Things with Words. Edited by J.O. Urmson and Marina Sbisà. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brecht, Bertolt. 1967. Gesammelte Werke, Bd. 15. Wikipedia [LD1] imap://wiesnerc@imap.staff.uni-marburg.de:993/fetch%3EUID%3E/INBOX%3E77832#_msocom_1 http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verfremdungseffekt#Brechts_Idee_als_Gegenpart_zum_aristotelischen_Dramenbegriff. Accessed 5 May 2016.

  • Burke, Kenneth. 1945 [1969]. A Grammar of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1950 [1969]. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campion, Gilbert. 1958. An Introduction to the Procedure of the House of Commons, 3rd edn. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2014. Analysing Political Speeches: Rhetoric, Discourse and Metaphor. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clausewitz, Carl von. 1832 [1980]. Vom Kriege. Frankfurt/M: Ullstein.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colclough, David. 2005. Freedom of Speech in Early Stuart England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Mille, James. 1878. Elements of Rhetoric. New York: Harper & Brothers. http://tinyurl.com/mhps972

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijk, Teun A. van. 2001. Critical Discourse Analysis. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ed. D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin, and H. Hamilton, 352–371. Malden, MA [u.a.]: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, John. 1968. The Identity of the History of Ideas. Philosophy 43: 85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairclough, Norman, and Ruth Wodak. 1997. Critical Discourse Analysis. In Discourse as Social Interaction, ed. Teun A. van Dijk, 258–284. London [u.a.]: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson, Alan. 2014. Proving, Pleasing and Persuading? Rhetoric in Contemporary British Politics. The Political Quarterly 85(4): 428–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, Paul. 2012. How to be an MP. London: Biteback.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, Michel. 1969. L’archéologie du savoir. Bibliothèque des sciences humaines. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1971. L’ordre du discours: Leçon inaugurale au Collège de France prononcée le 2 décembre 1970. Paris: Gallimard.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, Barney G., and Anselm L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Observations. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, Jochen, and Grit Laudel. 2004. Experteninterviews und Qualitative Inhaltanalyse. Wiesbaden: VS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haapala, Taru. 2012. “That in the Opinion of this House”: The Parliamentary Culture of Debate in the Nineteenth-Century Cambridge and Oxford Union Societies. PhD dissertation, University of Jyväskylä.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2013. The Mockery of Adbusters Magazine in the Classical Tradition of Political Rhetoric. In The Distant Present, ed. Tuula Vaarakallio and Taru Haapala, 71–89. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, SoPhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. forthcoming 2017. Political Rhetoric in the Oxford and Cambridge Unions, 1830–1870, Series: Studies in Modern History. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hexter, J.H., ed. 1992. Parliament and Liberty. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ihalainen, Pasi, and Kari Palonen. 2009. Parliamentary Sources in the Comparative Study of Conceptual History: Methodological Aspects and Illustration of a Research Proposal. Parliaments, Estates & Representation 29, 17–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ilie, Cornelia. 2001. Unparliamentary Language. Insults as Cognitive Forms of Confrontation. In Language and Ideology. Vol. 2, eds. R. Driven, R. Frank, and C. Ilie, 235–263. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2004. Insulting as (un)parliamentary Practice in the British and Swedish Parliaments. In Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Parliamentary Discourse, Series: Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, ed. Paul Bayley, 45–86. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • ———, ed. 2010. European Parliaments under Scrutiny. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, Barbara. 2008. Discourse Analysis, 2nd edn. Malden, MA [u.a.]: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelle, Udo, and Susann Kluge. 1999. Vom Einzelfall zum Typus. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kivistö, Hanna-Mari. 2013. ‘Dubliners’ in the European Union—A Perspective on the Politics of Asylum-Seeking. In The Distant Present, eds. Tuula Vaarakallio and Taru Haapala, 106–128. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, SoPhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopperschmidt, Josef, and Helmut Schanze, eds. 1994. Nietzsche oder “Die Sprache ist Rhetorik”. München: Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koselleck, Reinhart. 1972. Einleitung. In Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe, vol. I. xiii–xxvii.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1979. Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Theorie historischer Zeiten. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1982 [2010]. Archivalien—Quellen—Geschichten. In Vom Sinn und Unsinn der Geschichte, ed. Carsten Dutt, 68–79. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1983. Begriffsgeschichtliche Probleme der Verfassungsgeschichtsschreibung. Der Staat-Sonderheft 6, 7–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2006. Begriffsgeschichten. Herausgegeben von Carsten Dutt. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Vom Sinn und Unsinn der Geschichte. herausgegeben mit Nachwort von Carsten Dutt. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2011. Introduction (Einleitung) to the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe. Translated by Michaela Richter. Contributions to the History of Concepts 7, 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koselleck, Reinhart, Ulrike Spree, and Willibald Steinmetz. 2006. Drei bürgerliche Welten. Zur vergleichenden Semantik der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft in Deutschland, Frankreich und England. In Begriffsgeschichten: Studien zur Semantik und Pragmatik der politischen und sozialen Sprache, herausgegeben von Reinhart Koselleck, 402–463. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurunmäki, Jussi. 2015. How Women’s Suffrage Was Devalued: The Burden of Analytical Categories and the Conceptual History of Democracy. In Parliamentarism and Democratic Theory, eds. Kari Palonen, and José María Rosales, 31–52. Leverkusen: Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe. 1985. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lausberg, Heinrich. 1962. Elemente der literarischen Rhetorik. München: Huber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, Robert. 1867. Speeches and Letters on Reform. London: Bush.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, Peter. 2002. Elizabethan Rhetoric: Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, James. 2014. Politics and Rhetoric: A critical introduction. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayring, Philipp. 2008. Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken, 10th edn. Weinheim [u.a.]: Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, Chantal. 2013. Agonistics. Thinking the World Politically. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, John S. 1998. Tropes of Politics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, John S., Donald McCloskey, and Alan Megill. 1987. Rhetoric of the Human Sciences. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nietzsche, Friedrich. 1995. Werke. Kritische Gesamtausgabe 2/4. Berlin: de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palonen, Kari. 2006. The Struggle with Time. A Conceptual History of ‘Politics’ as an Activity. Hamburg: LIT Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. The Politics of Limited Times: The Rhetoric of Temporal Judgment in Parliamentary Democracies. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010a. ‘Objektivität’ als faires Spiel. Wissenschaft als Politik bei Max Weber. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010b. The Parliamentarisation of Elections. Redescriptions 14, 133–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012a. Rhetorik des Unbeliebten. Lobreden auf Politik im Zeitalter der Demokratie. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014a. Fair Play and Scarce Time: Aspects of the 1882 Procedural Reform Debate in the British Parliament. In The Politics of Dissensus: Parliament in Debate, eds. Kari Palonen, José María Rosales, and Tapani Turkka, 327–348. Santander: Cantabria University Press/McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014b. Politics and Conceptual Histories. Rhetorical and temporal perspectives. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014c. The Politics of Parliamentary Procedure. The Formation of the Westminster Procedure as a Parliamentary Ideal Type. Leverkusen: Budrich.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2016. From Oratory to Debate. Parliamentarisation of Deliberative Rhetoric in Westminster. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Parvikko, Tuija. 2008. Arendt, Eichmann and the Politics of the Past. Helsinki: The Finnish Political Science Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peltonen, Markku. 2013. Rhetoric, Politics and Popularity in Pre-Revolutionary England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perelman, Chaïm, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1958 [1983]. Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Bruxelles: L’éditions de l‘Université libre de Bruxelles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, J.G.A. 1971 [1989]. Politics, Language and Time. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl R. 1934 [1971]. Logik der Forschung. Tübingen: Mohr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redlich, Josef. 1905. Recht und Technik des Englischen Parlamentarismus. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Carl. 1932 [1979]. Der Begriff des Politischen. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, Herbert W. 1990. The Rhetorical Turn. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, Quentin. 1969. Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas. History and Theory 8, 3–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1970. Conventions and the Understanding of Speech Acts. Philosophical Quarterly 20, 118–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1978. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought I–II. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1988. A Reply to My Critics. In Quentin Skinner and His Critics, ed. James Tully, 231–288. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1996. Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1998. Liberty Before Liberalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. Rhetoric and Conceptual Change. Finnish Yearbook of Political Thought 3: 60–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2002a. Visions of Politics. Vol. 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2007. Paradiastole. In Renaissance Figures of Speech, eds. Sylvia Adamson, Gavin Alexander, and Karin Ettenhuber, 147–163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. Forensic Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Harriet. 1851. Enfranchisement of Women. Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review 54: 289–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaarakallio, Tuula. 2013. The Anti-parliamentarism of the French Front National Party. In The Distant Present, eds. Tuula Vaarakallio, and Taru Haapala, 28–47. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, SoPhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaarakallio, Tuula, and Taru Haapala. 2013. Introduction. In The Distant Present, eds. Tuula Vaarakallio, and Taru Haapala, 4–11. Jyväskylä: University of Jyväskylä, SoPhi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, Max. 1904 [1973]. Die ‘Objektivität’ sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis. In Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre, ed. herausgegeben von Johannes Winckelmann, 146–214. Tübingen: Mohr.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1918 [1988]. Parlament und Regierung im neugeordneten Deutschland. In Max-Weber-Studienausgabe I/15, ed. herausgegeben von Wolfgang J. Mommsen, 202–302. Tübingen: Mohr.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2012. In Collected Methodological Writings, eds. Hans Henrik Bruun, and Sam Whimster. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, Hayden. 1973. Metahistory. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiesner, Claudia. 2007. Bürgerschaft und Demokratie in der EU. Münster: LIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014a. Demokratisierung der EU durch nationale Europadiskurse. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014c. The European Parliament as Special Parliament and Political Actor. In The Politics of Dissensus. Parliament in Debate, eds. Kari Palonen, José María Rosales, and Tapani Turkka, 101–126. Santander: University of Cantabria Press/McGrawHill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, Ruth, ed. 2008. Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences. Basingstoke [u.a.]: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, Linda A., and Rolf O. Kroger. 2000. Doing Discourse Analysis. Methods for Studying Action in Talk and Text. Thousand Oaks [u.a.]: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Jyväskylä and Technical, University Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany

    Claudia Wiesner

  2. University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

    Kari Palonen & Taru Haapala

Authors
  1. Claudia Wiesner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kari Palonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Taru Haapala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wiesner, C., Palonen, K., Haapala, T. (2017). Research Practices and Operations in Studying Debates and Documents. In: Debates, Rhetoric and Political Action. Rhetoric, Politics and Society. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-57057-4_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation