A pragmatic analysis of impoliteness strategies in the second debate of the 2024 vice-presidential candidates

Abstract

This research is a pragmatic study that aims to explore the types and functions of impoliteness strategies and identify the vice-presidential candidates’ responses to the impoliteness strategies performed in the debate. This study investigates impolite acts performed in the Vice President’s 2nd Debate by three candidates: Muhaimin Iskandar, Gibran Rakabuming, and Mahfud MD. This research employed a descriptive qualitative method in which the data were in the form of utterances. Drawing on the theories from Culpeper et al. (2003) and Culpeper (2005, 2011) on impoliteness strategies, the results reveal that all five types of impoliteness strategies are used by the three candidates, with Bald on Record Impoliteness (30%) as the most dominant type used in the debate. This indicates that the candidates mostly attack their opponents in a direct, clear, unambiguous, and concise way. Moreover, Positive Impoliteness, Negative Impoliteness, Sarcasm, and Mock Impoliteness have the same percentage: 22.5%. Regarding functions, the most dominant function used by the candidates is Affective Impoliteness. This suggests that the candidates aim to provoke emotional outbursts in each other. As for responses, the most frequently used response by the candidates is Countering the Face Attack (75%). All the candidates used this response because they responded to another candidate’s attack to defend their face from the face attack. In conclusion, this research has demonstrated that the use of impoliteness strategies in debate can impact whether citizens vote for politicians or hate the politicians due to their performance on the debate stage.