This paper examines the question of politeness in political interviews, looking particularly at the use of loaded questions. Comparison is made between the two principal paradigms of politeness, Locher and Watts (2005) and Brown and Levinson (1987) . The paper focuses on the interviewing style of Steven Sackur (HARDtalk, BBC) who employs loaded questions in his political interviews in keeping with the analysis of Walton (1991) who argues that loaded questions can function as a ‘reasonable’ means to constrain the response of an interviewee and in turn further discourse. Sackur employs loaded questions selectively to convey and reinforce a presupposition to which an interviewee is not committed. In so doing, he is able to constrain the contribution of his interviewee. Loaded questions are a linguistic means of (im)politeness used strategically by Sackur to further the discourse of his interviews.

中文翻译：

---

政治面试中的礼貌问题

本文研究了政治面试中的礼貌问题，特别关注了所使用的问题的使用。比较了礼貌的两个主要范式，Locher和Watts（2005）以及Brown和Levinson（1987）。本文着重于史蒂文·萨克（Steven Sackur）（HARDtalk，BBC）的采访风格，他在政治采访中采用了重载问题，而沃尔顿（Walton，1991）的分析则认为重载问题可以作为限制回应的“合理”手段受访者的话语，进而进行进一步的讨论。Sackur有选择地采用一些有问题的问题，以传达和加强受访者未曾承担的前提。这样，他就可以限制受访者的贡献。