Abstract This paper investigates the reference statements and rhetorical functions of politicians’ reactive (“uptaking”) statements in parliamentary debates as well as their self-positioning effects. Uptaking moves may be used by speakers for pursuing strategic, global discourse aims. The specific properties of such ‘uptaking’ utterances and their sequential embedding in the unfolding discourse provide analysts with cues of speakers’ global interactional goals. Results indeed show how global and local pragmatic factors impact content, form, and rhetorical function of MPs’ uptaking statements. The data comprises four Austrian parliamentary sessions, which follow the inaugural speech each newly appointed Austrian chancellor has to deliver in the Austrian national assembly at the beginning of a legislative term. Overall, four fifths of the uptaking discourse units (consisting of ‘reference to previous statement plus comment’) refer to the government program, the inaugural speech or a previous MPs’ statement. Whereas a closer investigation of the reference statements seems to indicate a left wing vs. right wing rhetorical pattern (with left wing and center parties referring to ‘official’ sources, while right wing parties set their own topical agenda), investigating the rhetorical functions of the uptaking discourse units reveals a clear government vs. opposition (but no party-specific) rhetoric: Government party MPs praise the government program (or the inaugural speech), opposition party speakers criticize it. Both groups thus focus on the interpersonal plain of interaction. In contrast, argumentative (or counter-argumentative) uptaking discourse units which would indicate speakers’ willingness to enter into a rational discourse (in a Habermasian sense) with their political opponents are extremely rare. Through their rhetorical activities, the vast majority of government and opposition speakers thus reinforce and perpetuate already known political stances and affiliations in front of a third party (i.e. the general public watching the debates via TV or Internet livestream) rather than presenting themselves as rational, problem-focused politicians.

中文翻译：

---

辩论或展示政治立场？

摘要 本文研究了政治家在议会辩论中的反应性（“吸收”）陈述的参考陈述和修辞功能及其自我定位效应。演讲者可能会使用采取行动来追求战略性的全球话语目标。这种“吸收”话语的特定属性及其在展开的话语中的顺序嵌入为分析人员提供了说话者全球互动目标的线索。结果确实显示了全球和地方的语用因素如何影响国会议员采纳声明的内容、形式和修辞功能。数据包括四次奥地利议会会议，在每个新任命的奥地利总理必须在立法任期开始时在奥地利国民议会发表就职演说之后。全面的，五分之四的讨论单元（由“参考之前的声明加评论”组成）是指政府计划、就职演说或之前国会议员的声明。而对参考陈述的进一步调查似乎表明左翼与右翼的修辞模式（左翼和中间党指的是“官方”来源，而右翼党派设定了自己的主题议程），调查了左翼和右翼的修辞功能积极的话语单元揭示了明确的政府与反对派（但没有特定政党）的言论：政府党议员赞扬政府计划（或就职演说），反对党发言人批评它。因此，这两个群体都专注于人际互动。相比之下，论证（或反论证）采用的话语单位表明说话者愿意与他们的政治对手进行理性话语（在哈贝马斯意义上）是极其罕见的。通过他们的修辞活动，绝大多数政府和反对派发言人在第三方（即通过电视或互联网直播观看辩论的公众）面前强化和延续已知的政治立场和从属关系，而不是将自己表现得理性，关注问题的政治家。