The public sphere is where citizens can come together to discuss issues of public concern and attempt to influence the political handling of these. Social media and online discussion forums have created new arenas where citizens can participate in the public debate. Discussions found in these arenas, however, seldom hold deliberative qualities. This paper examines how one increasingly complex and controversial issue – immigration – is discussed in Scandinavian newspapers’ comment sections. It does so through a case study of discussions about the arrival of Syrian refugees to the three nation-states. Rather than evaluating the deliberative functions of these discussions, the paper asks how the rhetorical situation influences how attitudes are expressed, and how these utterances in turn function in the particular situation. The analysis finds that similar rhetorical practices are performed independent of the national context, suggesting that the individual speaker’s rhetorical latitude is contingent upon the issue and the arena. The ways in which these practices are performed, however, differ between the three national contexts, suggesting that the cultural context in which the discussion takes place also influences the individual speaker’s rhetorical latitude.

中文翻译：

---

个人情感，经历和攻击：斯堪的纳维亚评论区的移民辩论

在公共领域，公民可以聚集在一起讨论公共关注的问题，并尝试影响这些问题的政治处理。社交媒体和在线讨论论坛创建了一个新的竞技场，公民可以在那里参加公开辩论。但是，在这些领域中进行的讨论很少具有协商性。本文探讨了如何在斯堪的纳维亚报纸的评论栏讨论一个日益复杂和有争议的问题—移民。它是通过对有关叙利亚难民到达这三个民族国家的讨论进行案例研究来实现的。本文没有评估这些讨论的讨论功能，而是询问修辞情境如何影响态度的表达方式，以及这些话语又如何在特定情境下发挥作用。分析发现，类似的修辞手法的执行不受国家背景的影响，这表明单个演讲者的修辞自由度取决于问题和舞台。但是，在三种不同的国家背景下，执行这些做法的方式有所不同，这表明进行讨论的文化背景也会影响单个讲话者的修辞范围。