UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Getting an issue on the table: A pragma-dialectical study of presentational choices in confrontational strategic maneuvering in Dutch parliamentary debate Tonnard, Y.M. Publication date 2011 Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Tonnard, Y. M. (2011). Getting an issue on the table: A pragma-dialectical study of presentational choices in confrontational strategic maneuvering in Dutch parliamentary debate. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:26 Sep 2021 The aim of this study is to answer the ques- Gettin tion of how presentational choices can be helpful to politicians to get their party’s priority issues discussed in parliamentary debate. For this purpose, relevant pieces G of Dutch parliamentary discourse are an issue on the table the an issue on analyzed in which politicians operate who lead a party that is often considered to be a one issue party, such as Geert Wilders (Party for Freedom) and Marianne Thieme (Party for the Animals). Making use of the pragma-dialectical concept of stra- tegic maneuvering, the study shows that attempts to get a party’s priority issue on the table can generally be characterized as either a topic shifting maneuver or a polar- izing maneuver. More often than not, the presentational choices these politicians make are to be analyzed as coherent pres- entational tactics, which serve at the same time the politician’s aims of being effective and remaining within the institutionally determined requirements of reasonable- ness. The judgment that using party polit- a pragma-dialectical study of presentational choices ical strategies such as getting a priority issue on the table is by definition unreasonable is in confrontational strategic maneuvering not supported by this study. Only when the in Dutch parliamentary debate politician’s efforts frustrate the parliamen- tary process of resolving the differences of opinion at issue they do not comply with the reasonableness requirements. ... Yvon nnard Yvon Tonnard t o.