Holly, Werner (1989) “Credibility and Political Language” in Language, Power and Ideology: Studies in Political Discourse (ed.) Ruth Wodak: 115-135. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

1. Faith in politicians

2. Grice’s ‘intentions’ and the problem of overtness

2.1 Communication, action, meaning

Herbert P. Grice developed his much discussed model of communication. This model starts out from the assumption that any action has a purpose, i.e. an intended effect, in the case of  communication a reaction r from the addressee. The crucial point of Grice’s construction for our subject seems to be that this effect should not be generated through some causal or conventional mechanism, but through the addressee’s recognition of the addresser’s intention to induce this effect. This has been formulated in the following three conditions:

(1) S intends that H shows r.

(2) S intends that H recognizes that (1)

(3) S intends that H shows r on the basis of his recognition of (1) – 116-117

Most philosophical and linguistic theories define ‘language’ as a means of mutual understanding. The view that language should disclose and not conceal thoughts has been defended ever since the time of Augustin. – 117

2.2 Conventions, understanding, responsibility

3. Two ways of ‘non-communicating’

3.1 The “running-board” technique

3.2 The ‘phantom-meaning” technique

4. Conditions for the use of political language