Question-answer sequences in institutional discourse: Constructing the defendant

Marianthi Georgalidou


The purpose of this paper is to discuss question- answer sequences in discourse within institutional settings. Analysis focuses on data coming from parliamentary and forensic procedures, interviews that deal with the so called ‘Lagarde list’ case and two violent incidents that took place during extensive protest events in two major European capitals, namely London and Athens. The aim of the analysis is a) to discuss question/answer pairs in various formal institutional contexts and b) to question the boundaries among seemingly distinct speech-events pertaining to political, forensic and media discourse.


question/answer sequences, institutional discourse

Full Text:



Γεωργαλίδου, M. 2012. Ερωτήσεις και απαντήσεις στο δημοσιογραφικό και δικανικό λόγο: Μια προκαταρτική μελέτη. Στο Z. Gavriilidou, A. Efthymiou, E. Thomadaki & P. Kambakis-Vougiouklis (eds), Selected Papers of the 10th International Conference of Greek Linguistics. Komotini: Dimocritus University of Thrace, 773-741.

Clayman, S. & J. Heritage. 2002. The news interview. Journalists and public figures on air. Cambridge: CUP.

Ehrlich, S. 2010. Rape victims. The discourse of rape trials. In M. Coulthard & A. Johnson (eds). The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. London: Routledge, 265-280.

Heffer, C. 2010. Narrative in the trial: Constructing crime stories in court. In M. Coulthard & A. Johnson (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. London: Routledge, 199-217.

Heritage, J. 2002. The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile question content. Journal of Pragmatics 34: 1427-1446.

Hobbs, P. 2003. “You must say it for him”: Reformulating a witness testimony on cross examination at trial. Text 23: 477-511.

Holt, E. & A. Johnson. 2010. Socio-pragmatic aspects of legal talk: Police interviews and trial discourse. In M. Coulthard & A. Johnson (eds), The Routledge Handbook of Forensic Linguistics. London: Routledge, 21-36.

Komter, M. 2006. From talk to text: The interactional construction of a police record. Research on Language and Social Interaction 39(3): 201-228.

Matoesian, G. 2005. Nailing down an answer: Participations of power in trial talk. In Discourse Studies 2005 7: 733. London: Sage Publications, 733-759. Retrieved on 17/5/2015 from

Mey, J. 2001. Pragmatics. An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.

Παναρέτου, Ε. 2006. Κειμενικά υπο-είδη. Οι δικαστικές αποφάσεις. Στο Δ. Γούτσος, Σ. Κουτσουλέλου, Αικ. Μπακάκου-Ορφανού & Ε. Παναρέτου (επιμ.), Ο Κόσμος των Κειμένων. Μελέτες Αφιερωμένες στον Γεώργιο Μπαμπινιώτη. Αθήνα: Ελληνικά Γράμματα, 127-143.

Pomerantz, A. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J. Maxwell Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds), Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 57-101.

Tracy, K. & J. Robles. 2009. Questions, questioning, and institutional practices: An introduction. Discourse Studies 11: 131-152. Retrieved on 17/5/2015 from


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2016 Marianthi Georgalidou

e-ISSN: 2529-1114

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, unless otherwise stated.