| Abstrakt: |
The paper analyzes the interviews of two government officials -- both ministers (of education and defence) at the time the interview was conducted -- and how they (de)construct their institutional and professional identities in their discourses. The analysis is based on the distinction of the voices present in the discourse. A combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is used to determine which of the voices (and identities) is most vividly presented in the interviews. For this purpose, modality, discourse markers and positive connotations are also explored. In conclusion, the paper establishes a connection between the cultural background of the speakers, the use of voices and the reader's perception of those voices. Obviously, the general tone (friendly or aggressive) of discourse depends on how the voices are distributed. A stronger politician's personality is more efficiently constructed through his identification with the institution of power and less frequent reference to the voice of the 'other'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
