Pragmatic analysis of argumentation in political discourse.

The pragmatic analysis of argumentation in political discourse is no longer as easy to approach as some claim. It involves an interaction between several disciplinary fields. This interaction poses two major problems: should pragmatics be instrumentalized in political discourse, at the risk of emptying it of its ideological, argumentative and even experiential interest, or, on the contrary, should it be aestheticized, at the risk of radically separating politics and linguistics, saying and doing, politics and life?Attempting to order a still-formless landscape, that of the pragmatic analysis of argumentation in political discourse, raises a number of framing questions:-How does a linguist view argumentation in political discourse? Does he move on from a naïve reading based essentially on a guileless projection of the indistinction between what is said and what is not said, to become an accomplished analyst capable of identifying and describing the effects of political discourse with objectivity and distance, without allowing himself to be disturbed or affected by ideological effects?