Interaction goals in political accounts in isiXhosa

[摘要] This study deals with research that has been conducted within three governmentdepartments (Education, Health and Social Development) that form part of the socialneeds cluster in the Province of the Eastern Cape. Five portfolio committee memberswere interviewed in each department (six in the department of Health). Reproaches(failures and challenges of service delivery and policy implementation) weredeveloped using information obtained from the 'policy and budget speeches of theafore-mentioned departments.In response to these reproaches, committee members had to give accounts(responses, explanations and/or reason-giving). Four types of accounts (concession,excuse, denial and justification) which are typical political accounts have proved to bequite popular and focus has been given to them in the analysis. The focus on theanalysis of the accounts was given to effectiveness, argumentation (reasons orarguments that are tendered in support of the accounts to establish the amount ofpersuasiveness) and politeness.The conclusions of the findings in the interviews were focused on three elements:���� The interviewee: The analyses of the interviewees were discussed with regard tothe accounts together with the number of arguments given. Each reproach wasanalyzed within an overview of the type of account with regard to three criteria:effectiveness, argumentation and politeness. The analyses of the intervieweeswere discussed individually with the help of tables of each interviewee. The focuswas on the accounts of justification and excuses. The interview was judged ontwo parameters:i. The number of accounts each interviewee has used with regard to the threecriteria above.ii. A comparison was made to establish the relative merit of the intervieweesamong themselves.���� The reproach: various reproaches in the three departments were discussedseparately with regard to the number of accounts and arguments in each reproach. The focus was mainly on the accounts of justification and excuse. Asummary was given of the various reproaches with the four major types ofaccounts. The same criteria of effectiveness, argumentation and politeness wereused. Judgment was given on the reproach or reproaches which have shown themost attention in the interviews with regard to the total number of accounts whichhave been used.���� The account: various justifications and excuses which have been used in theinteractions were discussed with regard to effectiveness, argumentation andpoliteness. The judgment was made as to which type of account was mostlyfavored by the interviewees.Implications of the research were discussed with regard to a comparative overview ofthe political accounts in reproaches with specific attention to the type and frequencyof the account as well as possible reasons for this type of preferred account.Four types of accounts have been used consistently in the interviews and amongthese four types, justifications (36.6%) and excuses (46.1%) are generally favored byall politicians who were involved in the interviews.These accounts are quite popular among politicians because they work in their favoras they are employed to reframe the consequences of the act with the ultimate aim ofchanging negative perceptions about the policies of the department and/orgovernment (justifications) and to deny any responsibility and/or causal link betweenthe politician and the undesirable outcome of the policy and thereby implying thatthere is no need for reproach (excuse).

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University