Emotive Aspects of Quotation in Diplomatic Discourse: A Study of US and UK Speeches in the UN Security Council (1964–1965)

The article explores the emotional aspects of quoting in diplomatic discourse within the framework of public political communication. The aim is to identify how different citation strategies contribute to the expression of emotivity in diplomats’ speeches. The study is based on 100 speeches delivered by the permanent representatives of the USA and the UK in the UN Security Council (1964–1965). Emotional polarity was assessed using automated tools: SentiWordNet, which assigns numerical values to words for their positive, neutral, or negative tone; VADER (Valence Aware Dictionary and sEntiment Reasoner), which considers contextual associations; and WordCounter, which analyzes the frequency of key lexical items. Discourse and quantitative analysis were applied to determine the frequency and function of various citation types. The findings show that direct quotation prevails, aligning with institutional requirements for evidentiality. However, significant differences in citation strategies were observed: British diplomats more often use indirect quotation, integrating others’ speech into their arguments, while American representatives favor scare quotation – using quotation marks to signal distancing, irony, or doubt. Quotations were found to serve not only referential but also emotional functions, especially in contrastive contexts as tools of opposition. This is the first study to apply automated sentiment analysis to the emotional aspects of quoting in diplomatic discourse. It reveals differences in citation strategies that reflect national rhetorical styles. Special attention is given to the pragmatic functions of citation, interpreted via H.P. Grice’s Cooperative Principle. The study shows how adherence to or marked violation of Gricean maxims is strategically used to strengthen rhetorical positions and shape evaluative framing. A methodology for integrating sentiment analysis tools into the study of quotation was developed, and a corpus-based analysis conducted, enabling the identification of key pragmatic functions in institutional discourse.

1. Aleshchanova, I. V. (2000). Tsitatsiya v gazetnom tekste: na materiale sovremennoi angliiskoi i rossiiskoi pressy [Citation in newspaper text: Based on modern English and Russian press] [Author’s abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Philological Sciences]. Volgograd State Pedagogical University. https://studfile.net/preview/3302335/page:4/

2. Belyakov, M. V. (2023a). Lingvoaksiologiya i lingvosemiotika diplomaticheskogo diskursa (na materiale otkrytoi professional’noi diplomatii) [Linguoaxiology and linguosemiotics of diplomatic discourse (based on open professional diplomacy)] [Author’s abstract of the dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philology]. Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation.

3. Belyakov, M. V. (2023b). [The problem of emotivity loss in translation (based on translations of official speeches by permanent representatives of the Russian Federation to the UN)]. The Humanities and Social Studies in the Far East, 21(1), 212–217. DOI:10.31079/19922868-2023-20-1-212-216

4. Bolotnova, N. S. (2022). Kontseptsiya emotivnosti V. I. Shakhovskogo v контекste issledovanii po kommunikativnoi stilistike teksta [The conception of emotiveness by V. I. Shakhovsky in the context of research on communicative stylistics of the text]. Izvestiya VGPU. Seriya: Filologicheskie nauki, (1), 197–203. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/kontseptsiya-emotivnosti-v-i-shahovskogo-v-kontekste-issledovaniy-po-kommunikativnoy-stilistike-teksta

5. Van Dijk, T. A. (2013). Diskurs i vlast’: Representatsiya dominirovaniya v yazyke i kommunikatsii [Discourse and power: Representation of domination in language and communication] (E. A. Ivanova, Trans.). Knizhnyi dom «LIBROKOM». (Original work published 2008)

6. Ivantsova, E. V. (2012). O termine «yazykovaya lichnost’»: istoki, problemy, perspektivy ispol’zovaniya [On the term “linguistic personality”: origins, problems, and perspectives of use]. Filologiya i kul’tura, (12), 24–30.

7. Karasik, V. I. (2000). O kategoriyakh diskursa [On categories of discourse]. In Yazykovaya lichnost: sotsiolingvisticheskie i emotivnye aspekty (pp. 5–20). Peremena.

8. Kristeva, Y. (1993). Bakhtin, slovo, dialog i roman [Bakhtin, word, dialogue, and novel]. Dialog. Karnaval. Khronotop, (4), 5–6.

9. Martirosyan, K. M. (2014). Kontseptsiya simvolicheskogo kapitala v sovremennoi sotsiologii [The concept of symbolic capital in modern sociology]. Kul’turnaya zhizn’ Yuga Rossii, 4(55), 35–37.

10. Mart’yanov, V. S. (2012). Diskurs tsitirovaniya v ritorike rossiiskikh elit [The discourse of quoting in the rhetoric of Russian elites]. Politicheskaya lingvistika, (1), 120–126.

11. Minaeva, L. V. (2014). Ob intertekstual’nosti i gipertekstual’nosti politicheskogo diskursa [On intertextuality and hypertextuality of political discourse]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 21: Upravlenie (gosudarstvo i obshchestvo), (2), 15–30.

12. Muradyan, A. A. (2020). [Political discourse through literary quotations]. Yazyk i tekst, 7(4), 99–106. https://doi.org/10.17759/langt.2020070408

13. Men, Z. (2023). [A comparative study of intertextuality in Russian and Chinese political discourse]. Politicheskaya lingvistika, 5(101), 202–209. https://politlinguistika.ru/images/5-2023/_2023_5_101-202-209.pdf

14. Perov, E. V. (2013). Teoriya i analiz sotsial’noi konfliktogennosti obshchestva [Theory and analysis of social conflictogenity of society]. Voprosy bezopasnosti, (5), 67–141. https://doi.org/10.7256/2306-0417.2013.5.2308

15. Tembotova, E. V. (2011). Tsitirovanie kak diskursivnaya strategiya [Citation as a discursive strategy]. In Aktual’nye problemy filologii i pedagogicheskoi lingvistiki (Issue 13, pp. 170–173).

16. Terentii, L. M. (2015). [Diplomatic discourse as a specific form of scientific communication]. Voprosy psikholingvistiki, (24), 176–185. https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=23641287

17. Shakhovskii, V. I. (2008). Chto takoe lingvistika emotsii [What is linguistics of emotions]. Mir lingvistiki i kommunikatsii. http://tverlingua.ru/archive/012/shakhovsky_03_12.htm

18. Yapparova, V. (2016). [Diplomatic discourse as an object of interdisciplinary research]. Filologiya i kul’tura, (2(44)), 165–170. https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/diplomaticheskiy-diskurs-kak-obekt-mezhdistsiplinarnogo-issledovaniya

19. Alkhawaldeh, A. A. (2024). Quotations in Jordanian parliamentary discourse: A pragma-discourse perspective. In O. Feldman (Ed.), Not my words: The language of politics (pp. 23–41). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-9789-9_2

20. Alnowaiser, K. (2024). Scientific text citation analysis using CNN features and ensemble learning model. PLoSONE, 19(5), e0302304. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0302304

21. Bonacchi, C., Witte, J., & Altaweel, M. (2024). Political uses of the ancient past on social media are predominantly negative and extreme. PLOS ONE, 19(9), e0308919. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0308919

22. Brendel, E., Meibauer, J., & Steinbach, M. (2011). Exploring the meaning of quotation. In E. Brendel, J. Meibauer, & M. Steinbach (Eds.), Understanding quotation (pp. 1–25). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110240030.1

23. Bublitz, W. (2015). Introducing quoting as a ubiquitous meta-communicative act. In J. Arendholz, W. Bublitz, & M. Kirner-Ludwig (Eds.), The pragmatics of quoting now and then (pp. 1–24). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110427561.1

24. Demiroz, G., Yanikoglu, B., Tapucu, D., & Saygin, Y. (2012). Learning domain-specific polarity lexicons. In 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (pp. 674–679). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDMW.2012.120

25. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1971). Constants across cultures in the face and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17(2), 124–129. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030377

26. Enfield, N. J., & Wierzbicka, A. (Eds.). (2002). The body in description of emotion. Pragmatics and Cognition, 10(1–2), 1–25. John Benjamins.

27. Esuli, A., & Sebastiani, F. (2006). SENTIWORDNET: Apublicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, B. Maegaard, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’06), Genoa, Italy (pp. 417–422). European Language Resources Association (ELRA).

28. Feldman, O., & Kinoshita, K. (2024). Quotation statements as a linguistic strategy in Japanese parliamentary questions. In O. Feldman (Ed.), Not my words: The language of politics (pp. 59–78). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-9789-9_4

29. Fetzer, A. (2020). «And I quote»: Forms and functions of quotations in Prime Minister’s Questions. Journal of Pragmatics, 170, 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.08.010

30. Fetzer, A. (2015). Forms and functions of quotations in mediated political discourse. In A. Fetzer, E. Weizman, & L. N. Berlin (Eds.), The dynamics of political discourse: Forms and functions of follow-ups (pp. 245–273). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.259.11fet

31. Fetzer, A., & Reber, E. (2019). Quoting in political discourse: Professional talk meets ordinary postings. In U. Römer & R. Schulze (Eds.), Quoting now and then: Transdisciplinary perspectives on quotation (pp. 95–120). De Gruyter.

32. Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.

33. Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts (pp. 41–58). Academic Press.

34. Haapanen, L., & Perrin, D. (2024). Linguistic recycling in political discourse: The resource aspect of reusing utterances in public. In O. Feldman (Ed.), Not my words: The language of politics (pp. 265–284). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-9789-9_14

35. Harkins, J., & Wierzbicka, A. (Eds.). (2001). Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective. Mouton de Gruyter.

36. Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2019). Points of reference: Changing patterns of academic citation. Applied Linguistics, 40(1), 64–85. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx012

37. Kunnath, S. N., Herrmannova, D., Pride, D., & Knoth, P. (2021). A meta-analysis of semantic classification of citations. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(4), 1170–1215. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00159

38. Leech, G. N. (2014). The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford University Press.

39. Miranda, E., Aryuni, M., Hariyanto, R., & Surya, E. (2019). Sentiment analysis using Sentiwordnet and machine learning approach (Indonesia general election opinion from the Twitter content). In 2019 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech) (pp. 62–67). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIMTech.2019.8843734

40. Mobley, D. (2018). Deja vu or copyright infringement? Why Melania Trump infringed on Michelle Obama’s copyrighted speech through subconscious copying. The John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law, 17, 360–382.

41. Moore, A. W. (1986). How significant is the use/mention distinction? Analysis, 46(4), 173– 179.

42. Nicholson, J. M., Mordaunt, M., Lopez, P., Uppala, A., Rosati, D., Rodrigues, N. P., Grabitz, P., & Rife, S. C. (2021). scite: A smart citation index that displays the context of citations and classifies their intent using deep learning. Quantitative Science Studies, 2(3), 882–898. https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00146

43. Ponsonnet, M. (2022). Emotional linguistic relativity and cross-cultural research on emotions. In G. L. Schiewer, J. Altarriba, & B. C. Ng (Eds.), Handbook on language and emotion (pp. 789–812). Mouton de Gruyter.

44. Psillos, S., & Curd, M. (Eds.). (2008). The Routledge companion to philosophy of science. Routledge.

45. Saka, P. (2011). The act of quotation. In E. Brendel, J. Meibauer, & M. Steinbach (Eds.), Understanding quotation (pp. 1–28). Mouton de Gruyter.

46. Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á., & Pabón Berbesí, M. (2009). “Backstage solidarity” in Spanishand English-written medical research papers: Publication context and the acknowledgment paratext. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(2), 307–317. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20981

47. White, P. R. R. (2015). Appraisal theory. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., pp. 779–784). Elsevier. https://prrwhite.info/prrwhite,%202015,%20Appraisal%20theory,%20Wiley%20Encylopedia.pdf