Abstract
In this chapter I argue that seduction is what makes it harder to tell the difference between persuasion -that cannot do away with seductive language in order to win over the other -and manipulation which plays on the addressee's emotions or emotional needs (Baron 2003). Seduction thus constitutes the weak spot of persuasive discourse through which manipulative tricks can penetrate. Manipulation is commonly defined as what can only be covert and is null and void if discovered, I will prove that this is not necessarily the case especially when the addressee can perceive manipulation but is seduced by it any way. What distinguishes persuasion from manipulation is the strength of the pressure put on the Hearer to acquiesce (Sorlin 2017a). The role of seductive discourse as defined in this chapter is precisely to attenuate this pressure (on the surface) by using different linguistic, cognitive and pragmatic means that are detailed here and illustrated with an example drawn from the political TV series House of Cards (Netflix 2013-2018). My goal is to show that there is such a thing as a pragmatics of seduction, predicated on strategies of influence in precarious balance between persuasion and manipulation.