Controversial policy issues unveil a tug-of-war of assumptions, truth claims, symbols or metaphors. The analysis of what they “mean” has been the main focus of interpretive research in Political Science. Alongside this approach I argue that meanings are shaped by their positioning towards the epistemic surrounding and suggest stressing “the other” in the analysis. “The other” presents the main analytic challenge of French Discourse Linguistics and includes oppositions, revisions, extensions or innovation, as well as it points to the general role of context in which meaning is developed. Combining both - Political Science and Discourse Linguistics - means to explain why some meanings are privileged by specific groups of actors and why. I implement Patrick Charaudeau’s concept of a “contract of communication”, which supposes that the speaking subject builds a contract with his/her epistemic surrounding in order to communicate his/her scope. Not only can’t the analysis seize meanings without the reference to the epistemic background in that they emerge; it sorts out “the other” as the sum of incompatible elements with respective epistemic surrounding. I briefly discuss the controversy of 2005 end-of-life law in France and analyze how groups for and against euthanasia frame “the other”. This enables me to show how meanings get acknowledged within specific epistemic communities and why and how they initiate policies.
