Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
59 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
P. Brown and Levinson's model: In the interpersonal dimension of talk there are two basic orientations to the functions or goals of talk? What are they and describe them. How do they interact?
|
1. TRANSACTIONAL ORIENTATION: factual information exchange plus instrumental goals; e.g., giving and receiving goods, directions, instructions, recipes, advice … i.e., Gricean view.
2. PHATIC ORIENTATION: affirmation and creation of social bonds; affirmation and creation of identity of self, other, and relationship. Without attending to phatic goals, transactional goals will not get accomplished. In other words, participants need to orient to both the transactional and phatic aspects of interaction. |
|
|
Describe the politeness model of B&L?
|
1. Individuals are rational, can carry out means-ends reasoning.
2. Individuals have the desire to protect their identities. 3. To do 1 interactants must do 2. Identity = Face, with two desires: NEGATIVE FACE: The desire to be unimpeded, to not have one's freedom restricted. POSITIVE FACE: The desire to be approved of by particular others. Most if not all interaction are a threat to face, therefore need to do facework! |
|
|
Describe:
WFTA = P(A/S) + D(S &A) +rx So what are the 2 basic tenets of this equation? What happens if you do to much or to little facework? |
P(A/S) = POWER OF A OVER S
D(S & A) = SOCIAL DISTANCE BETWEEN S AND A: closer, more intimate; further, more distant. rx: = DEGREE OF IMPOSITION OF THE ACT: e.g., borrowing a dime or $1, 000; asking for help to open door or to jump-start car. 1)The more face is threatened, the more facework must be done. 2)Once the amount of face threat calculated, do that much facework and no more. ~If do less than necessary, face threatening (and thus interpersonal problems). ~If do more than necessary, inefficient (NOTE: this is one way to distinguish the everyday sense of ‘politeness’ from the technical sense.) ~Doing too much or too little leads to inferences. |
|
|
What are the 4 FACEWORK SUPERSTRATEGIES AND 2 STRATEGIES?
|
1. LO Threat: BALD ON RECORD (Gricean, clear, precise, and to the point)
2. MED Threat: ON RECORD, (Clear what act is being done) (a) with POSITIVE POLITENESS ~CLAIM COMMON GROUND: You look great. What a beautiful baby. That was an absolutely fabulous dinner. Hey, sweetie. ~CONVEY S & A ARE COOPERATORS: Shall we eat? Give us a kiss. Let's stop for a bite. I'll help if I can. I'd love to help. I promise to be there. ~FULFILL A'S WANTS: That's really terrible. I'm sorry to hear that. Take this. (b) with NEGATIVE POLITENESS ~DON'T PRESUME/ASSUME: I wonder if I might help you? You're sad, I guess ~DON'T COERCE A: Perhaps I could get a lift. I don't imagine/suppose there'd be any chance/possibility that ... Could I borrow a smidgen of sugar? Can I help you, sir/madame/Mr. Prime Minister/Mr. President? ~COMMUNICATE S's WANT NOT TO IMPINGE: I'm sorry to bother you but... I hope this isn't a bad time but... You're the only person I can ask so...Dinner is ready. This is a "no smoking" house. Smoking is prohibited. ~REDRESS A's OTHER WANTS: I'll never be able to thank you enough. I can easily do that for you. It's no trouble at all. 3. MED/HI Threat: OFF RECORD (Some ambiguity about what act is being done) ~Off Record Politeness: displays that S is giving A options about how to interpret S's act. Thus, what S says is ambiguous. Strategies: hint, understate, overstate, use tautologies, be ironic, use metaphors, use rhetorical questions, be vague/ambiguous, be incomplete. Be vague or ambiguous. 4. HI Threat: DO NOT DO THE FTA |
|
|
What type of facework is going on here?
1A: yea:h i remember they mentioned about the prototype right a 2 while back 3B: yeah [yeah i don't see how] 4A: [and they were] interviewing people [right] 5B: [yeah]= 6A: =yeah= |
POSITIVE FACE (Solidarity) AGREEING and BEING INVOLVED?
|
|
|
What type of facework is going on here?
1T: isn't there any uh (0.7) kind of jobs you can get in the art (0.3) 2 field 3L: other than galleries but you have to have experience (0.4) in (.) 4 and that's like commissioned sales (0.5) i'm not a sales person 5 i'm not [a] 6T: [mm] 7L: negotiating type (0.5) buy this picture because (.) you know 8T: mm 9 (0.7) 10L: um (2.5) i could work at like regis (1.8) like picture framing place 11T: mm 12L: yahoo (.) cut frame like 13T: mm goody goody= 14L: =matting i don't think so |
POSITIVE FACE (Solidarity): JOKING.
|
|
|
What type of facework is going on here?
Example 6:15 (kids playing Spirograph) 1J: i don't like this one 2 (4.0) 3J: d'ya like this one 4 (1.0) 5R: i like this one= 6J: =d'ya like this one 7 (1.5) 8R: sorduv |
POSITIVE FACEWORK (Solidarity) AVOIDING DISAGREEMENTS and MINIMIZING DISAGREEMENTS.
|
|
|
What type of facework is going on here?
Example 6:16 1L: well (.) can you check the email tomorrow morning 2B: ya:::= 3L: otherwise i'll go to his office and bang on his door |
NEGATIVE FACE (respect and deference) CONVENTIONALLY INDIRECT REQUESTS.
|
|
|
What type of facework is going on here?
Example 6:20 (Student to professor, overheard) 1S: oh (.) a quick question 2P: mmhh 3S: would it be okay to show your nursery clips in my tutorial ... |
NEGATIVE FACE (respect and deference) PRESEQUENCES.
|
|
|
What type of facework is going on here?
1T: i must not be understanding [something] 2C: [yeah well she] it's her boyfriend |
NEGATIVE FACE (respect and deference) GIVE REASONS, EXCUSES, APOLOGIES, HEDGE, BE PESSIMISTIC.
|
|
|
What kind of difficulty does this show for facework?
Example 6:24 1A: you don't seem to be having any side effects 2B: to what 3A: the accutane 4B: this and my nose is super dry (.) look at my lips right now it's 5 so dry 6 (0.5) 7A: oh (.) kay [cause it looks just fine] |
DIFFICULT FACEWORK SITUATIONS:
SELF-DEPRECATIONS. Attacking own positive face leads to two contradictory motivations. Want to agree with others and at same time when agreeing also attacking the persons positive face. |
|
|
What difficulty does this show for faecwork?
1A: i got a ticket here yesterday 2B: why: 3A: i was testing the you can can park under the library when you 4 have a parking permit theory (.) after a certain time (.) but it did 5 not work (.) i parked here okay (.) nine o'clock 6B: mhm 7A: it was nine o'clock wednesday evening it's not like there's hu:ge 8 [demand] 9B: [really] and you got a ticket 10A: i got a ticket from the parking bastards 11 (0.8) 12B: i am so surprised |
COMPLAINTS: Complaints threaten negative face of person to whom complaint is addressed ('force' a story on B). Forcing view of complain on listener because looking for them to agree. If they don't agree they are threatening the complainers positive face.
|
|
|
What does this example show about facework?
Example 7:4 1C: yes it should be such a big deal 2 because i'm moving in a week 3D: so what |
Extension to B&L's politeness model: Attacking Positive Face.
|
|
|
What does this example show about facework?
Example 7:9 1A: [oh come on (.) give me a break] i don't think so 2J: i think it's true= 3A: =i really don't think so 4J: i totally believe it is true 5A: no i don't no it's not ... |
Extension to B&L's politeness model: Attack by recycled contradictions.
|
|
|
What does this example show about facework?
1M: i know connor is SO:: cute 2K: your boyfriend 3M: SHUT UP ((laughs)) i know this gu:y i know this guy that would 4 be so: for you (.) why don't you ask him out PLEA::SE 5K: no thank you |
The indexicality of face and facework: usually shut up would be an attack to a persons negative face. Here it is an affirming act of their relationship (how close they are).
|
|
|
Explain the reflexivity of face and facework? Give an example of how a con artist could use reflexivity?
|
Wfta = P(A/S) + D(S/A) + Rx
Can “run” this equation in two directions: (i)(Reading equation forward) Speaker can determine how much facework is required for the act she is about to perform. (ii)(reading equation backward) The Addressee can determine, how weighty (Wfta) the Speaker perceived her act to be. The Addressee knows that the sum of P, D and Rx is equal to Wfta. Thus, from the amount of facework present in the Speaker’s action the Addressee can infer how the Speaker perceives R, D and Rx. iii) The Speaker knows that the Addressee can read the equation backwards (knowing how the Speaker perceives R, D and R) the speaker can use her talk to negotiate, manipulate or make a claim about the relationship in some way. In a nightclub, a man sits down next to a woman he has never met before, puts his arm around her and says, "Hey, babe, let’s have a drink". Given the relationship between these persons (strangers, equal status) and the nature of the man’s actions, the man is not being polite (i.e., from a Brown & Levinson perspective). However, given that talk is REFLEXIVE, we can understand that the man may have spoken in the way he did in an attempt to manipulate, in some way, the woman's perception of their relationship and his actions. |
|
|
Name 6 Positive aspects of B&L's model?
|
1. Emphasizes importance of interpersonal dimension of talk.
2. Introduces face as desires (2 kinds of desires to be unimpeded & to be approved of) and of facework, structures of talk in and through which face is protected, repaired, upgraded or attacked. 3. Identifies range of strategies for doing facework. 4. Emphasizes reflexive relationship between talk & social structure (no one to one relationships of strategy to act). 5. Face is a co-constructed and indexical accomplishment. Co-constructed since face/facework are negotiated. Indexical since negotiation occurs in specific settings involving specific persons engaged in specific sequences of turns at talk. 6. B&L provide model of some important aspects of being a member of a culture that must be acquired by children. Opens up issues for research in developmental psych. |
|
|
Name 5 Problems with the B&L model?
|
1. Positive and Negative face.
a) Pos facework strategies may also be used to do neg facework, and vice versa. b) Neg face desire to be unimpeded; pos face desire to have others value one's wants (actions, values, beliefs, desires, etc.). Thus, neg face subsumed under pos face. 2. S's face versus A's face. a) B & L focus almost entirely on facework S directs to A’s face. b) According to B & L, each facework strategy is oriented to S’s face OR to A's face. Should be Dyadic! 3. Measuring amount of facework; and predicting amount of facework. a) There is no standard or accepted measurement model. b) B & L model as presented may not be FALSIFIABLE i.e., possible to interpret ANY observation. 4. Is B&L culturally specific? (i) how people in different cultures 'measure' (ii) what facework strategies are available. 5. Is there manifest evidence that participants orient to facework? Sometimes no evidence that participants are doing facework yet analyst still claims they are doing facework. |
|
|
What is the first set of Theoretical assumptions of CA (conversational analysis)? What is the structure of talk? What is the major method? What is the second set of Theoretical assumptions of CA (conversational analysis)? How is understanding dependent on turns of at talk?
|
* There are Orderly Methods for doing talk that are obvious and sequential structures (turn-by-turn).
4. Talk unfolds over time, turn-by-turn, with an exchange of speakers and with one participant talking at a time. ~Sequential placement is the major method for doing talk/interaction. Thus, structures of adjacency are important methods for doing interaction. * Conditional Relevance: Talk is context-shaped and context-shaping. Each new turn depends on old turn (look back and context-shaped), and sets stage by constraining range of actions for next turn (look forward and context-shaping). ~In order for understanding to occur turns must be related-conditional relevance. |
|
|
Explain how we know talk is orderly according to the CA?
|
1. Talk is most frequent and universal form of social interaction.
2a) Interaction is ORDERLY and talk is one way we interact. 2b) Talk = orderly, therefore methods = orderly. 2c) Participants co-construct Orderly Methods. |
|
|
What are the 3 assumptions about CA's orderly methods?
|
3a) The orderly methods are (i) structural and (ii) social.
3b) The orderly methods are used to produce and interpret talk. 3c) The orderly methods have moral force. Actions not in accordance with orderly methods are noticeable and accountable. |
|
|
According to CA how do we create Intersubjectivity?
|
Intersubjectivity is a by-product of the turn taking system e.g. in 3 turn sequence, in turn 2 A shows how he treats S's prior turn by what he orients to and S in turn 3 shows how she treats A's prior turn and so on...
|
|
|
Explain the 5 Methodological Approaches of the CA.
|
1.Data: SPONTANEOUS TALK.
2.TRANSCRIPTIONS. No detail of talk can be considered a priori irrelevant (need to look at real talk examples, micro level details are important). 3.Examine STRUCTURAL features of talk. Qualitative analysis. 4.Focus on PARTICIPANTS' MEANINGS, not analyst meaning. 5.Ignore EXOGENOUS FEATURES (features that are not obviously displayed in the interaction or transcript). |
|
|
What are the 5 Structural Organizations of CA?
|
1. Turn taking: structures of adjacency one speaker at a time, alternation of conditionally relevant turns, minimal pauses local organization of taking turns: practices of turn-taking on TCUs and TRPs.
Theory: Intersubjectivity is a by product of turn-taking. 2. Adjacency pairs 1st and 2nd pair-parts. Conditional relevance: particular type of 1st produced by S makes immediately relevant the production by A of some member of a particular set of 2nds. Expansion: pre's, insertion sequences, post expansions. Theory: the sequencing of 1st and 2nd pp shows how talk is orderly. 3. Preference: ~preferred & dispreferred actions. ~preferred (short, and to point) & dispreferred (long) structure. Theory: across and within turns. 4. Repairs: Theory: maintain intersubjectivity by dealing with breakdown. Because we infer in talk, inference can go wrong! 5. Pre's and Pre-Sequences strategic projected action sequences? Fishing; noticing as strategic action sequences. Pre's and facework. |
|
|
Why is talk a moral act? Where does the moral aspect of talk occur in CA?
|
Mutual assumption the P's will respond (turn-taking) and with a mutually relevant turn (2nd pp) and do so without violation along the way. Must TRUST!
Violations of turn-taking practices e.g. cutting someone off in a story? In Adjacency pairs: noticeable absence & accountability: the moral aspect of structures of talk. |
|
|
According to CA how do we coordinate turns?
|
By orienting to two types of units Turn Constructional Units (TCU = an idea unite which will naturally have a TRP at the end) and Transition Relevance Places (TRP = turn taking happens here with the 4 rules).
|
|
|
What are the 4 Rules of TRP according to CA?
|
Rules 1: current speaker selects a next speaker.
Rule 2: current speaker doesn't select th next speaker, any other party may self-select. Rules 3: current speaker doesn't select next speaker, no other party self-selects, then current speaker may continue. Rule 4: when rule 3 is applied by current speaker then at next TRP rule 1-3 apply. |
|
|
What does this example show about a type of structural organization?
Example 8:2 1I: susan did you have something 2S: um: no do you want me to keep reading 3I: yeah sure |
Turn-taking: specifically smooth TRP. Intersubjectivity is a by product of Turn-Taking!!!
|
|
|
What does this example show about the structural organization of talk? Specifically it shows how one problem is fixed?
Example 8:7 (telephone talk) 1A: got it all in there 2B: ten four 3A: okay buddy when ya when you get out here next weekend 4B: okay 5A: see ya 6B: kay bud 7 ((talk ended, presumably due to telephone disconnection)) |
Given the rules of TCU and TCP we should expect minimal or no gap between turns. So how to end a conversation?
Closings & pre-closings! |
|
|
What does this example show about the structual organization of talk. Specifically what problem does it solve?
Example 8:9 1.A: o:h speaking of crazy neighbors 2B: ye[ah] 3A: [you]'ve got nuthin you've got no problems did i tell you (.) 4 about my aunt and uncles' crazy neighbor 5B: no 6A: oh my god the guy's a total nutbar (.) okay (.) they live ... ((A continues to talk for many turns; B backchannels)) |
Given the rules of TCU and TCP we should expect minimal or no gap between turns. So how do we take an extended turn?
Narratives & pre-narratives! |
|
|
What does this example show about the structural organization of talk? Specifically what problem does it solve?
Example 8:10 (telephone talk) 1A: yeah that's what they do like at coffee [shops] 2B: [i thought] they put um 3 (0.7) uh (0.5) cinnamon on it 4A: it’s usually nutmeg or cinnamon or um uh chocolate sprinkles 5 (1.2) 6B: oh coo:l 7A: yeah it's awe[some] 8B: [right] on (1.8) goo:d |
Given the rules of TCU and TCP we should expect minimal or no gap between turns. So how do we display interest and agreement in an extended turns?
Continuers & Assessors (i.e., backchannels)! |
|
|
What are 3 types of TRP's? What Type of talk in not a TRP? How does current speaker hold his turn?
|
1. Smooth TRP: no overlap or extended pauses.
2. Overlap: 2 or more parties talk at once. 3. Interruption: current speaker has not hit a TRP when other speaker interrupts with an overlap. Backchanneling: brief overlap usually by listener. Filled or Unfilled Pauses: umms and uhhs usually when taking extended turn. |
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Be specific.
Example 9:1 1A and then like we'll study for a few hours and go for lunch 2B: okay |
Adjacency Pair: Invite-Accept/Decline. Turns come in sequences which shows how talk is orderly.
|
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Be specific.
Example 9:3 1A: hi greg 2B: hi |
Adjacency Pair: Greeting-Greeting. Turns come in sequences which shows how talk is orderly.
|
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Be specific.
Example 9:5 1A: bye 2B: bye |
Adjacency Pair: Parting-Parting. Turns come in sequences which shows how talk is orderly.
|
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Be specific.
Example 9:6 1A: are you able to make a sign for me 2B: uhhmm |
Adjacency Pair:
Request-Grant/Refuse. Turns come in sequences which shows how talk is orderly. |
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Be specific.
Example 9:8 (mother and child are making up a story from a picture book) 1M: okay ((cough)) ay so they're just standing there 2C: yeap |
Adjacency Pair: Inform-Acknowledge. Turns come in sequences which shows how talk is orderly.
|
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Specifically it shows a complication for one?
Example 9:9 1A: you wouldn't believe what happened last night 2B: what happened 3A: well we got stopped by a cop |
Complications to the "simple" adjacency pair structure: Expansion Sequences. Specifically Pre's, and uptake, and announcement.
|
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Specifically it shows a complication for one?
Example 9:14 1A: well you know why i bet you any money kevin [they're saying maybe] 2B: [i'll tell you why because] 3A: i'll tell you why |
Complications to the "simple" adjacency pair structure: Expansion Sequences. Specifically a turn-down sequence. Pre-inform then turn-down, then again tries.
|
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Specifically it shows a complication for one?
Example 9:15 1A: kay what would you do with yours 2 B: i would buy a condominium 3A: for how much 4B: how much 5A: how much do you think you'd spend on a condominium 6B: probably (3.0) two hundred thousand dollars |
Complications to the "simple" adjacency pair structure:
Expansion Sequences. Specifically an insertion sequence. |
|
|
Which structural organization does this example demonstrate? Specifically it shows a complication for one?
Example 9:17 1A: i got this weird picture of a goul (.) or (.) what do you call those (.) 2 things that sit on the edge of buildings 3B: gargoyles 4A: gargoyles that's it |
Complications to the "simple" adjacency pair structure:
Expansion Sequences. Specifically Post Expansion Sequence. |
|
|
What does this example show about one of the structural organizations of CA?
Example 9:20 (recalled interaction of A and B, a married couple) 1A: i'm getting fat 2B: (3.0) 3A: do you really think so |
Conditional Relevance:production of 1st pp by S makes relevant the immediate production of an appropriate 2nd pp by A.
~When a Noticeable Absence of the 2nd pp occurs, then we assume this was the intention and draw an inference on the absence as meaning something (i.e. agreeing in this case). |
|
|
What does this example show about one of the Structural Organizations of CA?
Example 9:22 (engaged couple) 1A: you still haven't answered my question 2B: mm i'm not gonna answer that question 3A: why 4B: cause it's a loaded question 5A: no it isn’t 6B: yeah it is (.) i think it is |
Accountability & the Moral aspect of adjacency pairs. When a 1st pp is not answered, we hold the person morally responsible.
|
|
|
What does this example show about one of the structural organization of CA?
Example 10:1 (mother and child are playing with a dollhouse) 1M: and they know mum and daddy are coming home pretty soon 2 soon righ[t] 3C: [y]eah= 4M: =they'll be home tomorrow 5C: yeah |
Preferred Response (the response that is most frequent and the response the 1st pp is structured to produce) in Preferred Structure.
|
|
|
What does this example show about one of the structural organizations of CA?
Example 10:9 (telephone talk) 1R: ... takes place up at the university this Saturday from seven 2o’clock in the morning ‘til about ten-thirty 3(1.6) 4S: uuuh (1.2) hum (1.5) until ten-thirty (.) i i have an exam that day 5(1.3) so:::: (0.8) i don't think i should |
Dispreferred Response (the response that is least frequent and the response the 1st pp is not structured to produce) in Dispreferred Structure.
|
|
|
What does this example show about one of the structural organization of CA?
Example 10:10 1M: ju’wanna finish the story real quick first okay 2 (2.5) 3C: okay |
Preferred Response (the response that is most frequent and the response the 1st pp is structured to produce) in Dispreferred Structure.
|
|
|
What does this example show about one of the structural organization of CA?
Example 10:14 (two friends playing Scrabble) 1A: i don't think you can go backwards 2B: yeah you ca:n be shannon look how the word goes |
Dispreferred Response (the response that is least frequent and the response the 1st pp is not structured to produce) in Preferred Structure.
|
|
|
What is a Repair Sequences and explain the steps?
|
Sequences of turns manifestly oriented to repairing intersubjectivity.
1. Find the beginning of the Problem. 2. Find the repairable. 3. Identify the repair initiator (could be speaker or addressee). 4. Identify who performs the repair (addressee repaired is more face threatening). |
|
|
What does this example show about one of the Structural Organizations of CA?
Example 10:17 (Mother, M, & 3:6 year old Daughter, D) 1M: o::h 2D: shes deaded she's dead ( ) she's died 3M: she did ((yawn)) (0.9) she keeps dying and coming back to life … |
Self Initiated-Self Repair on one line.
|
|
|
What does this example show about one of the Structural Organizations of CA?
Example 10:21 1A: i never stayed anywhere long enough to really get like that (.) i 2 hated waitressing (.) i couldn’t wait tables i was no good at it 3B: a lot of people aren’t nice 4 (2.4) 5A: what (.) waiters= 6B: =to waiters 7A: mm (.) yeah i know that's why it sucks |
Other Initiate and Self Repair.
3((repairable)) 4((repair initiator)) 5((repair initiator)) 6((repair)) 7(acknowledge)) |
|
|
What does this example show about one of the Structural Organizations of CA?
Example 10:24 (Mother, M, & 3:6 year old Daughter, D) 1M: ( ) its time to turn it off and we're going to go downstairs 2D:and have and and[have] 3M: [make] 4D: and make and and have marshmallows (.) to eat … |
Other-Initiated/Other-Repair.
2. ((repairable)) 3. ((initiator and repair)) 4. ((acknowledge)) |
|
|
What does this example show about one of the Structural Organizations of CA?
Example 10:28 1A: okay i gotta go to ah the automotive at one o'clock 2 (0.6) 3B: why's that 4A: on homer and hilmkin 5B: yeah i know i said why’s that 6A: o::h why's that i gotta show a guy a wine label 7B: oh really:: |
The repair is repaired:
1. ((Repairable)) 2. ((Repair initiator)) 3. ((repair))/ repairable 4. ((repair is rejected))/ and becomes the repairable. 5. repair initiator. 6. repair. |
|
|
Name the 5 Positive aspects of CA?
|
1. Talk is social interaction.
2. Sequential orders of structures. 3. Talk is a co-constructed achievement and so is meaning. 4. Talk is a human practice. Not a description of determining factors of talk but a standard against what we measure talk. 5. Practices of talk are moral practices. Violations must be accounted for. |
|
|
Name the 3 problems with CA for a psychological model of talk?
|
1. Can analyze CHANGE but not DEVELOPMENT. Has no teleos, needs some sense for what is better and worse for development.
2. Ignores the structure of language (grammar), but there seems to be some linguistic structures that are used more than others. 3. Focus on obvious aspects of talk P's orient to and ignores context. |
|
|
Describe (Developmental) Social Pragmatics? What theoretical and methodological tenets does it use?
|
Pragmatics: deals with the ways we reach our goal in communication. So this approach assumes that talk is universal and very frequent activity with which we get practical and interpersonal goals done.
This approach is developmental in that it assumes that children are socialized in and through talk. Through talk also learn all forms of knowledge. So as talk is socially constructed knowledge is also socially constructed because it is based on talk. Based on a compilation of successful tenets from other theoretical approaches such as the speech Act model, Grice's Cooperative Principle, and CA (orderly methods, co-constructed actions, sequential structure, all obvious in talk). Doesn't incorporate any Code Model! |
|
|
Applying social pragmatics to developmental psychology opens up four broad sets of issues. Name the last 2? Explain the research example that goes with each? What is their methodology? What question does it answer?
|
1. Look at how aspects of the talk infants and children participate in influences their social-cognitive, moral and cultural development.
Co-operation and constraint in mother-child talk: mother and child read book with only pics, mother must make sure child gets book (by repairs). Constraining mothers: telling their kids what the story is and saying they are wrong. Example 11:2 1M: kay (0.5) so sarah (1.0) what does she do with hers ((id question)) 2C: she just grabs her hands ((ans; repairable)) 3M: she eats it right away ((repair)) Co-constructing mothers: allow their kids to reach conclusion on their own and only aid in repairs. Example 10:9 1C: [bil]ly and sarah are 2(0.9) 3M: are what 4C: are (4.0) i don’t kn[ow] 5M: [figh]ting 6C: fighting 7M: accusing each other (.) is that the word you’re looking for 9C: ah:: (.) they’re (0.2) remember what i do tattle on b well they’re tattling on him and sarah and billy 13M: they’re tattling on each other 14C: yeah Conclusion: Cooperative dyad kids were more cog/socially advanced. Allow kid's perspective to grow aids social development. 2. Perceptual and cognitive systems develop as a result of social interaction. Social interaction will have huge effect on structure of perceptual and cognitive systems. Look at how they relate to talk. An example of the cog/perceptual demands of talk. 1C: i open them 2 (1.0) 3M: shall we try that again 4C: may i please open them 5M: yes you may So much demand of the child here. Practical abilities for C to know that M's silence and shall we try it again means that C did something problematic. Then C knows what to try again "may I please" and the correct thing "May I and please" M was looking for. 3. How to know what children are understanding. Social Pragmatics use: the ‘next-turn proof procedure.’ For example in studying the development of pointing as a way to get joint attention. Researcher watches C point to a banana, gets M's joint attention which M's orients to as C wanting the banana. M then gives C the banana which C turns away from. C does not treat her own point as a request. M continued to do so. This is an interactional sequence that can be studied by the next-turn proof procedure. How M treats C may be useful in C learning joint attention and interaction. |
|
|
What does this example show about an action sequence. Name the strategy and the specific theoretical underpinning.
Example 12:1 (9:11) 1T: hey dallas are you free to play 2D: yeah sure 3T: cool thanks (.) do you want to play monkeyi:::::ng around or do you want 15to play bu::::bles 5D: monkeying around's good 6T: cool aright … |
Pre-sequences: may be built to anticipate and circumvent rejection or disagreement.
1 T asked a pre if D is free before asking if D wants to play. Asking in case not free so doesn't get rejected. Theory: the knowledge & cog-perceptual abilities required to engage in strategic actions in talk. |
|
|
What does this example show about an action sequence. Name the strategy and the specific theoretical underpinning.
Example 12:5 (telephone talk) 1A: your line’s been busy 2B: yeah my fu- .hh my father’s wife called me … |
Fishing: telling my side, limited access as a fishing device to get information without directly asking.
1 A tells B what A knows about B's situation in hopes B will fill in the rest. Theory: shows the knowledge & cog-perceptual abilities required to engage in strategic actions in talk. |
|
|
What does this example show about an action sequence. Name the strategy and the specific theoretical underpinning.
Example 12:10 1:M hey you get my wedding gift 2:J yes i did, thanks 3:M oh just wondering because i thought it might have been lost. making sure you 4:J oh we got it 5:M you can never be too sure its always good to check |
Defensive Detailing: when a speaker M produces an action that may give moral offense (did you get my wedding gift, looking for a thank you but actually may feel that J lost it so making sure), and then M builds a detailed case that she has not committed an offense (oh just making sure not lost, you can never be too sure. Doing so because wants to come across as genuine that she didn't think the negative that J didn't thank her but thinks the positive that J lost it.
Theory: the knowledge & cog-perceptual abilities required to engage in strategic actions in talk. |
