Difference between revisions of "Antaki-Houtkoop-Rapley2000"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|Author(s)=Charles Antaki; Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra; Mark Rapley
 
|Author(s)=Charles Antaki; Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra; Mark Rapley
|Title="Brilliant, next question...": High-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units
+
|Title=“Brilliant, next question...: high-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Questioning; interviews
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Questioning; interviews
 
|Key=Antaki-Houtkoop-Rapley2000
 
|Key=Antaki-Houtkoop-Rapley2000
Line 12: Line 12:
 
|URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
 
|URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
 
|DOI=10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
 
|DOI=10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
|Abstract=We note interviewers' use, after an answer receipt, of markedly positive assessments (such as "brilliant," "excellent," etc.). They occur in a (permissive) sequence of [answer receipt] + [right/ok token] + [high-grade assessment] + [move to next item] which, we argue, are task-oriented, rather than content-oriented, devices. They signal movement through a series of interactional units: the completion of individual question-answer pairs, interview schedule sections, and the whole series of questions. We discuss the possibility that such high-grade assessment sequences are hearably "institutional" talk and that troublesome conduct of an interview may occasion their use to mark successful completion of institutional objectives (here, inter-view progress). We speculate on what it means to find that the use of these high-grade assessments seems to be more prominent in interviews with people with a learning disability but note that their use might signal an episode of "institution-al" exchange in any talk.
+
|Abstract=We note interviewers' use, after an answer receipt, of markedly positive assessments (such as "brilliant," "excellent," etc.). They occur in a (permissive) sequence of (answer receipt) + (right/ok token) + (high-grade assessment) + (move to next item) which, we argue, are task-oriented, rather than content-oriented, devices. They signal movement through a series of interactional units: the completion of individual question-answer pairs, interview schedule sections, and the whole series of questions. We discuss the possibility that such high-grade assessment sequences are hearably "institutional" talk and that troublesome conduct of an interview may occasion their use to mark successful completion of institutional objectives (here, interview progress). We speculate on what it means to find that the use of these high-grade assessments seems to be more prominent in interviews with people with a learning disability but note that their use might signal an episode of "institutional" exchange in any talk.
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 11:24, 27 October 2019

Antaki-Houtkoop-Rapley2000
BibType ARTICLE
Key Antaki-Houtkoop-Rapley2000
Author(s) Charles Antaki, Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra, Mark Rapley
Title “Brilliant, next question...”: high-grade assessment sequences in the completion of interactional units
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Questioning, interviews
Publisher
Year 2000
Language
City
Month
Journal Research on Language and Social Interaction
Volume 33
Number 3
Pages 235–262
URL Link
DOI 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3303_1
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

We note interviewers' use, after an answer receipt, of markedly positive assessments (such as "brilliant," "excellent," etc.). They occur in a (permissive) sequence of (answer receipt) + (right/ok token) + (high-grade assessment) + (move to next item) which, we argue, are task-oriented, rather than content-oriented, devices. They signal movement through a series of interactional units: the completion of individual question-answer pairs, interview schedule sections, and the whole series of questions. We discuss the possibility that such high-grade assessment sequences are hearably "institutional" talk and that troublesome conduct of an interview may occasion their use to mark successful completion of institutional objectives (here, interview progress). We speculate on what it means to find that the use of these high-grade assessments seems to be more prominent in interviews with people with a learning disability but note that their use might signal an episode of "institutional" exchange in any talk.

Notes