Difference between revisions of "Lindstroem-Karlsson2016"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Jan Lindström; Susanna Karlsson; |Title=Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interac...")
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Jan Lindström; Susanna Karlsson;
 
|Author(s)=Jan Lindström; Susanna Karlsson;
 
|Title=Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction
 
|Title=Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Grammar-in-interaction; Epistemic disclaimers; Epistemic stance; Epistemic asymmetry; Medical interaction; (Finland) Swedish
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Grammar-in-interaction; Epistemic disclaimers; Epistemic stance; Epistemic asymmetry; Medical interaction; (Finland) Swedish; Medical EMCA
 
|Key=Lindstroem-Karlsson2016
 
|Key=Lindstroem-Karlsson2016
 
|Year=2016
 
|Year=2016
Line 10: Line 10:
 
|Volume=106
 
|Volume=106
 
|Pages=129-147
 
|Pages=129-147
 +
|URL=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216616303046?via%3Dihub
 
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.07.003
 
|DOI=https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.07.003
|Abstract=Advanced
+
|Abstract=This article analyzes the halts in sequential progressivity that are caused by claims of no-knowledge in Swedish medical interaction. The focus is on responsive turns and turn-constructional units that are prefaced by the epistemic disclaimer jag vet inte ‘I don’t know’. We argue that this use of epistemic disclaimers does not primarily display the speaker's lack of knowledge, but that their presence signals interactional problems that are contingent on epistemic asymmetries between the participants. Patient replies that contain an epistemic disclaimer are nonconforming responses and they therefore resist something about the question: the presupposed access to knowledge or the rights to knowledge. The present analysis demonstrates that epistemic tensions, especially in lay–professional interaction, are handled by the lay party using epistemic disclaimers. These can initiate a shift in epistemic posture toward a more independent, more personally accurate formulation of knowledge that somehow contrasts with the professional party's assumptions.
Outline
 
 
 
    Highlights
 
    Abstract
 
    Keywords
 
    1. Introduction
 
    2. Background: epistemic asymmetries in medical interaction
 
    3. Data and collection
 
    4. Analysis: dealing with epistemic access and primacy
 
    5. Conclusions
 
    Acknowledgements
 
    Appendix.
 
    References
 
    Vitae
 
 
 
Tables (9)
 
 
 
    Table
 
    Table 1
 
    Table
 
    Table
 
    Table
 
    Table
 
 
 
Elsevier
 
Journal of Pragmatics
 
Volume 106, December 2016, Pages 129-147
 
Journal of Pragmatics
 
Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction
 
Author links open overlay panelJanLindströmaSusannaKarlssonb
 
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.07.003
 
Get rights and content
 
Under a Creative Commons license
 
open access
 
Highlights
 
 
 
 
 
 
    This article analyzes the Swedish epistemic disclaimer jag vet inte in patient responses.
 
 
 
 
    The responses problematize the presupposed access or rights to knowledge.
 
 
 
 
    By claiming no knowledge, the speaker can initiate a shift in epistemic posture.
 
 
 
 
    The shift is toward a more independent, personally accurate formulation of knowledge.
 
 
 
 
    This formulation of knowledge contrasts with the professional party's assumptions.
 
 
 
Abstract
 
 
 
This article analyzes the halts in sequential progressivity that are caused by claims of no-knowledge in Swedish medical interaction. The focus is on responsive turns and turn-constructional units that are prefaced by the epistemic disclaimer jag vet inte ‘I don’t know’. We argue that this use of epistemic disclaimers does not primarily display the speaker's lack of knowledge, but that their presence signals interactional problems that are contingent on epistemic asymmetries between the participants. Patient replies that contain an epistemic disclaimer are nonconforming responses and they therefore resist something about the question: the presupposed access to knowledge or the rights to knowledge. The present analysis demonstrates that epistemic tensions, especially in lay–professional interaction, are handled by the lay party using epistemic disclaimers. These can initiate a shift in epistemic posture toward a more independent, more personally accurate formulation of knowledge that somehow contrasts with the professional party's assumptions.
 
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 08:45, 7 September 2018

Lindstroem-Karlsson2016
BibType ARTICLE
Key Lindstroem-Karlsson2016
Author(s) Jan Lindström, Susanna Karlsson
Title Tensions in the epistemic domain and claims of no-knowledge: A study of Swedish medical interaction
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Grammar-in-interaction, Epistemic disclaimers, Epistemic stance, Epistemic asymmetry, Medical interaction, (Finland) Swedish, Medical EMCA
Publisher
Year 2016
Language English
City
Month
Journal Journal of Pragmatics
Volume 106
Number
Pages 129-147
URL Link
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.07.003
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This article analyzes the halts in sequential progressivity that are caused by claims of no-knowledge in Swedish medical interaction. The focus is on responsive turns and turn-constructional units that are prefaced by the epistemic disclaimer jag vet inte ‘I don’t know’. We argue that this use of epistemic disclaimers does not primarily display the speaker's lack of knowledge, but that their presence signals interactional problems that are contingent on epistemic asymmetries between the participants. Patient replies that contain an epistemic disclaimer are nonconforming responses and they therefore resist something about the question: the presupposed access to knowledge or the rights to knowledge. The present analysis demonstrates that epistemic tensions, especially in lay–professional interaction, are handled by the lay party using epistemic disclaimers. These can initiate a shift in epistemic posture toward a more independent, more personally accurate formulation of knowledge that somehow contrasts with the professional party's assumptions.

Notes