Difference between revisions of "Park2017"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis;" to "Conversation Analysis;")
m
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Yujong Park
 
|Author(s)=Yujong Park
 
|Title=A closing-implicative practice in Korean primary medical care openings
 
|Title=A closing-implicative practice in Korean primary medical care openings
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Korean primary medical care encounters; Openings; Problem presentations;
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Korean primary medical care encounters; Openings; Problem presentations; Medical EMCA
 
|Key=Park2017
 
|Key=Park2017
 
|Year=2017
 
|Year=2017

Revision as of 01:55, 6 September 2018

Park2017
BibType ARTICLE
Key Park2017
Author(s) Yujong Park
Title A closing-implicative practice in Korean primary medical care openings
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Korean primary medical care encounters, Openings, Problem presentations, Medical EMCA
Publisher
Year 2017
Language
City
Month
Journal Journal of Pragmatics
Volume 108
Number
Pages 1-16
URL
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.10.004
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

Prior studies on institutional interactions have identified the opening phase as an important topic of study (Heritage and Robinson 2006; Robinson, 1998). This article employs conversation analysis to investigate the opening phase of videotaped acute primary care consultations in Korea to identify a closing-implicative practice (eti-ka apha-se-yo? ‘‘Where does it hurt?’’), which might be understood a being culturally specific. First, the article shows that the structure of openings in Korean primary care interaction consists of reducing activities as part of achieving an as-early-as-possible occasioning of the solicitation question. Second, after analyzing the sequential structure of the solicitation strategy that is most frequently employed, the article argues that the grammatical structure of this solicitation strategy and its pragmatic force limit the possible scope of patients’ responses to a minimal form (single TCU) describing the location (placement) of pain. The findings suggest that both the patient and doctor orient to the opening sequence as a path to history-taking by locating the primary problem. Implications of the finding for cross-cultural understandings of medical encounters are discussed.

Notes