Bruun2017
| Bruun2017 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Bruun2017 |
| Author(s) | Andrea Bruun |
| Title | ”Hvordan har du sovet i nat, Per?”: En samtaleanalytisk undersøgelse af navne i hjemmeplejesamtaler |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation analysis, Names, Person reference, Home care |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2017 |
| Language | Danish |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Language Works - Sprogvidenskabeligt Studentertidsskrift |
| Volume | 2 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 46–65 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
When names occur in utterances, they can function as selecting a new speaker in conversations. But what happens when names occur in two-party conversations where using names for selecting a new speaker then seems irrelevant? This paper investigates the use of names in a conversation from the Danish homecare system. The conversation is between an elderly male citizen and his caretaker. There were several occurrences of the citizen’s name in the conversation, and these form the basis for the analysis. Using a collection based analysis a hypothesis was developed for the name-phenomenon to see if there was a pattern. One line of research suggests that names in this position serve a special purpose like the one found to hold true in this paper, where others say that the position of the name in the end of utterances make it an object for deletion which may question its role. The paper concludes that the following tendency is present in the data under question: The name occurs primarily turn finally in utterances that start a new sequence and which furthermore contain something problematic, especially concerning something intimate and integrity threatening according to the citizen where reestablishment of a mutual relation is attempted. This paper thus contributes to the understanding of the use of names in two-party conversations in line with the former view, and disagrees with the latter.
Notes
