Edwards2000
| Edwards2000 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Edwards2000 |
| Author(s) | Derek Edwards |
| Title | Extreme case formulations: softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | Discursive Psychology |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2000 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 33 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 347–373 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_01 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Extreme case formulations (ECFs) were identified by Pomerantz (1986) as expressions using extreme terms such as all, none, most, every, least, absolutely, completely, and so forth, whose uses are to defend or justify a description or assessment, especially in case of challenge. In this study, orientations to the extremity of ECFs are initially shown in how and when they are sometimes qualified or softened. Yet ECFs are overwhelmingly not softened. Further examination shows how ECFs can work as devices for doing "nonliteral," in the sense of being not accountably accurate descriptions. Rather, their extremity might be taken to display investment in, or stance toward, some state of affairs. In addition to Pomerantz's observations, therefore, ECFs can (a) display various kinds of "investment" on the part of the speaker (e.g., commitment, certainty, caring, determination, a critical or positive attitude, etc.) and (b) provide for a range of nonliteral, metaphoric uses (interpretable as "it seemed as if (extreme X)," "let us proceed as if (extreme Y)," or "take (extreme Z) as ironic, a joke, a tease, etc.").
Notes
