Keel2011
| Keel2011 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Keel2011 |
| Author(s) | Sara Keel |
| Title | The parents' questioning repeats in response to young children's evaluative turns |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Parent-child interactions, Questioning, Repeats |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2011 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Gesprächsforschung: Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion |
| Volume | 12 |
| Number | |
| Pages | 52–94 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Based on a large audiovisual corpus of naturally occurring everyday parent-child interactions, this paper analyses the parents’ uses of a typical other-repair-initiator, i.e. the questioning (full) repeat (Q(F)R), after a young child’s evaluative turn. By taking into account the immediate praxeological context, the aim of the paper is to demonstrate that beyond initiating repair, parents’ deployment of Q(F)Rs and children’s responses to it, accomplish other social (inter)actions. Firstly, I discuss occurrences in which the child’s evaluative turn accomplishes a noticing, which re-engages turn-by-turn talk, and I show how the parental questioning repeat (QR) primarily ratifies the child’s previous action. Secondly, I analyse sequences in which the child’s evaluative turn implements an announcement, after which the parent’s Q(F)R adumbrates or displays surprise/disbelief, and thus challenges the child’s initial claim. Thirdly, I examine situations in which young children’s evaluative turns do complaints, and the parents’ Q(F)Rs at the one hand project, and at the other hand delay disagreement with the child’s previous complaint. Finally, I analyse sequences in which the children’s evaluative turns imply requests, and show how parents’ Q(F)Rs not only delay the (partial) granting of their children’s requests, but also engender a step-wise negotiation of them. Thus, the paper explicates how parents’ and children’s interactional organization of a typical other-repair-initiator, such as the Q(F)R, is grounded in the immediate course of (inter) action; and how Q(F)Rs realize (particular, typical) matters of alignment/dis- alignment between the interactants and issues of membership categorization.
Notes
