Pomerantz1984c
| Pomerantz1984c | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Pomerantz1984c |
| Author(s) | Anita Pomerantz |
| Title | Giving a source or basis: the practice in conversation of telling “how I know” |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Knowledge |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1984 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Pragmatics |
| Volume | 8 |
| Number | 5-6 |
| Pages | 607–625 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1016/0378-2166(84)90002-X |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
People routinely attend to their bases of knowledge or sources when there is doubt about what is true. The grounds that they attend include their direct experience and what others have said. When people describe their bases or sources during a dispute, they may be defending viewpoints, backing away from positions, or deciding which versions are credible.
A feature of describing one's basis is that smaller claims are made than in asserting an objective state of affairs. In describing what is directly experienced, speakers are strictly accountable for representing only their experiences while they imply that these experiences are more or less typical. In reporting what others have said, speakers are strictly accountable for citing accurately, not for the views cited. Interactionally, they may be affiliating, disaffiliating or leaving ambiguous their positions on the cited views.
The descriptions which are given in situations of doubt are also used in a different set of circumstances. People describe their bases or sources when they perform sensitive actions. Actions may possibly be offensive, degrading, or compromising and yet conversants may still want to, or feel they should, perform those actions. The ambivalence or caution involved may be exhibited by the speakers' making limited or no claims on their own behalf.
Notes
