Difference between revisions of "Duncker2012"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Dorthe Duncker |Title=‘‘What’s it called?’’ – Conventionalization, glossing practices, and linguistic (in)determinacy |Tag(s...")
 
m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis;" to "Conversation Analysis;")
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Dorthe Duncker
 
|Author(s)=Dorthe Duncker
 
|Title=‘‘What’s it called?’’ – Conventionalization, glossing practices, and linguistic (in)determinacy
 
|Title=‘‘What’s it called?’’ – Conventionalization, glossing practices, and linguistic (in)determinacy
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Language conventions; Conventionalization; Metalanguage; Repair; Conversation analysis; Integrationism;
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Language conventions; Conventionalization; Metalanguage; Repair; Conversation Analysis; Integrationism;
 
|Key=Duncker2012
 
|Key=Duncker2012
 
|Year=2012
 
|Year=2012

Revision as of 09:20, 17 May 2018

Duncker2012
BibType ARTICLE
Key Duncker2012
Author(s) Dorthe Duncker
Title ‘‘What’s it called?’’ – Conventionalization, glossing practices, and linguistic (in)determinacy
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Language conventions, Conventionalization, Metalanguage, Repair, Conversation Analysis, Integrationism
Publisher
Year 2012
Language
City
Month
Journal Language & Communication
Volume 32
Number
Pages 400–419
URL
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2012.09.002
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

At first glance conventionalization may seem to have little in common with the integra- tionist notion of ‘radical indeterminacy’, but on closer inspection it appears that the glossing practices that support sign-making efforts and assist communicating participants in reducing indeterminacies are in fact situated enactments of conventionalization, and that conventionalization is a dynamic process. In a corpus of Danish conversations, this article studies how participants through metalinguistic discursive examination concurrently establish linguistic facts to their own satisfaction and simultaneously make them the subject of mutual communicative responsibility and continuity. The glossing episodes discussed are well known from conversation analysis as ‘repair’ incidents, but the present study shows them to be constitutive resources for semiological validation rather than transient interactional disruptions.

Notes