Difference between revisions of "VanBurgsteden2022"
JakubMlynar (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Lotte van Burgsteden; Hedwig te Molder; Geoffrey Raymond; |Title=Going against the interactional tide: The accomplishment of dialogic mo...") |
BogdanaHuma (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Lotte van Burgsteden; Hedwig te Molder; Geoffrey Raymond; | |Author(s)=Lotte van Burgsteden; Hedwig te Molder; Geoffrey Raymond; | ||
|Title=Going against the interactional tide: The accomplishment of dialogic moments from a conversation analytic perspective | |Title=Going against the interactional tide: The accomplishment of dialogic moments from a conversation analytic perspective | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation analysis; Dialogue studies; Normative accountability; Progressivity; Retro-sequence; Social solidarity | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation analysis; Dialogue studies; Normative accountability; Progressivity; Retro-sequence; Social solidarity |
|Key=VanBurgsteden2022 | |Key=VanBurgsteden2022 | ||
|Year=2022 | |Year=2022 | ||
|Language=English | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Discourse Studies | |Journal=Discourse Studies | ||
| + | |Volume=24 | ||
| + | |Number=4 | ||
| + | |Pages=491-513 | ||
|URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14614456221099167 | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/14614456221099167 | ||
|DOI=10.1177/14614456221099167 | |DOI=10.1177/14614456221099167 | ||
|Abstract=This article addresses a vital concern in current society by showing what participants themselves may treat as ways to transcend their differences. Actors’ shared understanding has been of longstanding interest across the social sciences. Conversation analysis (CA) treats the procedural infrastructure of interaction as the basis for participants to manage intersubjectivity. The field of dialogue studies has made occasions in which people transform their relationship by discussing their differences, central to their research project, and called them “dialogic moments.” This study draws on CA to investigate “dialogic moments,” but now through the eyes of participants themselves. Using single-case analysis, we argue that such moments require participants to go against normative orientations in talk promoting social solidarity and progressivity, by soliciting differences to understand and transcend them. This “going against the interactional tide” may explain both why dialogue is difficult to achieve and why it is appreciated by participants as dialogue. | |Abstract=This article addresses a vital concern in current society by showing what participants themselves may treat as ways to transcend their differences. Actors’ shared understanding has been of longstanding interest across the social sciences. Conversation analysis (CA) treats the procedural infrastructure of interaction as the basis for participants to manage intersubjectivity. The field of dialogue studies has made occasions in which people transform their relationship by discussing their differences, central to their research project, and called them “dialogic moments.” This study draws on CA to investigate “dialogic moments,” but now through the eyes of participants themselves. Using single-case analysis, we argue that such moments require participants to go against normative orientations in talk promoting social solidarity and progressivity, by soliciting differences to understand and transcend them. This “going against the interactional tide” may explain both why dialogue is difficult to achieve and why it is appreciated by participants as dialogue. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 22:28, 2 August 2022
| VanBurgsteden2022 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | VanBurgsteden2022 |
| Author(s) | Lotte van Burgsteden, Hedwig te Molder, Geoffrey Raymond |
| Title | Going against the interactional tide: The accomplishment of dialogic moments from a conversation analytic perspective |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation analysis, Dialogue studies, Normative accountability, Progressivity, Retro-sequence, Social solidarity |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2022 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Studies |
| Volume | 24 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 491-513 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/14614456221099167 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article addresses a vital concern in current society by showing what participants themselves may treat as ways to transcend their differences. Actors’ shared understanding has been of longstanding interest across the social sciences. Conversation analysis (CA) treats the procedural infrastructure of interaction as the basis for participants to manage intersubjectivity. The field of dialogue studies has made occasions in which people transform their relationship by discussing their differences, central to their research project, and called them “dialogic moments.” This study draws on CA to investigate “dialogic moments,” but now through the eyes of participants themselves. Using single-case analysis, we argue that such moments require participants to go against normative orientations in talk promoting social solidarity and progressivity, by soliciting differences to understand and transcend them. This “going against the interactional tide” may explain both why dialogue is difficult to achieve and why it is appreciated by participants as dialogue.
Notes
