Difference between revisions of "Asmuss-Oshima2012"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Birte Asmuß; Sae Oshima |Title=Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences |Tag(s)=EMCA; Proposal-acceptance sequences; |Key=Asmu...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Birte Asmuß; Sae Oshima | |Author(s)=Birte Asmuß; Sae Oshima | ||
|Title=Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences | |Title=Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; proposal-acceptance sequences; affiliation; alignment; entitlement; institutional roles; meetings; multimodality; |
|Key=Asmuss-Oshima2012 | |Key=Asmuss-Oshima2012 | ||
|Year=2012 | |Year=2012 | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=14 | |Volume=14 | ||
|Number=1 | |Number=1 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=67–86 |
| + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445611427215 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1177/1461445611427215 | ||
| + | |Abstract=Meetings are complex institutional events at which participants recurrently negotiate institutional roles, which are oriented to, renegotiated, and sometimes challenged. With a view to gaining further understanding of the ongoing negotiation of roles at meetings, this article examines one specific recurring feature of meetings: the act of proposing future action. Based on microanalysis of video recordings of two-party strategy meetings, the study shows that participants orient to at least two aspects when making proposals: 1) the acceptance or rejection of the proposal; and 2) questions of entitlement: who is entitled to launch a proposal, and who is entitled to accept or reject it? The study argues that there is a close interrelation between questions of entitlement, aligning and affiliating moves, and the negotiation of institutional roles. The multimodal analysis also reveals the use of various embodied practices by participants for the local negotiation of entitlement and institutional roles. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:59, 30 November 2019
| Asmuss-Oshima2012 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Asmuss-Oshima2012 |
| Author(s) | Birte Asmuß, Sae Oshima |
| Title | Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, proposal-acceptance sequences, affiliation, alignment, entitlement, institutional roles, meetings, multimodality |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2012 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Studies |
| Volume | 14 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 67–86 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461445611427215 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Meetings are complex institutional events at which participants recurrently negotiate institutional roles, which are oriented to, renegotiated, and sometimes challenged. With a view to gaining further understanding of the ongoing negotiation of roles at meetings, this article examines one specific recurring feature of meetings: the act of proposing future action. Based on microanalysis of video recordings of two-party strategy meetings, the study shows that participants orient to at least two aspects when making proposals: 1) the acceptance or rejection of the proposal; and 2) questions of entitlement: who is entitled to launch a proposal, and who is entitled to accept or reject it? The study argues that there is a close interrelation between questions of entitlement, aligning and affiliating moves, and the negotiation of institutional roles. The multimodal analysis also reveals the use of various embodied practices by participants for the local negotiation of entitlement and institutional roles.
Notes
