Difference between revisions of "Asmuss-Oshima2012"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
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; proposal-acceptance sequences; affiliation; alignment; entitlement; institutional roles; meetings; multimodality;  
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; proposal-acceptance sequences; affiliation; alignment; entitlement; institutional roles; meetings; multimodality;
 
|Key=Asmuss-Oshima2012
 
|Key=Asmuss-Oshima2012
 
|Year=2012
 
|Year=2012
Line 10: Line 10:
 
|Number=1
 
|Number=1
 
|Pages=67–86
 
|Pages=67–86
|URL=http://dis.sagepub.com/content/14/1/67
+
|URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445611427215
 
|DOI=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.
 
|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

Download BibTex

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