Difference between revisions of "Vasquez2010"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Camilla Vásquez |Title=Examining two explicit formulations in university discourse |Tag(s)=EMCA; |Key=Vasquez2010 |Year=2010 |Journal=...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Camilla Vásquez | |Author(s)=Camilla Vásquez | ||
|Title=Examining two explicit formulations in university discourse | |Title=Examining two explicit formulations in university discourse | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; formulations; spoken academic discourse; metapragmatics; university discourse; institutional discourse |
|Key=Vasquez2010 | |Key=Vasquez2010 | ||
|Year=2010 | |Year=2010 | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=30 | |Volume=30 | ||
|Number=6 | |Number=6 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=749–771 |
| + | |URL=https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/text.2010.30.issue-6/text.2010.036/text.2010.036.xml | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1515/text.2010.036 | ||
| + | |Abstract=A formulation is a type of metapragmatic utterance that enables participants to comment on some segment of the ongoing talk and to negotiate meaning within an interaction. Formulations have often been investigated in therapeutic and counseling interactions, but little is known about the use of formulations in other institutional settings. Broadening the scope of inquiry to higher education, the present study explored the distributions, functions, and responses to two types of explicit formulations (those prefaced by what you're saying is and are you saying that) in university discourse. Using MICASE as a source of data, the study focused on the two explicit formulations in different types of university speech activities (e.g., lectures, study groups, research labs). The study's findings indicate that in higher education — just as in therapeutic contexts — the production of formulations is highly constrained by participants' institutional roles and their relative power. This article further illustrates the ways in which formulations can serve as didactic tools in educational contexts. Finally, the article concludes by highlighting potential interactions between formulation frames, response types, and participant structures. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 02:14, 18 October 2019
| Vasquez2010 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Vasquez2010 |
| Author(s) | Camilla Vásquez |
| Title | Examining two explicit formulations in university discourse |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, formulations, spoken academic discourse, metapragmatics, university discourse, institutional discourse |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2010 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Text & Talk |
| Volume | 30 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 749–771 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1515/text.2010.036 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
A formulation is a type of metapragmatic utterance that enables participants to comment on some segment of the ongoing talk and to negotiate meaning within an interaction. Formulations have often been investigated in therapeutic and counseling interactions, but little is known about the use of formulations in other institutional settings. Broadening the scope of inquiry to higher education, the present study explored the distributions, functions, and responses to two types of explicit formulations (those prefaced by what you're saying is and are you saying that) in university discourse. Using MICASE as a source of data, the study focused on the two explicit formulations in different types of university speech activities (e.g., lectures, study groups, research labs). The study's findings indicate that in higher education — just as in therapeutic contexts — the production of formulations is highly constrained by participants' institutional roles and their relative power. This article further illustrates the ways in which formulations can serve as didactic tools in educational contexts. Finally, the article concludes by highlighting potential interactions between formulation frames, response types, and participant structures.
Notes
