Difference between revisions of "Kotthoff1993"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis;" to "Conversation Analysis;") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Helga Kotthoff | |Author(s)=Helga Kotthoff | ||
| − | |Title=Disagreement and | + | |Title=Disagreement and concession in disputes: on the context sensitivity of preference structures |
| − | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; dispute; context studies; expectation management; Preference; | |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; dispute; context studies; expectation management; Preference; | ||
|Key=Kotthoff1993 | |Key=Kotthoff1993 | ||
|Year=1993 | |Year=1993 | ||
| Line 11: | Line 10: | ||
|Number=2 | |Number=2 | ||
|Pages=193-216 | |Pages=193-216 | ||
| − | |URL= | + | |URL=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/language-in-society/article/disagreement-and-concession-in-disputes-on-the-context-sensitivity-of-preference-structures/083137A4286CF71D8579852C9BB08BFF |
| − | |Abstract= This article discusses disagreement sequences in German and Anglo- | + | |DOI=10.1017/S0047404500017103 |
| − | + | |Abstract=This article discusses disagreement sequences in German and Anglo-American disputes. It is argued that the context sensitivity of preference for agreement with assessments that Pomerantz 1984 found in her data has to be elaborated and extended. My findings suggest that the preference structure can change once a dissent-turn-sequence has been displayed; in this case, opponents are expected to defend their positions. The reduction of reluctance markers creates a new preference structure which itself has to be accomplished by all participants. Concessions, defined as a participant's agreeing to the central issue after his or her prior disagreement, show reluctance markers which are viewed as indicators of the dispreferred status in other types of talk. Concessions can be distinguished from partially agreeing presequences of dissent turns. Speakers move toward concessions stepwise. Unprepared position shifts can be regarded by the interlocutors as the inability to defend an opinion. Concessions, being an interactional achievement, reframe the dispute. | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 12:16, 23 October 2019
| Kotthoff1993 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Kotthoff1993 |
| Author(s) | Helga Kotthoff |
| Title | Disagreement and concession in disputes: on the context sensitivity of preference structures |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, dispute, context studies, expectation management, Preference |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1993 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Language in Society |
| Volume | 22 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 193-216 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1017/S0047404500017103 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This article discusses disagreement sequences in German and Anglo-American disputes. It is argued that the context sensitivity of preference for agreement with assessments that Pomerantz 1984 found in her data has to be elaborated and extended. My findings suggest that the preference structure can change once a dissent-turn-sequence has been displayed; in this case, opponents are expected to defend their positions. The reduction of reluctance markers creates a new preference structure which itself has to be accomplished by all participants. Concessions, defined as a participant's agreeing to the central issue after his or her prior disagreement, show reluctance markers which are viewed as indicators of the dispreferred status in other types of talk. Concessions can be distinguished from partially agreeing presequences of dissent turns. Speakers move toward concessions stepwise. Unprepared position shifts can be regarded by the interlocutors as the inability to defend an opinion. Concessions, being an interactional achievement, reframe the dispute.
Notes
