Difference between revisions of "Drew2018"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis;" to "Conversation Analysis;")
 
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Paul Drew;
 
|Author(s)=Paul Drew;
 
|Title=Epistemics in social interaction
 
|Title=Epistemics in social interaction
|Tag(s)=Conversation analysis; EMCA; conversation analysis; correction; correction; epistemics; repair; states of knowledge; turn design; territories of knowledge; action formation; sequence expansion;  
+
|Tag(s)=Conversation Analysis; EMCA; conversation analysis; correction; correction; epistemics; repair; states of knowledge; turn design; territories of knowledge; action formation; sequence expansion;  
 
|Key=Drew2018
 
|Key=Drew2018
 
|Year=2018
 
|Year=2018

Latest revision as of 11:06, 18 May 2018

Drew2018
BibType ARTICLE
Key Drew2018
Author(s) Paul Drew
Title Epistemics in social interaction
Editor(s)
Tag(s) Conversation Analysis, EMCA, conversation analysis, correction, correction, epistemics, repair, states of knowledge, turn design, territories of knowledge, action formation, sequence expansion
Publisher
Year 2018
Language English
City
Month
Journal Discourse Studies
Volume 20
Number 1
Pages 163–187
URL Link
DOI 10.1177/1461445617734347
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

My argument here is principally that the ubiquity of (the relevance of) epistemics is evident in the ways in which knowledge claims and attributions of knowledge to self and other (1) are embedded in turns and sequences, (2) inform the design of turns at talk, (3) are amended in the corrections that speakers sometimes make, to change from one epistemic stance to another (e.g. from K+ to K−), and (4) are contested, in the occasional ‘struggles' between participants, as to which of them has epistemic primacy. I show that these cannot be understood in cognitive terms; furthermore, I show that epistemics – again the attribution of knowledge to self and other – is ‘real' for participants. That is, in these four practices and aspects of interaction (i.e. embedding, turn design, correction and contesting) it is evident that participants orient to their states of knowledge relative to one another, on a moment-by-moment, turn-by-turn basis.

Notes