Difference between revisions of "Kent2012"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m
 
Line 10: Line 10:
 
|Number=6
 
|Number=6
 
|Pages=711–730
 
|Pages=711–730
|URL=http://dis.sagepub.com/content/14/6/711
+
|URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461445612457485
 
|DOI=10.1177/1461445612457485
 
|DOI=10.1177/1461445612457485
 
|Abstract=How does a parent get a child to do something? And, indeed, how might the child avoid complying or seem to comply without actually having done so? This article uses conversation analysis to identify the interactionally preferred and dispreferred response to directives (compliance and resistance respectively). It then focuses on one alternative response option that has both verbal and embodied elements. The first part involves an embodied display of incipient compliance. That is, actions that are preparatory steps towards compliance and signal that it may be forthcoming, but which do not in themselves constitute compliance. Incipient compliance creates sequential space for a verbal turn that reformulates the ongoing action as autonomous, self-motivated behaviour on the recipient’s part, rather than subject to the will of the directive speaker. This enables the recipient to maintain autonomy over their own conduct without provoking the conflict or repeat directives associated with outright resistance.
 
|Abstract=How does a parent get a child to do something? And, indeed, how might the child avoid complying or seem to comply without actually having done so? This article uses conversation analysis to identify the interactionally preferred and dispreferred response to directives (compliance and resistance respectively). It then focuses on one alternative response option that has both verbal and embodied elements. The first part involves an embodied display of incipient compliance. That is, actions that are preparatory steps towards compliance and signal that it may be forthcoming, but which do not in themselves constitute compliance. Incipient compliance creates sequential space for a verbal turn that reformulates the ongoing action as autonomous, self-motivated behaviour on the recipient’s part, rather than subject to the will of the directive speaker. This enables the recipient to maintain autonomy over their own conduct without provoking the conflict or repeat directives associated with outright resistance.
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 09:17, 30 November 2019

Kent2012
BibType ARTICLE
Key Kent2012
Author(s) Alexandra Kent
Title Compliance, resistance and incipient compliance when responding to directives
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Directives, Resistance, Children, Family Conversation
Publisher
Year 2012
Language
City
Month
Journal Discourse Studies
Volume 14
Number 6
Pages 711–730
URL Link
DOI 10.1177/1461445612457485
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

How does a parent get a child to do something? And, indeed, how might the child avoid complying or seem to comply without actually having done so? This article uses conversation analysis to identify the interactionally preferred and dispreferred response to directives (compliance and resistance respectively). It then focuses on one alternative response option that has both verbal and embodied elements. The first part involves an embodied display of incipient compliance. That is, actions that are preparatory steps towards compliance and signal that it may be forthcoming, but which do not in themselves constitute compliance. Incipient compliance creates sequential space for a verbal turn that reformulates the ongoing action as autonomous, self-motivated behaviour on the recipient’s part, rather than subject to the will of the directive speaker. This enables the recipient to maintain autonomy over their own conduct without provoking the conflict or repeat directives associated with outright resistance.

Notes