Difference between revisions of "Killmer2024"
JakubMlynar (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Helene Killmer; |Title=How parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests |Tag(s)=EMCA; Parents with aphasia; Negoti...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Helene Killmer; | |Author(s)=Helene Killmer; | ||
|Title=How parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests | |Title=How parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Parents with aphasia; Negotiation; Requests; Directives; Deontic authority; Conversation analysis | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Parents with aphasia; Negotiation; Requests; Directives; Deontic authority; Conversation analysis |
| − | |Key= | + | |Key=Killmer2024 |
| − | |Year= | + | |Year=2024 |
|Language=English | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics | |Journal=Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics | ||
| + | |Volume=38 | ||
| + | |Number=6 | ||
| + | |Pages=529–549 | ||
|URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02699206.2023.2226303 | |URL=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02699206.2023.2226303 | ||
|DOI=10.1080/02699206.2023.2226303 | |DOI=10.1080/02699206.2023.2226303 | ||
|Abstract=Negotiating bedtime or table manners with children can be challenging, probably even more so for parents with aphasia. This study aims to explore how parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests in everyday interactions. It examines the interactional practices of parents with aphasia and their consequences for deontic authority (the right to direct another person’s future action). Using conversation analysis, I conducted a collection-based study of request sequences in 10 hours of video recordings involving three parents with aphasia (two with mild and one with severe aphasia). Two different types of child resistance following a parental request were analysed: passive resistance (indicated by the child’s inaction) and active resistance (indicated by the child’s attempt to bargain or give an account for not doing the requested action). It is shown that all three parents with aphasia respond to passive resistance with pursuits, such as ‘hey’ and other prompts. However, while the two parents with greater linguistic resources deal with active resistance by seeking compliance with counterarguments and by cautiously upgrading their deontic rights, such fine-tuning is not present when the parent with more limited linguistic resources deals with his child’s resistance. This parent uses intrusive physical practices, gestures, increased volume and repetition. This analysis offers insights into practices that appear to affect the ability of these parents with aphasia to negotiate with their children and thus engage in parenting and participate in family life. In order to be able to offer support when engaging with children as desired by parents with aphasia, it is important to gain further insights into how aphasia can affect the organisation of everyday family life. | |Abstract=Negotiating bedtime or table manners with children can be challenging, probably even more so for parents with aphasia. This study aims to explore how parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests in everyday interactions. It examines the interactional practices of parents with aphasia and their consequences for deontic authority (the right to direct another person’s future action). Using conversation analysis, I conducted a collection-based study of request sequences in 10 hours of video recordings involving three parents with aphasia (two with mild and one with severe aphasia). Two different types of child resistance following a parental request were analysed: passive resistance (indicated by the child’s inaction) and active resistance (indicated by the child’s attempt to bargain or give an account for not doing the requested action). It is shown that all three parents with aphasia respond to passive resistance with pursuits, such as ‘hey’ and other prompts. However, while the two parents with greater linguistic resources deal with active resistance by seeking compliance with counterarguments and by cautiously upgrading their deontic rights, such fine-tuning is not present when the parent with more limited linguistic resources deals with his child’s resistance. This parent uses intrusive physical practices, gestures, increased volume and repetition. This analysis offers insights into practices that appear to affect the ability of these parents with aphasia to negotiate with their children and thus engage in parenting and participate in family life. In order to be able to offer support when engaging with children as desired by parents with aphasia, it is important to gain further insights into how aphasia can affect the organisation of everyday family life. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 09:52, 26 July 2024
| Killmer2024 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Killmer2024 |
| Author(s) | Helene Killmer |
| Title | How parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Parents with aphasia, Negotiation, Requests, Directives, Deontic authority, Conversation analysis |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2024 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics |
| Volume | 38 |
| Number | 6 |
| Pages | 529–549 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/02699206.2023.2226303 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Negotiating bedtime or table manners with children can be challenging, probably even more so for parents with aphasia. This study aims to explore how parents with aphasia deal with children’s resistance to requests in everyday interactions. It examines the interactional practices of parents with aphasia and their consequences for deontic authority (the right to direct another person’s future action). Using conversation analysis, I conducted a collection-based study of request sequences in 10 hours of video recordings involving three parents with aphasia (two with mild and one with severe aphasia). Two different types of child resistance following a parental request were analysed: passive resistance (indicated by the child’s inaction) and active resistance (indicated by the child’s attempt to bargain or give an account for not doing the requested action). It is shown that all three parents with aphasia respond to passive resistance with pursuits, such as ‘hey’ and other prompts. However, while the two parents with greater linguistic resources deal with active resistance by seeking compliance with counterarguments and by cautiously upgrading their deontic rights, such fine-tuning is not present when the parent with more limited linguistic resources deals with his child’s resistance. This parent uses intrusive physical practices, gestures, increased volume and repetition. This analysis offers insights into practices that appear to affect the ability of these parents with aphasia to negotiate with their children and thus engage in parenting and participate in family life. In order to be able to offer support when engaging with children as desired by parents with aphasia, it is important to gain further insights into how aphasia can affect the organisation of everyday family life.
Notes
