Difference between revisions of "Bolden-Robinson2011"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Galina B. Bolden; Jeffrey D. Robinson; |Title=Soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives in conversation |Tag(s)=EMCA; Accounts; Why-i...")
 
m
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
{{BibEntry
 
{{BibEntry
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
 
|BibType=ARTICLE
|Author(s)=Galina B. Bolden; Jeffrey D. Robinson;  
+
|Author(s)=Galina B. Bolden; Jeffrey D. Robinson;
 
|Title=Soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives in conversation
 
|Title=Soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives in conversation
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Accounts; Why-interrogatives; Complaints; Blaming;
 
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Accounts; Why-interrogatives; Complaints; Blaming;
Line 9: Line 9:
 
|Volume=61
 
|Volume=61
 
|Number=1
 
|Number=1
|Pages=94-119
+
|Pages=94–119
|DOI=doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x
+
|URL=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x/abstract
 +
|DOI=10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x
 
|Abstract=This article investigates the action of directly soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives (e.g., Why did you do that?). Using conversation analysis, this article argues that why-interrogatives are Janus-faced. On one hand, as types of questions, they index an epistemic gap between questioners and answerers and thus the possibility that answerers are able to provide accounts that questioners did not previously know about. On the other hand, why-interrogatives claimsome epistemic access to the accountable event and communicate a stance that it does not accord with common sense and thus is inappropriate or unwarranted. Why-formatted interrogatives display a challenging stance toward the accountable event and responsible agent(s) and are, thus, frequently coimplicated in complaining,  criticizing, and blaming.
 
|Abstract=This article investigates the action of directly soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives (e.g., Why did you do that?). Using conversation analysis, this article argues that why-interrogatives are Janus-faced. On one hand, as types of questions, they index an epistemic gap between questioners and answerers and thus the possibility that answerers are able to provide accounts that questioners did not previously know about. On the other hand, why-interrogatives claimsome epistemic access to the accountable event and communicate a stance that it does not accord with common sense and thus is inappropriate or unwarranted. Why-formatted interrogatives display a challenging stance toward the accountable event and responsible agent(s) and are, thus, frequently coimplicated in complaining,  criticizing, and blaming.
 
}}
 
}}

Latest revision as of 12:35, 20 February 2016

Bolden-Robinson2011
BibType ARTICLE
Key Bolden-Robinson2011
Author(s) Galina B. Bolden, Jeffrey D. Robinson
Title Soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives in conversation
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Accounts, Why-interrogatives, Complaints, Blaming
Publisher
Year 2011
Language
City
Month
Journal Journal of Communication
Volume 61
Number 1
Pages 94–119
URL Link
DOI 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This article investigates the action of directly soliciting accounts with why-interrogatives (e.g., Why did you do that?). Using conversation analysis, this article argues that why-interrogatives are Janus-faced. On one hand, as types of questions, they index an epistemic gap between questioners and answerers and thus the possibility that answerers are able to provide accounts that questioners did not previously know about. On the other hand, why-interrogatives claimsome epistemic access to the accountable event and communicate a stance that it does not accord with common sense and thus is inappropriate or unwarranted. Why-formatted interrogatives display a challenging stance toward the accountable event and responsible agent(s) and are, thus, frequently coimplicated in complaining, criticizing, and blaming.

Notes