Lerner1993
| Lerner1993 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Lerner1993 |
| Author(s) | Gene H. Lerner |
| Title | Collectivities in action: Establishing the relevance of conjoined participation in conversation |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, audience behavior, classroom interaction, coalitions, collective action, speaker selection, team talk, turn-taking |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1993 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Text |
| Volume | 13 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 213–245 |
| URL | |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Collectivities can become consequential social units in ordinary conversation. This article reports on the organization of talk in interaction at the juncture of two types of practical action. First, I consider the ongoing relevance of conjoined participation in two specializedforms of interaction (orator-audience interaction and teacher-student interaction) and I describe the range of practices that can be used ta broaden the units of participation in conversational interaction from individual persons to larger social units. Second, I amplify earlier treatments ofspeaker selection practices for conversation. Finally, I bring these two lines ofinquiry together. In multiparty conversation participants can address an association of recipients, thereby making relevant a response from those recipients as members of an association. By addressing a sequence-initiating action (e.g., a question) to an association ofrecipients, a conjoined opportunity to respond can be made relevant. Speakers can make conjoined participation relevant for relatively enduring collectivities (e.g., couples); moreover, occasion-specifie and momentary collectivities can become relevant units ofparticipation.
Notes
