Drew-Hepburn2016
| Drew-Hepburn2016 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Drew-Hepburn2016 |
| Author(s) | Paul Drew, Alexa Hepburn |
| Title | Absent apologies |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Apologies, Noticeable absence, Accountability |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Processes |
| Volume | 53 |
| Number | 1-2 |
| Pages | 114-131 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/0163853X.2015.1056690 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Absent apologies – apologies that were expected but which are not forthcoming – are quite frequently identified and commented upon, for instance in the media. In this paper we discuss two kinds of evidence that apologies can be noticeably absent for participants in ordinary interactions. The first kind is the delays that can occur in the progressivity in talk until an apology is forthcoming, particularly in cases where interlocutors are misaligned about culpability for a transgression. Such cases typically involve pursuit of an appropriate apology (admission), and an account for the other's (mis)conduct. The second kind of evidence is that, where speakers fail to apologise for a putative transgression, their interlocutors can nevertheless treat the other's prior turn as though it had been an apology, by absolving them of culpability in the standard way, e.g. ‘that's alright’. We show that such absolution can occur irrespective of whether culpability is admitted and an apology proferred.
Notes
