Jeff Robinson Special lecture-York2020
| SpecialCASLCLec2020 | |
|---|---|
| Type | Other |
| Categories (tags) | Uncategorized |
| Dates | 2020/06/25 - 2020/06/25 |
| Link | https://bit.ly/3eaijwS |
| Address | Online |
| Geolocation | 53° 56' 46", -1° 3' 6" |
| Abstract due | |
| Submission deadline | |
| Final version due | |
| Notification date | |
| Tweet | Special Lecture: Jeff Robinson will be giving a talk for CASLC (Centre for Advanced Studies in Language & Communication, University of York) to mark the end of our academic year . Thursday 25th June, 4pm-5:30pm BST (GMT+1), register online for a zoom link! |
| Export for iCalendar | |
Jeff Robinson Special lecture-York2020:
Details:
Special CASLC guest lecture by Professor Jeff Robinson (Portland State University)
We are very excited to announce that Jeff Robinson will be giving a talk for CASLC (Centre for Advanced Studies in Language & Communication, University of York) to mark the end of our academic year at York. Although we sadly can't share cake or take our special guest out to dinner afterwards, we're delighted that e-conferencing means that anyone can join without the need to travel. Jeff is a master conversation analyst and a consummate speaker. We're in for a real treat! For more about Jeff, please follow this link to his home page.
- Date: Thursday 25th June 2020
- Time: 4.00pm-5.30pm British Summer Time (GMT+1)
- Place: Zoom (joining details to follow, please register)
Please register your interest so that we can send you joining details nearer the time. To register, please click on the link :https://bit.ly/3eaijwS to complete a short form.
Title:
One Type of Polar, Information-Seeking Question and its Stance of Probability: Implications for the Preference for Agreement
Abstract:
There is little doubt that Sacks’ (1987) notion of the 'preference for agreement' is generally valid. However, that it is valid does not tell us how it is valid. This article further unpacks the preference for agreement by conversation-analytically grounding one of its many underlying mechanisms. Specifically, this article examines the practice of formatting an action – in this case, a type of information seeking – as a positively formatted polar interrogative without polarity items (e.g., Did you go fishing?). This article demonstrates that doing so enacts a speaker stance that the question's proposed state of affairs (e.g., that the recipient went fishing) is probable, and thus that a response is more likely to constitute affirmation than disaffirmation. Additionally, this article demonstrates the preference-organizational effects of such formatting on some aspects of response construction. Data are gathered from videotapes of unstructured, face-to-face conversations, included 289 interrogatives, and are in American English.
