1887
  1. Home
  2. Books
  3. Discourses of Helping Professions
  4. Chapter

How practitioners deal with their clients' "off-track" talk

image of How practitioners deal with their clients'

In institutional encounters where a client engages with a practitioner for advice or guidance, there is a phase in which the client may be expected to ‘tell their tale’ before the practitioner offers a response. In this chapter I shall analyse the kind of professional conversation which involves with a client being invited to describe a personal and indeed intimate problem, in order for the professional to offer their perspective (and possibly suggest a solution). The client’s problems here are matters of emotion, conflict or life-style, caused or sharpened by psychological disorder or disability – in other words, we shall be listening in to what the editors term as the ‘professional format’ of the counselling, personal-­support and therapy consultation.

References

  1. Antaki, Charles , and Andrew Jahoda
    2010 “Psychotherapists’ Practices in Keeping a Session “On-track” in the Face of Clients’ “Off-track” Talk.” Communication & Medicine7: 11–21. doi: 10.1558/cam.v7i1.11
     https://doi.org/10.1558/cam.v7i1.11 [Google Scholar]
  2. Antaki, Charles , W.M.L. Finlay , and Chris Walton
    2009 “Choice for People with an Intellectual Impairment in Official Discourse and in Practice.”Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities6 (4): 260–266. doi: 10.1111/j.1741‑1130.2009.00230.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2009.00230.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Dryden, Windy
    (ed.) 2007 Dryden’s Handbook of Individual Therapy. London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Heritage, John
    1984 “A Change of State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Organisation.”InStructures of Social Action, ed. by John. M. Atkinson , and John Heritage , 299–345. 
Cambridge: CUP and Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Heritage, John , and D.R. Watson
    1979 “Formulations as Conversational Objects.”InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas , 123–162. New York: Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Jefferson, Gail
    1984 “On Stepwise Transition from Talk about a Trouble to Inappropriately Next-positioned Matters.”InStructures of Social Action: Studies of Conversation Analysis, ed. by John M. Atkinson , and John Heritage , 191–222. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Maynard, D.W. , and C.L. Marlaire
    1992 “Good Reasons for Bad Testing Performance: The Interactional Substrate of Educational Exams.”Qualitative Sociology15: 177–202. doi: 10.1007/BF00989493
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00989493 [Google Scholar]
  8. Peräkylä, Annsi , Charles Antaki , Sanna Vehviläinen , and Ivan Leudar
    (eds) 2008 Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511490002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490002 [Google Scholar]
  9. Peräkylä, Annsi , and Sanna Vehviläinen
    2003 “Conversation Analysis and the Professional Stocks of Interactional Knowledge.”Discourse & Society14 (6): 727–750. doi: 10.1177/09579265030146003
     https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265030146003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Sacks, Harvey
    1987 “On the Preferences for Contiguity and Agreement in Sequences in Conversation.”InTalk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button , and John R. Lee , 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 1992 Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Schegloff, Emanuel A
    1979 “The Relevance of Repair to Syntax-for-Conversation.”InSyntax and Semantics, Volume 12: Discourse and Syntax, ed. by Talmy Givon , 261–286. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 1982 “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement: Some Use of ’uh huh’ and Other Things that Come Between Sentences.”InAnalyzing Discourse: Text and Talk (Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics), ed. by Deborah Tannen , 71–93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 2007 Sequence Organisation in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  15. Williams, Val
    2010 Disability and Discourse: Analysing Inclusive Conversation with People with Intellectual Disabilities. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Wright, Jesse H. , Monica Ramirez Basco , and Michael E. Thase
    2006 Learning Cognitive-behavior Therapy: An Illustrated Guide. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Yearley, S. , and J. Brewer
    1989 “Stigma and conversational competence: a conversation analytic study of the mentally handicapped”. Human Studies12: 97–115. doi: 10.1007/BF00142841
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142841 [Google Scholar]

References

  1. Antaki, Charles , and Andrew Jahoda
    2010 “Psychotherapists’ Practices in Keeping a Session “On-track” in the Face of Clients’ “Off-track” Talk.” Communication & Medicine7: 11–21. doi: 10.1558/cam.v7i1.11
     https://doi.org/10.1558/cam.v7i1.11 [Google Scholar]
  2. Antaki, Charles , W.M.L. Finlay , and Chris Walton
    2009 “Choice for People with an Intellectual Impairment in Official Discourse and in Practice.”Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities6 (4): 260–266. doi: 10.1111/j.1741‑1130.2009.00230.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2009.00230.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Dryden, Windy
    (ed.) 2007 Dryden’s Handbook of Individual Therapy. London: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Heritage, John
    1984 “A Change of State Token and Aspects of Its Sequential Organisation.”InStructures of Social Action, ed. by John. M. Atkinson , and John Heritage , 299–345. 
Cambridge: CUP and Paris: Editions de la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Heritage, John , and D.R. Watson
    1979 “Formulations as Conversational Objects.”InEveryday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, ed. by George Psathas , 123–162. New York: Irvington.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Jefferson, Gail
    1984 “On Stepwise Transition from Talk about a Trouble to Inappropriately Next-positioned Matters.”InStructures of Social Action: Studies of Conversation Analysis, ed. by John M. Atkinson , and John Heritage , 191–222. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Maynard, D.W. , and C.L. Marlaire
    1992 “Good Reasons for Bad Testing Performance: The Interactional Substrate of Educational Exams.”Qualitative Sociology15: 177–202. doi: 10.1007/BF00989493
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00989493 [Google Scholar]
  8. Peräkylä, Annsi , Charles Antaki , Sanna Vehviläinen , and Ivan Leudar
    (eds) 2008 Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511490002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511490002 [Google Scholar]
  9. Peräkylä, Annsi , and Sanna Vehviläinen
    2003 “Conversation Analysis and the Professional Stocks of Interactional Knowledge.”Discourse & Society14 (6): 727–750. doi: 10.1177/09579265030146003
     https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265030146003 [Google Scholar]
  10. Sacks, Harvey
    1987 “On the Preferences for Contiguity and Agreement in Sequences in Conversation.”InTalk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button , and John R. Lee , 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. 1992 Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Schegloff, Emanuel A
    1979 “The Relevance of Repair to Syntax-for-Conversation.”InSyntax and Semantics, Volume 12: Discourse and Syntax, ed. by Talmy Givon , 261–286. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. 1982 “Discourse as an Interactional Achievement: Some Use of ’uh huh’ and Other Things that Come Between Sentences.”InAnalyzing Discourse: Text and Talk (Georgetown University Round Table on Language and Linguistics), ed. by Deborah Tannen , 71–93. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 2007 Sequence Organisation in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  15. Williams, Val
    2010 Disability and Discourse: Analysing Inclusive Conversation with People with Intellectual Disabilities. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Wright, Jesse H. , Monica Ramirez Basco , and Michael E. Thase
    2006 Learning Cognitive-behavior Therapy: An Illustrated Guide. Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Yearley, S. , and J. Brewer
    1989 “Stigma and conversational competence: a conversation analytic study of the mentally handicapped”. Human Studies12: 97–115. doi: 10.1007/BF00142841
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142841 [Google Scholar]

  • From This Site

    /content/books/9789027269430-pbns.252.02ant
    dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal
    10
    5
/content/books/9789027269430-pbns.252.02ant
dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
-contentType:Journal
10
5
Chapter
content/books/9789027269430
Book
false
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error