1887
Volume 6, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-1272
  • E-ISSN: 2213-1280
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The analysis of conflict in family discourse has often been characterised by ethnographic approaches and/or fine-grained analysis of unique conflict episodes. This article, by contrast, uses a c.175,000-word spoken corpus of Irish family discourse, in conjunction with a corpus pragmatic approach, to explore specific linguistic aspects of conflict discourse. Conflict episodes are identified and analysed in the corpus using a range of linguistic “hooks” (Rühlemann 2010) that have been previously associated with prefacing disagreement such as the marker , mitigators () or the counterargument strategy . The analysis reveals that the family members most frequently use the strategy in conflict episodes which facilitates immediate disagreement. This strategy is often accompanied by a range of mitigators, predominantly in turn final position, some of which have not been previously identified as indexing conflict sequences.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00011.cla
2018-11-26
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aijmer, Karin
    2013Understanding Pragmatic Markers: A Variational Pragmatic Approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Aijmer, Karin, and Christoph Rühlemann
    (eds.) 2015Corpus Pragmatics. A Handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9781139057493
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
    1997Dinner Talk: Cultural Patterns of Sociability and Socialization in Family Discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. doi:  10.4324/9780203053225
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203053225 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bochner, Arthur
    1984 “The Function of Human Communication in Interpersonal Bonding.” InHandbook of Rhetorical and Communication Theory, edited byCarroll Arnold and John Waite Bowers, 544–621. London: Allyn and Bacon.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bova, Antonio, and Francesco Arcidiacono
    2015 “Beyond Conflicts: Origin and Types of Issues Leading to Argumentative Discussions during Family Mealtimes.” Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict3(2): 263–288. doi:  10.1075/jlac.3.2.02bov
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.3.2.02bov [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, Penelope, and Steven Levinson
    1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  7. Carter, Ronald, and Michael McCarthy
    2006Cambridge Grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Clancy, Brian
    2002 “The Exchange in Family Discourse.” Teanga21: 134–151.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2011 “Complementary Perspectives on Hedging Behaviour in Family Discourse: The Analytical Synergy of Variational Pragmatics and Corpus Linguistics.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics16(3): 371–390. doi:  10.1075/ijcl.16.3.05cla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.16.3.05cla [Google Scholar]
  10. 2016Investigating Intimate Discourse: Exploring the Spoken Interaction of Families, Couples and Friends. London: Routledge. doi:  10.4324/9781315672113
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315672113 [Google Scholar]
  11. Clancy, Brian, and Elaine Vaughan
    2012 “It’s Lunacy Now: A Corpus-based Pragmatic Analysis of the Use of now in Contemporary Irish English.” InNew Perspectives on Irish English, edited byBettina Migge, and Máire Ní Chiosáin, 225–246. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/veaw.g44.11cla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/veaw.g44.11cla [Google Scholar]
  12. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, and Sandra Thompson
    2000 “Concessive Patterns in Conversation.” InCause – Condition – Concession – Contrast: Cognitive and Discourse Perspectives, edited byElizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, and Bernd Kortmann, 381–410. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi:  10.1515/9783110219043.4.381
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219043.4.381 [Google Scholar]
  13. Diani, Giuliana
    2004 “The Discourse Functions of I don’t know in English Conversation.” InDiscourse Patterns in Spoken and Written Corpora, edited byKarin Aijmer, and Anna-Brita Stenström, 157–171. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/pbns.120.11dia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.120.11dia [Google Scholar]
  14. Fox Tree, Jean, and Josef Schrock
    2002 “Basic Meanings of you know and I mean.” Journal of Pragmatics34 (6): 727–747. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00027‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00027-9 [Google Scholar]
  15. Garcia McAllister, Paula
    2015 “Speech Acts: A Synchronic Perspective.” InCorpus Pragmatics: A Handbook, edited byKarin Aijmer and Christoph Rühlemann, 29–51. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9781139057493.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493.003 [Google Scholar]
  16. Georgakopoulou, Alexandra
    2001 “Arguing about the Future: On Indirect Disagreements in Conversations.” Journal of Pragmatics33 (12): 1881–1900. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(00)00034‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00034-5 [Google Scholar]
  17. Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie Harness Goodwin
    1990 “Interstitial Argument.” InConflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversation, edited byAllen Grimshaw, 85–117. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Gordon, Cynthia
    2009Making Meanings, Creating Family: Intertextuality and Framing in Family Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:  10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195373820.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195373820.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  19. Hoey, Michael
    1993 “The Case for the Exchange Complex.” InData, Description, Discourse. Papers on the English Language in Honour of John Sinclair, edited byMichael Hoey, 115–138. London: HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Holtgraves, Thomas
    1997 “Yes, but…: Positive Politeness in Conversation Arguments.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology16 (2): 222–239. doi:  10.1177/0261927X970162006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970162006 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hutchby, Ian
    1996Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries and Power on Talk Radio. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. doi:  10.4324/9780203811825
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203811825 [Google Scholar]
  22. Kennedy, Graeme
    1998An Introduction to Corpus Linguistics. London: >Longman. doi:  10.4324/9781315843674
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315843674 [Google Scholar]
  23. Kohnen, Thomas
    2008 “Tracing Directives through Text and Time: Towrds a Methodology of a Corpus-based Diachronic Speech-act Analysis.” InSpeech Acts in the History of English, edited byAndreas Jucker and Irma Taavitsainen, 295–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi:  10.1075/pbns.176
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.176 [Google Scholar]
  24. Kotthoff, Helga
    1993 “Disagreement and Concession in Disputes: On the Context Sensitivity of Preference Structures.” Language in Society22 (2): 193–216. doi:  10.1017/S0047404500017103
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500017103 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lee, David A.
    1997 “Frame Conflicts and Competing Construals in Family Argument.” Journal of Pragmatics27 (3): 339–360. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(96)00041‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00041-0 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lutzky, Ursula, and Andrew Kehoe
    2017 ““I Apologise for My Poor Blogging”: Searching for Apologies in the Birmingham Blog Corpus.” Corpus Pragmatics1 (1): 37–56. doi:  10.1007/s41701‑017‑0004‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0004-0 [Google Scholar]
  27. Maynard, Douglas
    1985 “How Children Start Arguments.” Language in Society14 (1): 1–29. doi:  10.1017/S0047404500010915
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010915 [Google Scholar]
  28. McCarthy, Michael
    1998Spoken Language and Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. McEnery, Tony, and Andrew Wilson
    1996Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. McEnery, Tony, and Andrew Hardie
    2012Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511981395
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511981395 [Google Scholar]
  31. Mey, Jacob
    2001Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Muntigl, Peter, and William Turnbull
    1998 “Conversational Structure and Facework in Arguing.” Journal of Pragmatics29 (3): 225–256. doi: 10.1016/s0378‑2166(97)000489
    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(97)000489 [Google Scholar]
  33. Musi, Elena
    2018 “How did you change my view? A Corpus-based Study of Concessions’ Argumentative Role.” Discourse Studies20 (2): 270–288. doi:  10.1177/1461445617734955
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445617734955 [Google Scholar]
  34. Musgrave, Simon, Andrea Schalley, and Michael Haugh
    2014 “The use of Ontologies as a Tool for Aggregating Spoken Corpora.” InBest Practices for Spoken Corpora in Linguistic Research, edited byŞükriye Ruhi, Michael Haugh, Thomas Schmidt, and Kai Wörner, 225–248. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Norrick, Neal, and Alice Spitz
    2008 “Humour as a Resource for Mitigating Conflict in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics40 (10): 1661–1686. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Placencia, María Elena
    2008 “(Non)Compliance with Directives among Family and Friends: Responding to Social Pressure and Individual Wants.” Intercultural Pragmatics5 (3): 315–344. doi:  10.1515/IPRG.2008.015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IPRG.2008.015 [Google Scholar]
  37. O’Keeffe, Anne, Michael McCarthy, and Ronald Carter
    2007From Corpus to Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511497650
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511497650 [Google Scholar]
  38. O’Keeffe, Anne, Brian Clancy, and Svenja Adolphs
    2011Introducing Pragmatics in Use. London: Routledge. doi:  10.4324/9780203830949
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203830949 [Google Scholar]
  39. Overstreet, Maryann
    1999Whales, Candlelight and Stuff Like That: General Extenders in English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Pomerantz, Anita
    1984 “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, edited byJ. Maxwell Atkinson, and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:  10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008 [Google Scholar]
  41. Rees-Miller, Janie
    2000 “Power, Severity, and Context in Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics32 (8): 1087–1111. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00088‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00088-0 [Google Scholar]
  42. Rips, Lance
    1998 ‘Reasoning and Conversation.’ Psychological Review105: 411–441. doi:  10.1037//0033‑295X.105.3.411
    https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295X.105.3.411 [Google Scholar]
  43. Romero-Trillo, Jesús
    (ed.) 2008Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics: A Mutualistic Entente. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110199024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199024 [Google Scholar]
  44. Rühlemann, Christoph
    2010 “What Can a Corpus Tell us about Pragmatics?” InThe Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, edited byAnne O’Keeffe, and Michael McCarthy, 288–301. London: Routledge. doi:  10.4324/9780203856949.ch21
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203856949.ch21 [Google Scholar]
  45. Rühlemann, Christoph, and Brian Clancy
    2018 “Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics.” InPragmatics and Its Interfaces, edited byCornelia Ilie, and N. Norrick. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 241–266. doi:  10.1075/pbns.294
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.294 [Google Scholar]
  46. Schiffrin, Deborah
    1984 “Jewish Argument as Sociability.” Language in Society13 (3): 311–335. doi:  10.1017/S0047404500010526
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010526 [Google Scholar]
  47. 1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511611841
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511611841 [Google Scholar]
  48. Scott, Mike
    2017WordSmith Tools Version 7.0. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software Limited.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Tannen, Deborah
    1989Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 2005Conversational Style: Analysing Talk among Friends. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. 2006 “Intertextuality in Interaction: Reframing Family Arguments in Public and Private.” Text and Talk26 (4/5): 597–617. doi:  10.1515/TEXT.2006.024
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.024 [Google Scholar]
  52. Tsui, Amy
    1991 “The Pragmatic Functions of I don’t know.” Text11 (4): 607–622. doi:  10.1515/text.1.1991.11.4.607
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1991.11.4.607 [Google Scholar]
  53. Turner, Lynn, and Richard West
    2006Perspectives on Family Communication. London: McGraw Hill.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Vaughan, Elaine, and Brian Clancy
    2013 “Small Corpora and Pragmatics.” Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics1: 53–73. doi:  10.1007/978‑94‑007‑6250‑3_4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6250-3_4 [Google Scholar]
  55. 2016 “Sociolinguistic Information and Irish English Corpora.” InSociolinguistics in Ireland, edited byRaymond Hickey, 365–388. London: Palgrave. doi:  10.1057/9781137453471_16
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137453471_16 [Google Scholar]
  56. Vaughan, Elaine, Michael McCarthy and Brian Clancy
    2017 “Vague Category Markers as Turn Final Items in Irish English.” World Englishes36 (2): 208–223. doi:  10.1111/weng.12254
    https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12254 [Google Scholar]
  57. Ventola, Eija
    1979 “The Structure of Casual Conversation in English.” Journal of Pragmatics3(3–4): 267–298. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(79)90034‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(79)90034-1 [Google Scholar]
  58. Vuchinich, Samuel
    1984 “Sequencing and Social Structure in Family Conflict.” Social Psychology Quarterly47 (3): 217–234. doi:  10.2307/3033819
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3033819 [Google Scholar]
  59. 1990 “The Sequential Organisation of Closing in Verbal Family Conflict.” InConflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversation, edited byAllen Grimshaw, 118–138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Weisser, Martin
    2003 “SPAACy: A Semi-automated Tool for Analysing Dialogue Acts.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics8 (1): 63–74. doi:  10.1075/ijcl.8.1.03wei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.8.1.03wei [Google Scholar]
  61. Williams, Ashley
    2005 “Fighting Words and Challenging Expectations: Language Alternation and Social Roles in a Family Dispute.” Journal of Pragmatics37 (3): 317–328. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2004.10.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.10.005 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00011.cla
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/jlac.00011.cla
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conflict , corpus , corpus pragmatics , disagreement , family discourse , pragmatic markers and spoken language
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