1887
Volume 10, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article advances the notion of metaventriloquism by bringing together the concepts of metacommunication and ventriloquism (Cooren 2010). Metaventriloquism is when one makes claims regarding who or what another is speaking behalf of. To explore the implications of metaventriloquism, a public hearing related to a community water controversy is analyzed. The analysis illustrates how metaventriloquism may be used as a form of critique and operates retrospectively in claiming what motivated another, and prospectively in claiming what another should do. The implications of metaventriloquism for the construction of technological risks are also explored.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00058.cas
2020-05-19
2020-05-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barad, Karen
    2007Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bateson, Gregory
    1972Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Beck, Ulrich
    1992Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Los Angeles: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bencherki, Nicolas and François Cooren
    2011 “Having To Be: The Possessive Constitution of Organization.” Human Relations64: 1579–1607. 10.1177/0018726711424227
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726711424227 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bencherki, Nicolas, Frederic Matte, and François Cooren
    (eds) 2019Authority and Power in Social Interaction Methods and Analysis. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781351051668
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351051668 [Google Scholar]
  6. Benoit-Barné, Chantal and François Cooren
    2009 “The Accomplishment of Authority Through Presentification How Authority Is Distributed Among and Negotiated by Organizational Members.” Management Communication Quarterly23 (1): 5–31. 10.1177/0893318909335414
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318909335414 [Google Scholar]
  7. Carbaugh, Donal
    1989 “Fifty terms for talk: A cross-cultural study.” International and intercultural communication annual13 (93): 120.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Caronia, Letizia and François Cooren
    2014 “Decentering Our Analytical Position: The Dialogicity of Things.” Discourse and Communication8 (1): 41–61. 10.1177/1750481313503226
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481313503226 [Google Scholar]
  9. Castor, Theresa R.
    2016 “The materiality of discourse: relational positioning in a fresh water controversy.” Communication Research and Practice2 (3): 334–350. 10.1080/22041451.2016.1221685
    https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2016.1221685 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2017 “Metacommunication.” The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication: 1–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Castor, Theresa
    2018 “Sustainability and Textual Extensions of Institutional Discourse: Testing the Great Lakes Compact.” Critical Sociology44 (2): 341–356. 10.1177/0896920517693673
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0896920517693673 [Google Scholar]
  12. Cooren, François
    2004 “Textual Agency: How Texts Do Things in Organizational Settings.” Organization11 (3): 373–393. 10.1177/1350508404041998
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508404041998 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2006 “The Organizational World as a Plenum of Agencies.” InCommunication as Organizing: Empirical and Theoretical Explorations in the Dynamic of Text and Conversation, ed. byFrançois Cooren, James R. Taylor, and Elizabeth J. Van Every, 81–100. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2010Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation and Ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.6
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.6 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2015 “In Medias Res: Communication, Existence, and Materiality.” Communication Research and Practice1(4): 1–15. 10.1080/22041451.2015.1110075
    https://doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2015.1110075 [Google Scholar]
  16. Cooren, François and Nicholas Bencherki
    2010 “How things do things with words: Ventriloquism, passion and technology.” Encyclopaideia15: 35–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Cooren, François, Frédérik Matte, Chantal Benoit-Barné, and Boris Brummans
    2013 “Communication as Ventriloquism: A Grounded-in-Action Approach to the Study of Organizational Tensions.” Communication Monographs80: 255–277. 10.1080/03637751.2013.788255
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2013.788255 [Google Scholar]
  18. Cooren, François and Sergeiy Sandler
    2014 “Polyphony, Ventriloquism, and Constitution: In Dialogue with Bakhtin.” Communication Theory24: 225–224. 10.1111/comt.12041
    https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12041 [Google Scholar]
  19. Cooren, François, Fiona Thompson, Donna Canestraro, and Tamas Bodor
    2006 “From Agency to Structure: Analysis of an Episode in a Facilitation Process.” Human Relations59: 533–565. 10.1177/0018726706065373
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726706065373 [Google Scholar]
  20. Craig, Robert
    2005 How we talk about how we talk: Communication theory in the public interest. Journal of Communication55: 659–667. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2005.tb03015.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb03015.x [Google Scholar]
  21. Craig, Robert T. and Karen Tracy
    2014 “Building Grounded Practical Theory in Applied Communication Research: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Applied Communication Research42 (3): 229–243. 10.1080/00909882.2014.916410
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2014.916410 [Google Scholar]
  22. Jones, Rodney H.
    2012Discourse Analysis. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Latour, Bruno
    2008What Is the Style of Matters of Concern. Two Lectures in Empirical Philosophy. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lucy, John A.
    (ed.) 1993Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621031
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031 [Google Scholar]
  25. Luhmann, Niklas
    1990 “Technology, Environment and Social Risk: A Systems Perspective.” Industrial Crisis Quarterly4(3): 223–31. 10.1177/108602669000400305
    https://doi.org/10.1177/108602669000400305 [Google Scholar]
  26. Martine, Thomas, François Cooren, Aurélien Bénel, and Manuel Zacklad
    2016 “What Does Really Matter in Technology Adoption and Use? A CCO Approach.” Management Communication Quarterly30(2): 164–187. 10.1177/0893318915619012
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318915619012 [Google Scholar]
  27. McLuhan, Marshall
    1994Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Murphy, Raymond
    2004 “Disaster or Sustainability: The Dance of Human Agents with Nature’s Actants.” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology41(3): 249–266. 10.1111/j.1755‑618X.2004.tb00778.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-618X.2004.tb00778.x [Google Scholar]
  29. Robles, Jessica S. and Elizabeth S. Parks
    2019 “Complaints about technology as a resource for identity-work.” Language in Society48(2): 209–231. 10.1017/S0047404518001379
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404518001379 [Google Scholar]
  30. Rogers, Everett M.
    1986Communication Technology. New York: Simon and Schuster.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Strifling, David
    2018, March20. Will the Foxconn project “transform” Wisconsin’s water resources? [Blog post]. Retrieved fromlaw.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2018/03/20/will-the-Foxconn-project-transform-wisconsins-water-resources/
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Tatge-Rozell, Jill
    . “Hundreds comment on proposed plan to tap Lake Michigan.” Kenosha News, March7 2018 AccessedMay 31, 2019. www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/hundreds-comment-on-proposed-plan-to-tap-lake-michigan/article_fae6808d-17a6-5a29-8e92-607b900cbf51.html
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Taylor, James R. and Elizabeth J. Van Every
    2014When organization fails: Why authority matters. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315815176
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315815176 [Google Scholar]
  34. Vasilyeva, Alena, Jessica Robles, Jean Saludadez, Christian Schwägerl, and Theresa Castor
    2019 “The varieties of (more or less) formal authority.” InAuthority and Power in Social Interaction Methods and Analysis, ed. byNicolas Bencherki, Frederic Matte, and François Cooren, 37–55. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781351051668‑3
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351051668-3 [Google Scholar]
  35. Verschueren, Jef
    1999Understanding Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Watzlawick, Paul, Janet Beavin Bavelas, and Don D. Jackson
    1967Pragmatics of Human Ccommunication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Whitehead, Alfred
    1920The Concept of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00058.cas
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00058.cas
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): metacommunication , public discourse , technological risks , ventriloquism and water policy
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