1887
Volume 11, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2210-4119
  • E-ISSN: 2210-4127
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Complaints about the use of new communication technologies are frequent in public discourse and work within a broader assemblage of discourses that promote selective ideologies. What is it that people are doing when they produce these complaints, and how might acts of complaining promote equity in our daily lives? We analyse complaints taken from 16 hours of video recorded dialogues and argue that the complaint discourse about the relationship of new communication technologies to people’s expected embodied functioning and idealized social participation reconstitutes and perpetuates broader ableist discourses about preferred engagement in the “real world.” By identifying intertextuality between two different topical discourses, we expand understanding about the reification of cross-cutting ableist discourses and promote more inclusive language use.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00083.par
2021-04-22
2021-05-06
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Abbass, Eslamirasekh , Jafari Seresht Davood , and Mehregan Masoumeh
    2012 “How Do You React to the Breakdown after It Happens? Do You Complain about It? A Contrastive Study on the Complaint Behavior in American English and Persian.” Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences47: 34–40. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.609
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.609 [Google Scholar]
  2. Antaki, Charles , Rebecca J. Crompton , Chris Walton , and W. M. L. Finlay
    2016 “How Adults with a Profound Intellectual Disability Engage Others in Interaction.” Sociology of Health & Illness39 (4): 581–598. 10.1111/1467‑9566.12500
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12500 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baynton, Douglas C.
    1997 “Bringing Disability to the Centre: Disability as an Indispensable Category of Historical Analysis.” Disability Studies Quarterly1: n.p.dsq-sds.org/article/view/108/108
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Campbell, Fiona A. Kumari
    2008 “Exploring Internalized Ableism Using Critical Race Theory.” Disability & Society23 (2): 151. 10.1080/09687590701841190
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590701841190 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2001 “Inciting Legal Fictions: Disability’s Date with Ontology and the Ableist Body of the Law.” Griffith Law Review10: 42–62.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Carbaugh, Donal
    2007 “Cultural Discourse Analysis: Communication Practices and Intercultural Encounters.” Journal of Intercultural Communication Research36: 167–182. 10.1080/17475750701737090
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17475750701737090 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cattell, Maria G.
    1999 “Elders’ Complaints: Discourses on Old Age and Social Change in Rural Kenya and Urban Philadelphia.” InLanguage and Communication in Old Age: Multidisciplinary Perspectivesby Heidi Ehernberger Hamilton , 295–374. NY: Garland Publishing, Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. CDC
  9. Cherney, James L.
    2011 “The Rhetoric of Ableism.” Disability Studies Quarterly31 (3). https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1665. AccessedMay 7, 2020. 10.18061/dsq.v31i3.1665
    https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v31i3.1665 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cladis, Andrea E.
    2018 “A Shifting Paradigm: An Evaluation of the Pervasive Effects of Digital Technologies on Language Expression, Creativity, Critical Thinking, Political Discourse, and Interactive Processes of Human Communications.” E-Learning and Digital Media17(5): 341–364. 10.1177/2042753017752583
    https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753017752583 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cohen, Leor
    2015 “World Attending in Interaction: Multitasking, Spatializing, Narrativizing with Mobile Devices and Tinder.” Discourse, Context, and Media9: 46–54. 10.1016/j.dcm.2015.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2015.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  12. Connor, Stuart
    2010 Promoting ‘Employ ability’: The Changing Subject of Welfare Reform in the UK.” Critical Discourse Studies7 (1): 41–54. 10.1080/17405900903453930
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405900903453930 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dolmage, Jay T.
    2017Academic Ableism: Disability and Higher Education. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. doi: 10.3998/mpub.9708722.EPUB
    https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.9708722.EPUB [Google Scholar]
  14. Drew, Paul
    1998 “Complaints about Transgressions and Misconduct.” Research on Language and Social Interaction31: 295–325. 10.1080/08351813.1998.9683595
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.1998.9683595 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ehrlich, Susan , and Tanya Romaniuk
    2014 “Discourse Analysis.” InResearch Methods in Linguistics, eds. Robert J. Podesva and Devyani Sharma , 460–493. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139013734.024
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013734.024 [Google Scholar]
  16. Ellcessor, Elizabeth
    2017 “Cyborg Hoaxes: Disability, Deception, and Critical Studies of Digital Media.” New Media & Society19 (11): 1761–1777. 10.1177/1461444816642754
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816642754 [Google Scholar]
  17. Erevelles, Nirmala
    2011Disability and Difference in Global Contexts: Enabling a Transformative Body Politic. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137001184
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137001184 [Google Scholar]
  18. Fairclough, Norman
    1989Language and Power. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Fairclough, Norman , Ruth Wodak , and Teun A. Van Dijk
    1996 ‘Critical Discourse Analysis’ inDiscourse as Social Interaction, 258–284.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Thomson, Rosemarie Garland
    1997Extraordinary Bodies: Figuring Physical Disability in American Culture and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gee, James Paul
    2011An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method, 3rd edition. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Goggin, Gerard and Christopher Newell
    2003Digital Disability: The Social Construction of Disability in New Media. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Goodley, Dan
    2013 “Dis/entangling Critical Disability Studies.” Disability & Society28(5): 631–644. 10.1080/09687599.2012.717884
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.717884 [Google Scholar]
  24. Grue, Jan
    2015Disability and Discourse Analysis. Surrey, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. 2011 “Discourse Analysis and Disability: Some Topics and Issues.” Discourse & Society22(5): 532–546. 10.1177/0957926511405572
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926511405572 [Google Scholar]
  26. Heinze, Ulrich
    2014 “Pictorial Body Metaphors in Japanese Advertising: How the Body Economy Replaces the Body Nation in the Affluent Images of oisha, bihada, and tanjō .” Language and Dialogue4 (3): 425–454. 10.1075/ld.4.3.04hei
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.4.3.04hei [Google Scholar]
  27. Jacknick, Christine M. and Sharon Avni
    2017 “Shalom, Bitches: Epistemic Stance and Identity Work in an Anonymous Online Forum.” Discourse, Context & Media15: 54–64. 10.1016/j.dcm.2016.11.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2016.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Jingree, Treena and W. M. L. Finlay
    2013 “Expressions of Dissatisfaction and Complaint by People with Learning Disabilities: A Discourse Analytic Study.” British Journal of Social Psychology52(2): 255–272. 10.1111/j.2044‑8309.2011.02064.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02064.x [Google Scholar]
  29. Johnstone, Barbara
    2002Discourse Analysis. Great Britain: Blackwell Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Ladd, Paddy
    2003Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood. Clevedon, UK: Cromwell Press, Ltd. 10.21832/9781853595479
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853595479 [Google Scholar]
  31. Lane, Harlan , Robert Hoffmeister , and Benjamin J. Bahan
    1996A Journey into the Deaf-World. San Diego, CA: Dawn Sign Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Mauldin, Laura
    2014 “Precarious Plasticity: Neuropolitics, Cochlear Implants, and the Redefinition of Deafness.” Science, Technology & Human Values39 (1), 130–153. 10.1177/0162243913512538
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243913512538 [Google Scholar]
  33. 2012 “Parents of Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants: A Study of Technology and Community.” Sociology of Health & Illness34 (4), 529–543. 10.1111/j.1467‑9566.2011.01401.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2011.01401.x [Google Scholar]
  34. Meân, Lindsey J.
    2012 “Discourses, Discursive Processes, Intertextuality, and Identities. Journal of Multicultural Discourses7(2): 145–152. 10.1080/17447143.2012.701306
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2012.701306 [Google Scholar]
  35. Mondada, Lorenza
    2014 “Bodies in Action: Multimodal Analysis of Walking and Talking.” Language and Dialogue4 (3): 357–403. 10.1075/ld.4.3.02mon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.4.3.02mon [Google Scholar]
  36. Nixon, Jennifer
    2010 “The Politics of Need Interpretation: Discourse and the Needs of Disabled Survivors of Abuse.” Critical Discourse Studies7 (3): 165–176. 10.1080/17405904.2010.491220
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2010.491220 [Google Scholar]
  37. Olshtain, Elite and Liora Weinbach
    1987 “Complaints: A Study of Speech Act Behavior among Native and Non-native Speakers of Hebrew.” InThe Pragmatic Perspective, eds. by Jef Verschueren and Marcella Bertucelli-Papi , 195–208. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbcs.5.15ols
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbcs.5.15ols [Google Scholar]
  38. Padden, Carol A.
    2011 “Sign Language Geography” inDeaf Around the World: The Impact of Language, by Gaurav Mathur and Donna Jo Napoli . Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Potter, Jonathan
    2003 “Discourse Analysis and Discursive Psychology.” InQualitative Research in Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodology and Design, eds. by P. M. Camic , J. E. Rhodes , and L. Yardley , 73–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Pyysiäinen, Jarkko
    2010 “Co-constructing a Virtuous Ingroup Attitude? Evaluation of New Business Activities in a Group Interview of Farmers.” Text & Talk30 (6): 701–721. 10.1515/text.2010.034
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2010.034 [Google Scholar]
  41. 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]
  42. Robles, Jessica S. , Stephen DiDomenico , and Joshua Raclaw
    2018 “Doing Being an Ordinary Communication Technology and Social Media User.” Language & Communication60: 150–167. 10.1016/j.langcom.2018.03.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2018.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  43. Sealey, Alison
    2012 “‘I Just Couldn’t Do It’: Representations of Constraint in an Oral History Corpus.” Critical Discourse Studies9 (3): 195–210. 10.1080/17405904.2012.688295
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2012.688295 [Google Scholar]
  44. Sillars, Malcolm O. and Bruce E. Gronbeck
    2000Communication Criticism: Rhetoric, Social Codes, Cultural Studies. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Sindoni, Maria Grazia
    2014 “Through the Looking Glass: A Social Semiotic and Linguistic Perspective on the Study of Video Chats.” Text & Talk34 (3): 325–347. 10.1515/text‑2014‑0006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0006 [Google Scholar]
  46. Sinkeviciute, Valeria
    2017 “Variability in Group Identity Construction: A Case Study of the Australian and British Big Brother Houses.” Discourse, Context & Media20: 70–82. 10.1016/j.dcm.2017.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  47. Strauss, Claudia
    2004 Cultural Standing in Expression of Opinion. Language in Society33 (2): 161–194. 10.1017/S004740450433201X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740450433201X [Google Scholar]
  48. Tileagă, Cristian
    2005 “Accounting for Extreme Prejudice and Legitimating Blame in Talk about the Romanies.” Discourse & Society16 (5): 603–624. 10.1177/0957926505054938
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926505054938 [Google Scholar]
  49. Thurlow, Crispin and Katherine Bell
    2009 “Against Technologization: Young People’s New Media Discourse as Creative Cultural Practice.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14 (4): 1038–1049. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2009.01480.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01480.x [Google Scholar]
  50. Thurlow, Crispin
    2006 “From Statistical Panic to Moral Panic: The Metadiscursive Construction and Popular Exaggeration of New Media Language in Print Media.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication11: 667–701. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2006.00031.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00031.x [Google Scholar]
  51. Tran, Giao Quynh
    2002Pragmatic and Discourse Markedness Hypothesis. Paper presented atProceedings of the 2002 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society. RetrievedMarch 27, 2017fromwww.als.asn.au/proceedings/als2002/Tranold.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Velasco, Daniel García
    2013 Raising in Functional Discourse Grammar. InCasebook in Functional Discourse Grammar, ed. by J. Lahclan Mackenzie and Hella Olbertz , 249–276. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.137.10vel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.137.10vel [Google Scholar]
  53. West, Isaac
    2010 “PISSAR’s Critically Queer and Disabled Politics.” Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies7 (2): 156–175. 10.1080/14791421003759174
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14791421003759174 [Google Scholar]
  54. Wodak, Ruth and Michael Meyer
    2012 “Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology.” InMethods of Critical Discourse Analysis, ed. by Ruth Wodak and Michael Meyer , 1–33. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Zubillaga Del Río, Ainara Carmen Alba Pastor
    2013 “Disability in the perception of technology use among university students.” Comunicar20 (40): 165–172. 10.3916/C40‑2013‑03‑07
    https://doi.org/10.3916/C40-2013-03-07 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ld.00083.par
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): ableism , complaints , disability , discourse and new communication technologies
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