1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Narrative Inquiry
  4. Volume 30, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 30, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1387-6740
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9935
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Goffman’s concepts of face and face work, and his assertion that talk in face-to-face interaction is cooperative, are undertheorized and often critiqued. In an attempt to expand on these concepts, excerpts are analyzed from a single-teller narrative which evolves into a 13-minute conversational story about the relationship troubles of an absent third party. Analyzed for the verbal and nonverbal disruptions and subsequent adjustments and remedial actions manifested by participants, Conversation Analysis (CA) is employed to capture how threats to face surface and how they are recognized, cooperatively managed, and made tellable. Through the analysis, this paper addresses the perceived incommensurability between CA and Goffman’s notion of face, demonstrating the ways in which face is (1) a doing a doing, a situated presentation of self that serves narrative-advancing functions and renders talk tellable as threats to face arise and (2) an achievement comprised of moves that are tacitly cooperative, ambiguously cooperative, or uncooperatively cooperative.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ni.18055.tho
2020-05-19
2024-10-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ni.18055.tho
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arundale, R. B.
    (2009) Face as emergent in interpersonal communication: An alternative to Goffman. InF. Bargiela-Chiappini & M. Haugh (Eds.), Face, communication and social interaction (pp.33–54). London, UK: Equinox Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bischoping, K., & Gao, Z.
    (2017) Story sequencing and strereotyping: A case study from talk about the crowded buses of China. Narrative Inquiry, 27(1), 85–108. 10.1075/ni.27.1.05bis
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.27.1.05bis [Google Scholar]
  3. Chafe, W.
    (1993) Prosodic and functional units of language. InJ. Edwards & M. Lampert (Eds.), Talking data: Transcription and coding in discourse research (pp.33–43). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Coupland, J., & Jaworski, A.
    (2003) Transgression and intimacy in recreational talk narratives. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(1), 85–106. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_5
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_5 [Google Scholar]
  5. Georgakopoulou, A.
    (2007) Small stories, interaction and identities. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sin.8
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sin.8 [Google Scholar]
  6. Grice, H. P.
    (1975) Logic and conversation. InP. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts (pp.41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Goffman, E.
    (1967) Interaction ritual. New York, NY: Doubleday.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. (1981) Forms of talk. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Guendouzi, J.
    (2001) You’ll think we’re always bitching: The functions of cooperativity and competition in women’s gossip. Discourse Studies3, 29–51. 10.1177/1461445601003001002
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445601003001002 [Google Scholar]
  10. Haugh, M., & Bargiela-Chiappini, F.
    (2010) Face in interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 2073–2077. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.013
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.013 [Google Scholar]
  11. Heritage, J.
    (2009) Conversation analysis as social theory. InB. S. Turner (Ed.), The new Blackwell companion to social theory (pp.300–320). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. 10.1002/9781444304992.ch15
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444304992.ch15 [Google Scholar]
  12. Jackson, C.
    (2016) “I sort of did stuff to him”: A case study of tellability and taboo in young people’s talk about sex. Narrative Inquiry, 26(1), 150–170. 10.1075/ni.26.1.08jac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.26.1.08jac [Google Scholar]
  13. Jaworski, A., & Coupland, J.
    (2005) Othering in gossip: “You go out you have a laugh and you can pull yeah okay but like…”. Language in Society, 34, 667–694. 10.1017/S0047404505050256
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050256 [Google Scholar]
  14. Jefferson, G.
    (1984) On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. InJ. M. Atkinson & J. C. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies of conversation analysis (pp.191–222). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Jefferson, G., Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E.
    (1987) Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy. InG. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp.152–205). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kang, J. Y.
    (2003) On the ability to tell good stories in another language: Analysis of Korean EFL learners’ oral “frog story” narratives. Narrative Inquiry, 13(1), 127–149. 10.1075/ni.13.1.05kan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.13.1.05kan [Google Scholar]
  17. (2006) Producing culturally appropriate narratives in English as a foreign language: A discourse analysis of Korean EFL learners’ written narratives. Narrative Inquiry, 16(2), 379–407. 10.1075/ni.16.2.08kan
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.16.2.08kan [Google Scholar]
  18. Kasper, G., & Prior, M. T.
    (2015) Analyzing storytelling in TESOL interview research. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 226–255. 10.1002/tesq.169
     https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.169 [Google Scholar]
  19. Kitzinger, C.
    (2008) Developing feminist conversation analysis: A response to Wowk. Human Studies, 31,179–208. 10.1007/s10746‑008‑9088‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-008-9088-7 [Google Scholar]
  20. Lerner, G.
    (1996) Finding “face” in the preference structures of talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 59(4), 303–321. 10.2307/2787073
     https://doi.org/10.2307/2787073 [Google Scholar]
  21. Lumsden, D.
    (2008) Kinds of conversational cooperation. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 1896–1908. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.03.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.03.007 [Google Scholar]
  22. Mohammad, A., & Vásquez, C.
    (2015) “Rachel’s not here”: Constructed dialogue in gossip. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19(3), 351–371. 10.1111/josl.12125
     https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12125 [Google Scholar]
  23. Monzoni, C. M., & Drew, P.
    (2009) Inter-actional contexts of story – interventions by non-knowledgeable story recipients in (Italian) multi-person interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 197–218. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.06.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  24. Norrick, N. R.
    (2000) Conversational narrative: Storytelling in everyday talk. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.203
     https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.203 [Google Scholar]
  25. Pomerantz, A., & Heritage, J.
    (2012) Preference. InJ. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp.210–228). Chichester, UK: Blackwell Publishing LTD. 10.1002/9781118325001.ch11
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118325001.ch11 [Google Scholar]
  26. Ruhi, S.
    (2009) Evoking face in self and other-presentation in Turkish. InF. Bargiela-Chiappini & M. Haugh (Eds.), Face, communication and social interaction (pp.155–174). London, UK: Equinox Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Schegloff, E. A.
    (1988) Goffman and the analysis of conversation. InP. Drew & A. Wootton (Eds.), Erving Goffman: Exploring the interaction order (pp.89–135). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. (1988/1989) From interview to confrontation: Observations of the Bush/Rather encounter. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 22, 215–240. 10.1080/08351818809389304
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351818809389304 [Google Scholar]
  29. (1997) “Narrative analysis” thirty years later. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 97–106. 10.1075/jnlh.7.11nar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/jnlh.7.11nar [Google Scholar]
  30. (2007) A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 462–482. 10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.007 [Google Scholar]
  31. Schulz, C. M., & Larkin, D.
    (1999) Peanuts: A golden celebration. The art and the story of the world’s best-loved comic strip. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Stivers, T., & Timmermans, S.
    (2017) Always look on the bright side of life: Making bad news bivalent, Research on Language and Social Interaction, 50(4), 404–418. 10.1080/08351813.2017.1375804
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1375804 [Google Scholar]
  33. Svennevig, J., & Skovholt, K.
    (2005, July10–15). The methodology of conversation analysis – positivism or social constructivism?Paper presented at the9th International Pragmatics Conference, Riva del Garda, Italy.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Vargas Maseda, R.
    (2017) Deciphering Goffman: The structure of his sociological theory revisited. London, UK: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315576121
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315576121 [Google Scholar]
  35. Watts, R. J.
    (2003) Politeness. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511615184
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615184 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ni.18055.tho
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversation analysis; conversational storytelling; cooperation; face; face work; girl talk; Goffman; non-native speaker; Schegloff; tellability

Most Cited

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