Volume 11, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


In light of the tendency in studies of Japanese discourse and communication to account for patterns of social interaction in terms of cultural concepts such as (“harmony”), (“empathy”), and (“restraint”), this report sets out to demonstrate how much of an endogenously produced, local achievement social interaction can be in Japanese. To do so, the techniques and principles of conversation analysis are employed to describe how a particular social action, the expression of concession to statements of opposition, is produced by participants in a set of Japanese university faculty meetings. Although it is suggested that the very direct and explicit design of the concession displays could be explained in terms of concepts such as and/or , it is nonetheless argued that the interactional significance of this action can be best understood by undertaking a detailed, sequential analysis of the interaction. The analysis itself is divided into two parts: First it is demonstrated that the concessions are products of the participants’ close attendance to and monitoring of the details of the unfolding interaction; second it is shown that instead of turning to pre-determined cultural concepts to account for the trajectory of the interaction, it is possible to understand the concession displays by situating them within the flow of the interaction itself.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Barnlund, Dean
    (1989) Communicative styles of Japanese and Americans. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Boden, Deirdre
    (1994) The Business of talk: Organizations in action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Boden, Deirdre , & Don H. Zimmerman
    (eds.) (1991) Talk & social structure: Studies in ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Drew, Paul , & John Heritage
    (eds.) (1992) Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Fox, Barbara , Makoto Hayashi , & Robert Jasperson
    (1996) Resources and repair: A cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In E. Ochs , E. Schegloff , and S. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge University Press, pp. 185-237. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.004 [Google Scholar]
  6. Goffman, Erving
    (1981) Forms of talk. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Goodwin, Charles
    (1981) Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Hayashi, Makoto
    (1994) A comparative study of self-repair in English and Japanese conversation. In N. Akatsuka (ed.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 4. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 77-94.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (1999) Where grammar and interaction meet: A study of co-participant completion in Japanese conversation. Human Studies22.(2-4): 475-499. doi: 10.1023/A:1005492027060
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005492027060 [Google Scholar]
  10. Hayashi, Makoto , & Junko Mori
    (1998) Co-construction in Japanese revisited: We do "finish each others sentences". In N. Akatsuka , H. Hoji , S. Iwasaki , S. Sohn , and S. Strauss (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguistics 7. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 77-93.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Heath, Christian
    (1984) Talk and recipiency: Sequential organization in speech and body movement. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 247-265.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Heritage, John
    (1984) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson J. Heritage and(eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 299-345.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (1998) Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society27: 291-334. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500019990
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hester, Stephen , & Peter Eglin
    (eds.) (1997) Culture in action: Studies in membership category analysis. Washington D.C.: University Press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hutchby, Ian
    (1996) Confrontation talk: Arguments, asymmetries, and power on talk radio. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Iwasaki, Shoichi
    (1997) The Northridge earthquake conversations: The floor structure and the ‘loop’ sequence in Japanese conversation. Journal of Pragmatics28: 661-693. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)00070‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)00070-2 [Google Scholar]
  17. Kendon, Adam
    (1982) The organization of behavior in face-to-face interaction: Observations on the development of a methodology. In K. Scherer P. Ekman and(eds.), Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 440-505.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Lebra, Takie
    (1976) Japanese patterns of behavior. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Lerner, Gene , & Tomoyo Takagi
    (1999) On the place of linguistic resources in the organization of talk-in-interaction: A co-investigation of English and Japanese practices. Journal of Pragmatics31: 49-75. doi: 10.1016/S0378‑2166(98)00051‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00051-4 [Google Scholar]
  20. Locastro, Virginia
    (1987) Aizuchi: A Japanese conversational routine. In L. Smith (ed.), Discourse across cultures. New York: Prentice Hall, pp. 101-113.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lynch, Michael
    (2000) The ethnomethodological foundations of conversation analysis. Text 20.4: 517-532.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Maynard, Senko
    (1986) On back-channel behavior in Japanese and English casual conversation. Linguistics24: 1079-1108. doi: 10.1515/ling.1986.24.6.1079
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1986.24.6.1079 [Google Scholar]
  23. (1989) Japanese conversation: Self-contextualization, structure, and interactional management. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Mizutani, Osamu , & Nobuko Mizutani
    (1987) How to be polite in Japanese. Tokyo: The Japan Times.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Mori, Junko
    (1999) Negotiating agreement and disagreement in Japanese: Connective expressions and turn construction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/sidag.8
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.8 [Google Scholar]
  26. Nakane, Chie
    (1970) Japanese society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Pomerantz, Anita
    (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-101.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Sacks, Harvey
    (1992) Lectures on conversation. Edited by G. Jefferson . Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Sacks, Harvey , Emanuel Schegloff , and Gail Jefferson
    (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn taking in conversation. Language50: 697-735. doi: 10.2307/412243
    https://doi.org/10.2307/412243 [Google Scholar]
  30. Saft, Scott
    (1998) Some uses and meanings of utterance initial iya in Japanese Discourse. In N. Akatsuka , H. Hoji , S. Iwasaki , S.O. Sohn , and S. Strauss (eds.), Japanese/Korean linguisticsVol. 7. Stanford: CSLI Publications, pp. 121-137.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (2000) Arguing in the institution: Context, culture, and conversation analysis in a set of Japanese university faculty meetings. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.
  32. (2001a) Concession displays in arguments and disagreements that occur in Japanese discourse: Unique cultural style or situated interactional achievement. In E. Németh (ed.), Pragmatics in 2000: Selected papers from the 7th International Pragmatics Conference. Antwerp: IPrA, pp. 496-507.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. (2001b) Acknowledgement tokens and arguments in Japanese university faculty meetings. Paperpresented at the IIEMCA conference on ‘Orders of Ordinary Action’. July 9-11, Manchester, UK.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Schegloff, Emanuel
    (1992) Introduction in Harvey Sacks’ Lectures on conversation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. IX-LXII.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Smith, Robert J
    (1983) Japanese society: Tradition, self, and the social order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Takagi, Tomoyo
    (1999) "Questions" in argument sequences in Japanese. Human Studies22: 397-423. doi: 10.1023/A:1005419406587
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005419406587 [Google Scholar]
  37. Tanaka, Hiroko
    (1999) Turn-taking in Japanese conversation: A study in grammar and Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.56
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.56 [Google Scholar]
  38. (2000) Turn projection in Japanese talk-in-interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction 33.1: 1-38. doi: 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3301_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3301_1 [Google Scholar]
  39. Watanabe, Suwako
    (1993) Cultural differences in framing: American and Japanese group discussions. In D. Tannen (ed.), Framing in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 176-209.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. White, Sheida
    (1989) Back-channels across cultures: A study of Americans and Japanese. Language in Society18: 59-77. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500013270
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500013270 [Google Scholar]
  41. Wierzbicka, Anna
    (1991) Japanese key words and core cultural values. Language in Society20: 333-385. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500016535
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500016535 [Google Scholar]
  42. Yamada, Haru
    (1992) American and Japanese business discourse: A comparison of interactional styles. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (1997) Different games/Different rules: Why Americans and Japanese misunderstand each other. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
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