1887
Volume 10, Issue 4
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper describes how bilingual colleagues living in Hong Kong make small talk in instant messaging to achieve various business-oriented goals and construct multiple identities in the discursive process. Guided by James Paul Gee’s revised framework of discourse analysis, the analyses evidenced that, overall, colleagues use small talk in instant messages to maintain minimal ties with distant partners, fill in silence during computer work, affect informal decision-making at work, and to diffuse useful surrounding information into business talk. These instances interplay with different affordances provided by the gadgets in the instant messenger interfaces. Such creative usage, together with the perceived nature of online interaction and instant messaging, results in multiple and turbulent identities circulating in the broader context of workplace discourse. The article concludes by arguing that computer-mediated communication has offered participants an emerging modus of interacting socially, beyond the physical and psychological constraints of time and space.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.16064.mak
2020-01-14
2020-09-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anandarajan, Murugan, Maliha Zaman, Qizhi Dai, and Bay Arinze
    2010 “Generation Y Adoption of Instant Messaging: An Examination of the Impact of Social Usefulness and Media Richness on Use Richness.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication53 (2): 132–143. 10.1109/TPC.2010.2046082
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2010.2046082 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtin, Mikhail
    1981The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays (Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baron, Naomi S.
    2004 “See you Online: Gender Issues in College Student Use of Instant Messaging.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology23 (4): 397–423. 10.1177/0261927X04269585
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X04269585 [Google Scholar]
  4. 2010 “Discourse Structures in Instant Messaging: The Case of Utterance Breaks.” [email protected]7: article 4. Retrieved fromwww.languageatinternet.org/articles/2010/2651
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2013 “Instant Messaging.” InPragmatics of Computer-Mediated Communication, ed. bySusan C. Herring, Dieter Stein, and Tuija Virtanen, 135–162. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110214468.135
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214468.135 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barron, Anne, and Emily Black
    2015 Constructing Small Talk in Learner-Native Speaker Voice-Based Telecollaboration: A Focus on Topic Management and Backchanneling. System48: 112–128. 10.1016/j.system.2014.09.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.009 [Google Scholar]
  7. Barton, David, and Carmen Lee
    2013Language Online: Investigating Digital Texts and Practices. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203552308
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203552308 [Google Scholar]
  8. Beinstein, Judith
    1975 “Conversations in Public Places.” Journal of Communication25 (1): 85–95. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1975.tb00557.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1975.tb00557.x [Google Scholar]
  9. Benwell, Bethan, and May McCreaddie
    2016 “Keeping ‘Small Talk’ Small in Health-Care Encounters: Negotiating the Boundaries between On- and Off-Task Talk.” Research on Language and Social Interaction49 (3): 258–271. 10.1080/08351813.2016.1196548
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1196548 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bezemer, Jeff, and Gunther Kress
    2008 “Writing in Multimodal Texts: A Social Semiotic Account of Designs for Learning.” Written Communication25 (2): 166–195. 10.1177/0741088307313177
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088307313177 [Google Scholar]
  11. Blum-Kulka, Shoshana
    2000 “Gossipy Events at Family Dinners: Negotiating Sociability, Presence and the Moral Order.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 213–240. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Cameron, A. Frances, and Jane Webster
    2005 “Unintended Consequences of Emerging Communication Technologies: Instant Messaging in the Workplace.” Computers in Human Behavior21: 85–103. 10.1016/j.chb.2003.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2003.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  13. Cheng, Winnie, and Martin Warren
    2005 “A Corpus-Driven Study of Disagreement in Hong Kong Business Discourse.” InAsian Business Discourse, ed. byFrancesca Bargiela-Chiappini, and Maurizio Gotti, 241–270. Berlin: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Chung, Donghun, and Chang Soo Nam
    2007 “An Analysis of the Variables Predicting Instant Messenger Use.” New Media and Society9 (2): 212–234. 10.1177/1461444807072217
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807072217 [Google Scholar]
  15. Clifton, Jonathan
    2012 “Doing Trust in Workplace Interaction.” InProfessional Communication across Languages and Cultures, ed. byMǎda Stanca, and Rǎzvan Sǎftoiu, 107–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.17.07cli
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.17.07cli [Google Scholar]
  16. Coates, Jennifer
    1988 “Gossip Revisited”. InWomen in their Speech Communities: New Perspectives on Language and Sex, ed. byJennifer Coates and Deborah Cameron, 94–122. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Coposescu, Liliana T.
    2012 “Discursive Hybridity at Work.” InProfessional Communication across Languages and Cultures, ed. byMǎda Stanca, and Rǎzvan Sǎftoiu, 83–105. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.17.06cop
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.17.06cop [Google Scholar]
  18. Coupland, Justine
    2000 “Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Small Talk.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 1–25. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2003 “Small Talk: Social Functions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction36 (1): 1–6. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_1 [Google Scholar]
  20. Coupland, Justine, Nikolas Coupland, and Jeffrey D. Robinson
    1992 “‘How are you?’: Negotiating Phatic Communion.” Language in Society21 (2): 207–230. 10.1017/S0047404500015268
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015268 [Google Scholar]
  21. Crystal, David
    2006Language and the Internet (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511487002
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511487002 [Google Scholar]
  22. Cui, Xia
    2015 “Small Talk: A Missing Skill in the Chinese Communicative Repertoire.” Australian Review of Applied Linguistics38 (1): 3–23. 10.1075/aral.38.1.01cui
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aral.38.1.01cui [Google Scholar]
  23. Darics, Erika
    2010 “Relational Work in Synchronous Text-Based CMC of Virtual Teams.” InHandbook of Research on Discourse Behavior and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction, ed. byRotimi Taiwo, 830–851. Hershey, Penn.: IGI Global. 10.4018/978‑1‑61520‑773‑2.ch053
    https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-61520-773-2.ch053 [Google Scholar]
  24. (ed.) 2015Digital business discourse. London: Palgrave. 10.1057/9781137405579
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137405579 [Google Scholar]
  25. DiFonzo, Nicholas, Martin J. Bourgeois, Jerry Suls, Christopher Homan, Noah Stupak, Bernard P. Brooks, David S. Ross, and Prashant Bordia
    2013 “Rumor Clustering, Consensus, and Polarization: Dynamic Social Impact and Self-Organization of Hearsay.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology49: 378–399. 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.12.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.12.010 [Google Scholar]
  26. Drew, Paul, and Kathy Chilton
    2000 “Calling just to Keep in Touch: Regular and Habitualised Telephone Calls as an Environment for Small Talk.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 137–162. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Drew, Paul, and John Heritage
    1992 “Analyzing Talk at Work: An Introduction.” InTalk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings, ed. byPaul Drew and John Heritage, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Ellwardt, Lea, Rafael Wittek, and Rudi Wielers
    2012 “Talking about the Boss: Effects of Generalized and Interpersonal Trust on Workplace Gossip.” Group and Organization Management37 (4): 521–549. 10.1177/1059601112450607
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601112450607 [Google Scholar]
  29. Gee, James P.
    2011An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Gibson, James J.
    1979The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Guo, Zixiu, Felix B. Tan, Tim Turner, and Huizhong Xu
    2008 “An Exploratory Investigation into Instant Messaging Preferences in Two Distinct Cultures.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication51 (4): 396–415. 10.1109/TPC.2008.2007869
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2008.2007869 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hall, Stuart
    2000 “Who needs ‘identity’?” InIdentity: A Reader, ed. byPaul du Gay, Jessica Evans, and Peter Redman, 15–30. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Herring, Susan C.
    1999 “Interaction Coherence in CMC.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication4 (4). Retrieved fromjcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue4/herring.html
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 2010 “Computer-Mediated Conversation: Introduction and Overview.” [email protected], 7: article 2. Retrieved fromwww.languageatinternet.org/articles/2010/2801
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Holmes, Janet
    2000 “Doing Collegiality and Keeping Control at Work: Small Talk in Government Departments.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 32–61. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. 2005 “When Small talk is a Big Deal: Sociolinguistic Challenges in the Workplace.” InSecond Language Needs Analysis, ed. byMichael H. Long, 344–372. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511667299.012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667299.012 [Google Scholar]
  37. 2006 “Workplace Narratives, Professional Identity and Relational Practice.” InDiscourse and Identity, ed. byAnna de Fina, Deborah Schiffrin, and Michael Bamberg, 166–187. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511584459.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511584459.009 [Google Scholar]
  38. 2014 “Doing Discourse Analysis in Sociolinguistics.” InResearch Methods in Sociolinguistics, ed. byJanet Holmes and Kirk Hazen, 177–193. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Holmes, Janet, and Rose Fillary
    2000 “Handling Small Talk at Work: Challenges for Workers with Intellectual Disabilities.” International Journal of Disability, Develop and Education47 (3): 273–291. 10.1080/713671114
    https://doi.org/10.1080/713671114 [Google Scholar]
  40. Holmes, Janet, Sharon Marsden, and Meredith Marra
    2013 “Doing Listenership: One Aspect of Sociopragmatic Competence at Work.” Pragmatics and Society4 (1): 26–53. 10.1075/ps.4.1.02hol
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.4.1.02hol [Google Scholar]
  41. Holmes, Janet, and Maria Stubbe
    2015Power and Politeness in the Workplace: A Sociolinguistic Analysis of Talk at Work (2nd ed.). London: Longman. 10.4324/9781315750231
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315750231 [Google Scholar]
  42. Iversen, T. Buschmann, Line Melby, and Pieter Toussaint
    2013 “Instant Messaging at the Hospital: Supporting Articulation Work?” International Journal of Medical Informatics82: 753–761. 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.05.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2013.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  43. Jones, Rodney H.
    2004 “The Problem of Context in Computer-Mediated Communication.” InDiscourse and Technology: Multimodal Discourse Analysis, ed. byPhilip LeVine and Ron Scollon, 20–33. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 2010 “Cyberspace and Physical Space: Attention Structures in Computer Mediated Communication.” InSemiotic Landscapes: Language, Image, Space, ed. byAdam Jaworski and Crispin Thurlow, 151–167. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kiernan, Patrick
    2017Language, Identity and Cycling in the New Media Age: Exploring Interpersonal Semiotics in Multimodal Media and Online Texts. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Koester, Almut
    2010Workplace Discourse. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Kulkarni, Dipti
    2014 “Exploring Jakobson’s ‘Phatic Function’ in Instant Messaging Interactions.” Discourse and Communication8 (2): 117–136. 10.1177/1750481313507150
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1750481313507150 [Google Scholar]
  48. Ladegaard, Hans J.
    2011a “‘Doing Power’ at Work: Responding to Male and Female Management Styles in a Global Business Corporation.” Journal of Pragmatics43: 4–19. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  49. 2012b “The Discourse of Powerlessness and Repression: Identity Construction in Domestic Helper Narratives.” Journal of Sociolinguistics16 (4): 450–482. 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2012.00541.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2012.00541.x [Google Scholar]
  50. Lazzaro-Salazar, Virginia M., Meredith Marra, Janet Holmes, and Bernadette Vine
    2015 “Doing Power and Negotiating through Disagreement in Public Meetings.” Pragmatics and Society6 (3): 444–464. 10.1075/ps.6.3.06laz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.6.3.06laz [Google Scholar]
  51. Mak, Chun Nam Bernie, and Hin Leung Chui
    2013 “A Cultural Approach to Small Talk: A Double-Edged Sword of Sociocultural Reality during Socialization into the Workplace.” Journal of Multicultural Discourses8 (2): 118–133. 10.1080/17447143.2012.753078
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17447143.2012.753078 [Google Scholar]
  52. Mak, Chun Nam Bernie, Hin Leung Chui, and Yiqi Liu
    2012 “Instant Messaging and Microblogging: Situated-Learning Platforms for Educationists and Workplace Mentors.” Social and Behavioral Sciences51: 392–399.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Mak, Chun Nam Bernie, and Carmen Lee
    2015 “Swearing is e-Business: Expletives in Instant Messaging in Hong Kong Workplaces.” InDigital Business Discourse, ed. byErika Darics, 124–143. London: Palgrave.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Malinowski, Bronislaw
    1923 “The problem of meaning in primitives.” InThe Meaning of Meaning: A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism, ed. byCharles K. Ogden and Ivor A. Richards, 296–336. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. McCarthy, Michael
    2000 “Mutually Captive Audiences: Small Talk and the Genre of Close-Contact Service Encounters”. InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 84–109. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Nabeth, Thierry
    2009 “Social Web and Identity: A Likely Encounter.” Identity in the Information Society2 (1): 1–5. 10.1007/s12394‑009‑0029‑z
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12394-009-0029-z [Google Scholar]
  57. Nardi, Bonnie, Steve Whittaker, and Erin Bradner
    2000 “Interaction and Outeraction: Instant messaging in Action.” InCSCW’00 Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 79–88. New York: ACM Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Norman, Donald A.
    1988The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Perry, Fred L.
    2011 Research in Applied Linguistics: Becoming a Discerning Consumer (2nd ed.). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum. 10.4324/9780203839027
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203839027
  60. Provine, Robert R., Robert J. Spencer, and Darcy Mandell
    2007 “Emotional Expression Online: Emoticons Punctuate Website Text Messages.” Journal of Language and Social Psychology26 (3): 299–307. 10.1177/0261927X06303481
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X06303481 [Google Scholar]
  61. Quan-Haase, Anabel, Joseph Cothrel, and Barry Wellman
    2005 “Instant Messaging for Collaboration: A Case Study of a High-Tech Firm.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication10 (4). Retrieved fromjcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue4/quan-haase.html. 10.1111/j.1083‑6101.2005.tb00276.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00276.x [Google Scholar]
  62. Ragan, Sandra L.
    2000 “Sociable Talk in Women’s Health Care Contexts: Two Forms of Non-Medical Talk.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 269–287. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Ready, Douglas A.
    2002 “How Storytelling Builds Next-Generation Leaders.” MIT Sloan Management Review43 (4): 63–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Richards, Keith
    2006Language and Professional Identity: Aspects of Collaborative Interaction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230505049
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230505049 [Google Scholar]
  65. Rosnow, Ralph L.
    1977 “Gossip and Marketplace Psychology.” Journal of Communication27 (1): 158–163. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.1977.tb01811.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1977.tb01811.x [Google Scholar]
  66. Sǎftoiu, Rǎzvan
    2012 “Small Talk – A Work of Frame.” InProfessional Communication across Languages and Cultures, ed. byMǎda Stanca and Rǎzvan Sǎftoiu, 213–235. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ds.17.12saf
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.17.12saf [Google Scholar]
  67. Schnurr, Stephanie
    2013Exploring Professional Communication: Language in Action. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Sheer, Vivian C.
    2010 “Hong Kong Adolescents’ Use of MSN vs. ICQ for Developing Friendships Online: Considering Media Richness and Presentational Control.” Chinese Journal of Communication3 (2): 223–240. 10.1080/17544751003740409
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17544751003740409 [Google Scholar]
  69. Stephens, Keri K.
    2008 “Optimizing Costs in Workplace Instant Messaging Use.” IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication51 (4): 369–380. 10.1109/TPC.2008.2007864
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2008.2007864 [Google Scholar]
  70. Stubbe, Maria, Chris Lane, Jo Hilder, Elaine Vine, Bernadette Vine, Meredith Marra, Janet Holmes, and Ann Weatherall
    2003 “Multiple Discourse Analyses of Workplace Interaction.” Discourse Studies5 (3): 351–388. 10.1177/14614456030053004
    https://doi.org/10.1177/14614456030053004 [Google Scholar]
  71. Tagg, Caroline
    2016 “Heteroglossia in Text-messaging: Performing Identity and Negotiating Relationships in a Digital Space”. Journal of Sociolinguistics20 (1): 59–85. 10.1111/josl.12170
    https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12170 [Google Scholar]
  72. Thurlow, Crispin
    2001 “The Internet and Language.” InThe Concise Encyclopedia of Sociolinguistics, ed. byRajend Mesthrie, 287–289. London: Pergamon.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Tracy, Karen, and Julie M. Naughton
    2000 “Institutional Identity-Work: A Better Lens.” InSmall Talk, ed. byJustine Coupland, 32–83. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Valkenburg, Patti M., and Jochen Peter
    2009 “The Effects of Instant Messaging on the Quality of Adolescents’ Existing Friendships: A Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Communication59: 79–97. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2008.01405.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01405.x [Google Scholar]
  75. Van De Mieroop, Dorien
    2016 “Small Talk in Interpreted Interactions in a Medical Setting.” Language and Intercultural Communication16 (2): 292–312. 10.1080/14708477.2015.1117483
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2015.1117483 [Google Scholar]
  76. Vine, Bernadette, Susan Kell, Meredith Marra, Janet Holmes
    2009 “Boundary-Marking Humour: Institutional, Gender and Ethnic Demarcation in the Workplace.” InHumor in Interaction, ed. byNeal R. Norrick and Delia Chiaro, 125–139. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.182.06vin
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.182.06vin [Google Scholar]
  77. Yates, Lynda, and George Major
    2015 “‘Quick-Chatting’, ‘Smart Dogs’, and How to ‘Say without Saying’: Small talk and Pragmatic Learning in the Community”. System48: 141–152. 10.1016/j.system.2014.09.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.011 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ps.16064.mak
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.16064.mak
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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