1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics
  4. Volume 37, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 37, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Disagreement, while generally seen as an act threatening interlocutors’ face, is indispensable in particular contexts. Based on an in-depth linguistic and paralinguistic analysis of 12 cases of disagreement from a Chinese venture capital reality TV show , we found that in this special context disagreement was a ‘dispreferred’ moment, but also an informative, educational, and amusing occurrence with multiple functions. While disagreements were frequently initiated (particularly by the investors), they were mostly indirect, carefully mitigated by participants with linguistic devices such as explanations, private verbs, questions, humor, as well as paralinguistic devices such as friendly facial expressions and movements. Furthermore, disagreements, especially aggravated ones, were often interactively mitigated by both on-stage participants (particularly the host) and the post-production team in an interestingly cooperative way. The interactive process of mitigating disagreements not only saved the interlocutors’ face, but also contributed to the multiple purposes of the show. Our findings suggest that politeness, as an invisible hand behind communicative acts, is still present despite the ‘conflict’ that characterizes this form of TV show.

© 2024 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22003.zha
2024-02-29
2024-10-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/resla.22003.zha
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Angouri, J.
    (2012) Managing disagreement in problem solving meeting talk. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1565–1579. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  2. Angouri, J., & Locher, M.
    (2012) Theorising disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1549–1553. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.06.011 [Google Scholar]
  3. Angouri, J., & Tseliga, T.
    (2010) “You have no idea what you are talking about”: From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora. Journal of Politeness Research, 6(1), 57–82. 10.1515/jplr.2010.004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bjørge, A.
    (2012) Expressing disagreement in ELF business negotiations: Theory and practice. Applied Linguistics, 33(4), 406–427. 10.1093/applin/ams015
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams015 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bond, M.
    (1986) The psychology of the Chinese people. Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown, P., & Levinson, S.
    (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chan, A., Schnurr, S., & Zayts, O.
    (2018) Exploring face, identity and relationship management in disagreements in business meetings in Hong Kong. Journal of Politeness Research, 14(2), 279–306. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0036
     https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0036 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cheng, W., & Tsui, A. B.
    (2009) “ahh ((laugh)) well there is no comparison between the two I think”: How do Hong Kong Chinese and native speakers of English disagree with each other?Journal of Pragmatics, 41(11), 2365–2380. 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.04.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.04.003 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cosier, R., & Schwenk, C.
    (1990) Agreement and thinking alike: Ingredients for poor decisions. Academy of Management Perspectives, 4(1), 69–74. 10.5465/ame.1990.4274710
     https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1990.4274710 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cottle, S.
    (2004) Producing nature(s): On the changing production ecology of natural history TV. Media, Culture & Society, 26(1), 81–101. 10.1177/0163443704039494
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443704039494 [Google Scholar]
  11. Culpeper, J.
    (2005) Impoliteness and entertainment in the television quiz show: The Weakest Link. Journal of Politeness Research, 1(1), 35–72. 10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.35
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  12. Culpeper, J., & Holmes, O.
    (2013) (Im)politeness and exploitative TV in Britain and North America: The X factor and American idol. InN. Lorenzo-Dus, & P. G. C. Blitvich (Eds.), Real talk: Reality television and discourse analysis in action (pp.169–198). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137313461_9
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137313461_9 [Google Scholar]
  13. Du Bois, J.
    (1991) Transcription design principles for spoken discourse research. Pragmatics, 1(1), 71–106.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Fisher, B. A., & Ellis, D. G.
    (1980) Small group decision making: Communication and the group process. McGraw-Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Georgakopoulou, A.
    (2001) Arguing about the future: On indirect disagreements in conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(12), 1881–1900. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(00)00034‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00034-5 [Google Scholar]
  16. Harrison, B.
    (1973) Form and content. Blackwell.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Hauff, M., & Laaser, W.
    (1996) Educational video and TV in distance education: Production and design aspects. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 2(6), 456–471.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Heritage, J.
    (1984) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Polity Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Higgins, M., & Smith, A.
    (2016) Belligerent broadcasting: Synthetic argument in broadcast talk. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315569017
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315569017 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hill, A.
    (2007) Restyling factual TV: Audiences and news, documentary and reality genres. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203099735
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203099735 [Google Scholar]
  21. Holtgraves, T.
    (1997) Yes, but... Positive politeness in conversation arguments. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16(2), 222–239. 10.1177/0261927X970162006
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970162006 [Google Scholar]
  22. Jian, M.
    (2013) Negotiating paternalism and the enterprising self in Taiwanese talent shows. Media International Australia, 147(1), 122–133. 10.1177/1329878X1314700113
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X1314700113 [Google Scholar]
  23. Jones, T.
    (2001) Emotional communication in conflict: Essence and impact. InW. F. Eadie, & P. E. Nelson (Eds.), The language of conflict and resolution (pp.81–104). Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Kakavá, C.
    (1993) Negotiation of disagreement by Greeks in conversations and classroom discourse. Ph.D. dissertation, Georgetown University.
  25. (2002) Opposition in modern Greek discourse: Cultural and contextual constraints. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(10–11), 1537–1568. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00075‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00075-9 [Google Scholar]
  26. Lee, C. L., Chen, Y., & Tan, G. L.
    (2013) Silence and face-work in two Chinese TV talk shows. Discourse, Context & Media, 2(1), 52–74. 10.1016/j.dcm.2013.01.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2013.01.002 [Google Scholar]
  27. Leech, G.
    (2014) The pragmatics of politeness. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195341386.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  28. Liao, Y., & Bond, M. H.
    (2011) The dynamics of face loss following interpersonal harm for Chinese and Americans. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(1), 25–38. 10.1177/0022022110361774
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110361774 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lin, C.
    (2020) Exploring judges’ compliments and criticisms on American, British, and Taiwanese talent shows. Journal of Pragmatics, 1601, 44–59. 10.1016/j.pragma.2020.02.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.02.008 [Google Scholar]
  30. Liu, S.
    (2004) Pragmatics strategies and power relations in disagreement: Chinese culture in higher education. Universal Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. López-Ozieblo, R.
    (2018) Disagreeing without a ‘no’: How teachers indicate disagreement in a Hong Kong classroom. Journal of Pragmatics, 1371, 1–18. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.016
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.016 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lorenzo-Dus, N.
    (2009) “You’re barking mad – I’m ou”: Impoliteness and broadcast talk. Journal of Politeness Research, 5(2), 159–187. 10.1515/JPLR.2009.010
     https://doi.org/10.1515/JPLR.2009.010 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lorenzo-Dus, N., Bou-Franch, P., & Blitvich, P. G. C.
    (2013) Impoliteness in US/UK talent shows: A diachronic study of the evolution of a genre. InN. Lorenzo-Dus, & P. G. C. Blitvich (Eds.), Real talk: Reality television and discourse analysis in action (pp.199–217). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137313461_10
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137313461_10 [Google Scholar]
  34. Mao, Y., & Zhao, X.
    (2020) A discursive approach to disagreements expressed by Chinese spokespersons during press conferences. Discourse, Context & Media, 371, 100428. 10.1016/j.dcm.2020.100428
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2020.100428 [Google Scholar]
  35. Matwick, K., & Matwick, K.
    (2018) Politeness and pseudo-intimacy in a food radio call-in program. Discourse, Context & Media, 211, 46–53. 10.1016/j.dcm.2017.11.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.11.006 [Google Scholar]
  36. McNeill, D.
    (2005) Gesture and thought. University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226514642.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Murphy, J.
    (2014) (Im)politeness during Prime Minister’s Questions in the UK Parliament. Pragmatics and Society, 5(1), 76–104. 10.1075/ps.5.1.04mur
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.5.1.04mur [Google Scholar]
  38. Myers, G.
    (2004) Matters of opinion: Talking about public issues. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486708
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486708 [Google Scholar]
  39. Netz, H.
    (2014) Disagreement patterns in gifted classes. Journal of Pragmatics, 611, 142–160. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.09.007 [Google Scholar]
  40. Rees-Miller, J.
    (2000) Power, severity, and context in disagreement. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(8), 1087–1111. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00088‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00088-0 [Google Scholar]
  41. Ren, W., & Woodfield, H.
    (2016) Chinese females’ date refusals in reality TV shows: Expressing involvement or independence?Discourse, Context & Media, 131, 89–97. 10.1016/j.dcm.2016.05.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2016.05.008 [Google Scholar]
  42. Schiffrin, D.
    (1984) Jewish argument as sociability. Language in Society, 13(3), 311–335. 10.1017/S0047404500010526
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500010526 [Google Scholar]
  43. Schnurr, S., & Chan, A.
    (2011) Exploring another side of co-leadership: Negotiating professional identities through face-work in disagreements. Language in Society, 40(2), 187–209. 10.1017/S0047404511000030
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404511000030 [Google Scholar]
  44. Sifianou, M.
    (2012) Disagreements, face and politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(12), 1554–1564. 10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.03.009 [Google Scholar]
  45. Stalpers, J.
    (1995) The expression of disagreement. InK. Ehlich, & J. Wagner (Eds.). The discourse of business negotiation (pp.275–289). De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110881516.275
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110881516.275 [Google Scholar]
  46. Tang, C.
    (2016) Managing criticisms in US-based and Taiwan-based reality talent contests: A cross-linguistic comparison. Pragmatics, 26(1), 111–136.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Warner-García, S.
    (2014) Laughing when nothing’s funny: The pragmatic use of coping laughter in the negotiation of conversational disagreement. Pragmatics, 24(1), 157–180.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Zhang, H., Zhao, J., & Wu, Y.
    (2021) Disagreement and mitigation in power-asymmetrical venture capital reality TV shows: A comparative case study of Shark Tank in the US and Dragon’s Den in China. Intercultural Pragmatics, 18(2), pp.245–276. 10.1515/ip‑2021‑2004
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2021-2004 [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhu, W.
    (2014a) Managing relationships in everyday practice: The case of strong disagreement in Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics, 641, 85–101. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.01.010 [Google Scholar]
  50. (2014b) Rapport management in strong disagreement: An investigation of a community of Chinese speakers of English. Text & Talk, 34(5), 641–664. 10.1515/text‑2014‑0021
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0021 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22003.zha
Loading
Disagreeing without tears
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics 37, 518 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.22003.zha
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22003.zha
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.22003.zha
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): disagreement; face threat; mitigation; politeness; reality TV show

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