Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
drinking, and also at points where conversation was either a) 'drying up' (i. e. conversational topic had been exhausted and fresh contributions were proving difficult, and, although far less frequent, b) when conversational topic appeared to be getting too'heated', and seemed to be risking running beyond the thresholds of sociability (not a common phenomenon, but one which nevertheless did occasionally occur). Although, at least in terms of aspects of the immediate environment, both English and German main phases had similar topical foci, there were some differences in the way these were handled. For example, compared to German hosts, English hosts responded to compliments or interest in the setting with a more self-deprecating and abased manner. This took the form of for example downgrading the food, or one's own performance in preparing it to the point of having 'thrown something in a pot and stuck it in the oven for an hour'. Other props frequently received similar treatment, with compliments on prop x being met with almost formulaic responses of 'Oh, do you like it?, or'It's not bad ... it does for what we want it for'. German praising of the similar items seemed a much more formulaic affair. Indeed, I remember on my first occasion at German sociable gatherings being the last person to utter the phrase 'Mmm ... lecker' [Mmm.. Tasty]. This obligation to praise food (usually within a couple of seconds of tasting the first mouthful) seemed also to exist in English ('Oh it's nice this'), but in German, the "Iecker" utterance seemed a necessary pre-requisite for the sociable second and following mouthfuls. Converse to English hosts, German recipient of such compliments largely avoided , self-deprecating or abasing comments on the whole in favour of a preference towards unmitigated agreement, based largely on an evaluative stance taken towards the focus of the compliment. Thus, das Essen ist aber ganz lecker' [the food is really tasty], would be met with comments from the host such as 'Ja.. ne' [Yeah.. isn't it], or factual details pertaining to the ingrediential source of the tastiness. Subsequently, the food or other sociable props could provide the initiating conversational resource for further topical development in a way similar to how other more abstract conversational matters would later be handled. In both settings, these greetings and noticings served an important due[ function. First, they served to proscriptively bracket sociability, and second, by 12A
eing invariably solidaric in nature (see Goffman 1971; Brown and Levinson 1987), they functioned to index commonality, and allow for the early revealing and testing of sociable selves and lines which may be later taken (see Goffman 1967). In a way, these phases reminded me somewhat of snowstorm ornaments commonly available at Christmas time -a frantic sociable maelstrom in which participants are momentarily caught up. This feeling was exacerbated by the short lived bodily movement up to the point where seats were commonly taken and things settled down in preparation for the main phase of sociability. Indeed, there appeared to be limits on how much of this conversational work could be done in both cultures however, whilst still maintaining a semblance of sincerity. Much complimentary solidaric behaviour of this sort seemed to have a limited conversational, indeed sociable, lifespan. Conversation generally turned away from in situ conversational resources, as matters from the outside world were introduced as the basis of topic development. It is these episodes of focused conversational topic talk that I want to focus on in some detail in subsequent chapters as it is here that I feel the talk was less conditioned by the rules of the sociable occasion, than by the rules of sociable conversation (see Watson and Potter 1962). 5.2 Aligning for Alignment As things settled down in both milieus, the collective focus turned to conversation - to things of common interest that could be talked about beyond ratificatory greetings or the 'here and now' environment. In short, topics of conversation were sought for sociable development. These topics were not prescribed or agended ones, but rather proffered and taken up as part of the in situ practices of sociability by the participants themselves. Before moving on to the in depth analysis of the conversational data I want to outline the general essence on sociable episodes in both cultures by considering what topics were commonly talked about; and how participants generally aligned to the activity of sociable topic talk as evidenced in the nature of their contributions. I should briefly here say something more about the notion of topic. Upon consulting the literature, topic proved to be as conceptually slippery and illusive 125
- Page 83 and 84: Brown and Levinson (1987). Indeed,
- Page 85 and 86: Notes to Chapter 2 11 use the term
- Page 87 and 88: This chapter then can be regarded a
- Page 89 and 90: asic irreducible sociological varia
- Page 91 and 92: Fraser (1990) who, in also attempti
- Page 93 and 94: particularly amenable to such a heu
- Page 95 and 96: identify certain underlying dynamic
- Page 97 and 98: In fact, these two opposing orienta
- Page 99 and 100: at any given point in the flow of c
- Page 101 and 102: orderly and meaningful conversation
- Page 103 and 104: locally managed and constantly in d
- Page 105 and 106: Poles of Alignment Fig. 3.6 Sociabl
- Page 107 and 108: toward a clearer understanding of w
- Page 109 and 110: Notes to Chapter 3 1 See also Brown
- Page 111 and 112: 4.1 Research Questions In the previ
- Page 113 and 114: eferring to as sociable includes in
- Page 115 and 116: The decision on quantity of data wa
- Page 117 and 118: largely anecdotal evidence from whi
- Page 119 and 120: such as laughter sequences. I also
- Page 121 and 122: Table 4.3 Data: Omissions from Anal
- Page 123 and 124: The obtrusiveness of my recording w
- Page 125 and 126: hand, I did not want to engage in t
- Page 127 and 128: German. However, these episodes asi
- Page 129 and 130: presented here provides a necessary
- Page 131 and 132: two chapters (Chapters 6 and 7). He
- Page 133: Hand shakes for example were infreq
- Page 137 and 138: claimed on the part of the particip
- Page 139 and 140: Table 5.1 Sociable Topics Topic Cat
- Page 141 and 142: in my observations of German sociab
- Page 143 and 144: collective past peppered with indiv
- Page 145 and 146: In the next chapter I want to explo
- Page 147 and 148: CHAPTER 6 ALIGNMENT IN ACTION: NEGA
- Page 149 and 150: shall not be carried forward into t
- Page 151 and 152: These various symbols are intended
- Page 153 and 154: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 155 and 156: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Rather than
- Page 157 and 158: 19 EP: ' [Although I mean that [now
- Page 159 and 160: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 161 and 162: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 163 and 164: detrimental effects foreigners are
- Page 165 and 166: 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
- Page 167 and 168: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 169 and 170: 28 HB: but at the end of the day >1
- Page 171 and 172: approach, I hope to further illumin
- Page 173 and 174: 37 KJ: I never had any day to day (
- Page 175 and 176: 2 bevor (. ) die Schlange nicht zeh
- Page 177 and 178: ot non-ratifi cation and non-suppor
- Page 179 and 180: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 181 and 182: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 183 and 184: What happens in this particular exc
drinking, and also at points where conversation was either a) 'drying up' (i. e.<br />
conversational topic had been exhausted and fresh contributions were proving<br />
difficult, and, although far less frequent, b) when conversational topic appeared<br />
to be getting too'heated', and seemed to be risking running beyond the<br />
thresholds <strong>of</strong> sociability (not a common phenomenon, but one which<br />
nevertheless did occasionally occur).<br />
Although, at least in terms <strong>of</strong> aspects <strong>of</strong> the immediate environment, both<br />
English and German main phases had similar topical foci, there were some<br />
differences in the way these were handled. For example, compared to German<br />
hosts, English hosts responded to compliments or interest in the setting with a<br />
more self-deprecating and abased manner. This took the form <strong>of</strong> for example<br />
downgrading the food, or one's own performance in preparing it to the point <strong>of</strong><br />
having 'thrown something in a pot and stuck it in the oven for an hour'. Other<br />
props frequently received similar treatment, with compliments on prop x being<br />
met with almost formulaic responses <strong>of</strong> 'Oh, do you like it?, or'It's not bad ... it<br />
does for what we want it for'. German praising <strong>of</strong> the similar items seemed a<br />
much more formulaic affair. Indeed, I remember on my first occasion at German<br />
sociable gatherings being the last person to utter the phrase 'Mmm ... lecker'<br />
[Mmm.. Tasty]. This obligation to praise food (usually within a couple <strong>of</strong> seconds<br />
<strong>of</strong> tasting the first mouthful) seemed also to exist in English ('Oh it's nice this'),<br />
but in German, the "Iecker" utterance seemed a necessary pre-requisite for the<br />
sociable second and following mouthfuls. Converse to English hosts, German<br />
recipient <strong>of</strong> such compliments largely avoided , self-deprecating or abasing<br />
comments on the whole in favour <strong>of</strong> a preference towards unmitigated<br />
agreement, based largely on an evaluative stance taken towards the focus <strong>of</strong><br />
the compliment. Thus, das Essen ist aber ganz lecker' [the food is really tasty],<br />
would be met with comments from the host such as 'Ja.. ne' [Yeah.. isn't it], or<br />
factual details pertaining to the ingrediential source <strong>of</strong> the tastiness.<br />
Subsequently, the food or other sociable props could provide the initiating<br />
conversational resource for further topical development in a way similar to how<br />
other more abstract conversational matters would later be handled.<br />
In both settings, these greetings and noticings served an important due[<br />
function. First, they served to proscriptively bracket sociability, and second, by<br />
12A