Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

ot non-ratifi cation and non-support of negative claims is evident in the
conversational data from both cultures' sociabilities, as the following episodes
illustrate.
Again, as with non-ratification of solidaric claims, no n-ratifi cation of
individuated claims is achieved as part and parcel of recognisable sociable style
in both cultures.
I illustrated above how a prime and routine way for English participants to
proffer negative claims was in the replaying of unique experience. In order for
this to be successful, appropriate conversational action needs to be taken on
the part of both the current speaker and the recipients: The speaker tells the
tale and the recipients 'allow` the tale to be told by appropriately aligning.
However, this need not always be the case. In this narrative environment,
examples of non-ratification of uniqueness claims in English can be seen to
occur for example in moments where a participant is not permitted to produce or
complete a narrative, tell a story, or relay some experience (cutting someone
out' or 'cutting someone short' as the English idioms run).
This may indeed be perceived as rude in some contexts. More
specifically, if for example humorous claims are being made (a salient aspect of
English narrative delivery - see Chapters 5 and 8), non-ratification and non-
support might be to stop the speaker telling a joke on the grounds that one had
'heard that joke before', or alternatively come in with the punch line oneself,
thereby robbing the speaker of his / her comic zenith. Not laughing at the joke
may have a similar non-ratificatory and non-supportive effect. In terms of the
substantive basis of conversational clams, when for example an individual in
English makes a uniqueness claim such as that made by KP&LP in Tommy
Fields (see excerpt 6.5), it is not expected (or appropriate) that recipients will
'take the floor away from the current speaker; fail to display appropriate
expressive response; or respond with an account of identical or even more
dramatic experience. To do so would be to seriously undermine the uniqueness
claimed by that speaker and again run the risk of appearing impolite (see
Chapter 9). Any English person will recognise the feelings of non-ratification
when proffering what we claim as unique experiences, only to be responded to
JR7