Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

activity of sociable conversation, what I shall term aligning for alignment.
This second category of analysis shall involve pointing out how - at a
general level - participants in each respective milieu variously engage in
sociable topic development, that is, the nature of topics routinely drawn
upon, the extent to which topics are collaboratively developed, and how
such topics are commonly framed - for example in a serious or more
humorous way. In concluding the chapter I shall posit a set of basic
descriptive topic categories under which much of the sociable topic talk in
each milieu can be subsumed. Importantly, I shall suggest that each of the
categories posited - and by definition the majority of sociable topic
development in each milieu - variously allows for both positive and
negative facework as alignment as it was conceptualised in chapter 3.
In Chapters 6 to 81 shall move from a focus on observational to
transcribed conversational data. The main thrust of Chapter 6 shall be to
illustrate how sociable conversation can be seen to be characterised by
instances of what I shall term both positive and negative alignment, that is,
the claiming of solidarity with and autonomy from fel low-partici pants.
These two readings of alignment, ones essential to the facework as
alignment approach advanced in Chapter 3- shall form the basis of the
discussion in this and the following two analytical chapters. Aside from
demonstrating how both positive and alignments as facework are routinely
engaged in in each milieu, I shall consider the whole range of possible
alignment contingencies suggested by the interpretative framework set out
in Chapter 3. In effect this chapter shall work at an illustrative level to
evidence the validity of the notion of facework as alignment in sociable
episodes. In terms of the specific empirical concerns of the study, I shall
show how the nature of these alignments clearly reflects some of the
salient aspects of conversational style in general identified in Chapter 2.
In Chapter 71 shall extended and develop the discussion of the self
as a symbolic resource for alignment first touched on in Chapter 1. In
particular I shall draw on Goffman's (1953; 1967) conceptualisation of the
self under what he termed a dual mandate, that is, as involving the self as
'player and the self as'image'. Specifically, again by drawing on
9