Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
6.5.2 Disequilibric Positive Alignment (Negative Threshold Breaches) Positive threshold breaches (whereby negative faces are threatened) are more difficult to capture, yet do occur. A positive threshold breach would occur when solidarity had extended to or beyond the point where the possibility for individuated claims becomes subsumed under all encompassing commonality ands solidarity (a graphic example culturally being staunch communist states). What happens is that the window of opportunity for drawing on the current conversational topic for the mobilisation of individuated selves rapidly shrinks; self expression diminishes in favour of a more conversationally stagnant collective expression. What we know in English as the conversation 'drying up', or as a gathering 'dying a death' are'good idiomatic expressions which index such instances of negative threshold breaches. Compared to German, English conversation seems to be able to tolerate relatively little silence or conversational inactivity. Thus, at points in sociable episodes where conversations do seem to 'dry up', participants usually work quickly to identify new topical resources. Endemic at such points in English at conversation are what are variously referred to as topic initiators (see e. g. Schegloff and Sacks 1973; Wilson 1989) such as'Oh, I know what I wanted to ask you, or'Hey, did you see that programme on Telly last night? ', with 'hey' and 'oh' sparking back to life sociability like a spark to a tinderbox and effectively allowing participants to re-align themselves, often in a more negatively aligned manner. If a new narrative is not found, attention may be focused elsewhere. An excellent resource for this is co-present children. In my own gatherings I observed that on more than one occasion in my English data when conversation had effectively dried up (brought to such a point by a total and extended agreement on an issue or exhausting of a replayed common past), participants often turned to children to either chastise ("Nicholas, stop playin' with your food") or show disproportionate attention ("Oh::: what have you made there). This not infrequently led to a joint and somewhat exaggerated interest being displayed by the other participants in the temporarily negatively altercasted child. This new point of interest could then in itself could provide a 'common' focus from 1 A'>
1 2 3 4 5 6 which a new set of individuated claims could be drawn ('Oh, do you know what he did last week ). In the following example, the conversation reaches such a point. Excerpt 6.16 He He... Hm The participants are moving out of a laughter sequence in which all have unmitigatingly expressed their amusement. MB: (h)awe::: LM: Awe::: (5) LM: hm MB: hm=hm (0.8) (0.2) RP: Gorgeous this Lyn What happens here is that, recognising a possible positive threshold breach, RP diverts attention to the food in much the same way that a new topic might be introduced. As well as changing the conversational focus, this move importantly altercasts LM (see Malone 1997) into - at least as far as this conversational environment is concerned - the unique role of host and 'cooker of good foods'. This in effect initiates a period of negative alignment. LM goes on in this piece of interaction to ratify this altercasted self by relaying to the rest of the participants qua guests the ingredients etc. Such moments of threshold breach are not wholly resolved, even by such remedial and re-alignment action but effectively send alignment ripples over the ensuing turns at talk until the waters settle into a more equilibric state. This is evidenced a few moments later on in this episode as all participants express unequivocal praise about the tastiness of the food. 1 R'A
- 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
- Page 185 and 186: To reiterate, positive threshold br
- Page 187 and 188: 41 LIP: [IN FACT THERE WAs quite a
- Page 189 and 190: What happens here is that KIP proff
- Page 191: 17 KH: the road (1) >and if he want
- Page 195 and 196: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 197 and 198: and English differences in conversa
- Page 199 and 200: Notes to Chapter 6 1 The only insta
- Page 201 and 202: study is a sociological one, and it
- Page 203 and 204: performer, a player, an image, a fi
- Page 205 and 206: English cultures respectively. In a
- Page 207 and 208: I will shortly illustrate how each
- Page 209 and 210: 18 KJ: [(Graphic drawin)= 19 LM: =O
- Page 211 and 212: The in-the-know self is a second sy
- Page 213 and 214: documentaries to having witnessed r
- Page 215 and 216: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is
- Page 217 and 218: Excerpt 7.6'Up a Hill' The sociable
- Page 219 and 220: RP&EP's mobilisation of an in-the-k
- Page 221 and 222: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 223 and 224: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 225 and 226: Excerpt 7.10 Was muss Mann machen?
- Page 227 and 228: Often, knowledgeable selves are ali
- Page 229 and 230: 7.4 Positive Selves I suggested ear
- Page 231 and 232: 27 RP: =get out of it= 28 LM: =. HH
- Page 233 and 234: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 235 and 236: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 is
- Page 237 and 238: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 239 and 240: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 241 and 242: of these selves at conversational w
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
which a new set <strong>of</strong> individuated claims could be drawn ('Oh, do you know what<br />
he did last week ).<br />
In the following example, the conversation reaches such a point.<br />
Excerpt 6.16 He He... Hm<br />
The participants are moving out <strong>of</strong> a laughter sequence in which all have<br />
unmitigatingly expressed their amusement.<br />
MB: (h)awe:::<br />
LM: Awe::: (5)<br />
LM: hm<br />
MB: hm=hm<br />
(0.8)<br />
(0.2)<br />
RP: Gorgeous this Lyn<br />
What happens here is that, recognising a possible positive threshold<br />
breach, RP diverts attention to the food in much the same way that a new topic<br />
might be introduced. As well as changing the conversational focus, this move<br />
importantly altercasts LM (see Malone 1997) into - at least as far as this<br />
conversational environment is concerned - the unique role <strong>of</strong> host and 'cooker<br />
<strong>of</strong> good foods'. This in effect initiates a period <strong>of</strong> negative alignment. LM goes<br />
on in this piece <strong>of</strong> interaction to ratify this altercasted self by relaying to the rest<br />
<strong>of</strong> the participants qua guests the ingredients etc. Such moments <strong>of</strong> threshold<br />
breach are not wholly resolved, even by such remedial and re-alignment action<br />
but effectively send alignment ripples over the ensuing turns at talk until the<br />
waters settle into a more equilibric state. This is evidenced a few moments later<br />
on in this episode as all participants express unequivocal praise about the<br />
tastiness <strong>of</strong> the food.<br />
1 R'A
Change language