Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository
extant approaches seemed particularly suitable for this, literature addressing sociability (Simmel 1949 [1911 ]), particularly the dynamics of sociable (Riesman and Watson 1964; Watson 1958; Watson and Potter 1962; Tannen 1984; Schiffrin 1984; Blum-Kulka 1997) or casual conversation (Eggins and Slade 1997) might help in taking a more heuristic stance to facework in conversation as advocated by scholars noting these problems associated with discourse analysis for facework practices. I moved on to suggest how the sociological concepts of alignments and equilibrium could be employed to accommodate the inherent dynamics of sociable conversation and, more importantly, could be seen to provide some analytical purchase on the self in sociable conversation as a concept directly linked to both positive and negative face needs. I then presented a framework of the analysis of facework as a matter not of utterances per se, but of selves, what I termed a facework as alignment approach to the analysis of facework in conversation. Based on these theoretical propositions, I pointed to certain questions which would need to be pursued if an understanding of English and German differences in conversational style as facework as alignment was to be arrived at. In Chapter 41 briefly spelled out my methodology for the gathering and initial analysis of conversational data guided by the analytical and empirical parameters arising from the development of the facework as alignment approach outlined in Chapter 3. Here I also addressed the nature of conducting data gathering and ethnographic observations in a sociable milieu - what I referred to as social(b)l(e) science. Issues addressed here included ethical ones, and my particular role as both researcher and bona fide participant in sociable gatherings. Chapters 5 to 8 were analytical in nature and were organised around the presentation and analysis of observational and conversational data. In Chapter 51 attempted to delineate sociability as particular form on interaction by identifying how participants in both cultures aligned at a general level to sociable gatherings. This was stressed as important as it was within this normative milieu that sociable conversation developed and participants were seen to align for alignment as I had termed it. In this chapter I also pointed at quite a general level to how participants in each respective milieu variously 290
handled sociable topics, in terms of for example the nature of topics developed, the extent to which topics were collaboratively developed, and how topics were commonly framed, for example in either a narrative of more substantive manner. In effect I attempted to demonstrate how participants aligned for the achievement of sociability as a socially and culturally recognisable style. In Chapters 6 to 81 moved from a focus on observational to transcribed conversational data. The main thrust of Chapter 6 was to illustrate how sociable conversation could be seen to be characterised by instances of what I termed both positive and negative alignment, including illustrating the range of possible alignment contingencies suggested by the interpretive framework set out in Chapter 3 in both English and German sociable episodes. From the analysis of the conversational data from both milieu, it was concluded that instances of both positive and negative alignments - at the level of conversational claims - were evidently intrinsic to sociable conversation in both English and German sociable settings. Importantly, the nature of these alignments clearly reflected some of the salient aspects of conversational style in general identified in Chapter 2. In Chapter 71 extended and developed the discussion of the self (Goffman 1953; 1967) as a symbolic resource for alignment (Goffman 1981; Katriel 1986; Malone 1997; Nofsinger 1991; Stokes and Hewitt 1976). Specifically, again by drawing on conversational data from both cultures, I identified certain salient conversational selves routinely mobilised by participants in each milieu. These conversational selves were posited as being necessary symbolic resources to both engage in the sociable style demonstrated in each respective culture, and allowed for the claiming and ratification of prevailing positive social values. Fundamentally, such selves were seen to be the symbolic resources through which participants were able to achieve both positive and negative alignment, and thus, over the flow of the conversation have both positive and negative face needs met within a wider reciprocal framework of mutually supportive ritual equilibrium. Finally, in Chapter 9,1 conducted an analysis of conversational data employing all these elements of the facework as alignment approach. The 291
- Page 249 and 250: Fig 8.2b The Individuated Selves (a
- Page 251 and 252: Excerpt 8.1 'Cookie's Party' I LM:
- Page 253 and 254: Beginning with the topic of convers
- Page 255 and 256: as re-invoking selves. The category
- Page 257 and 258: An interesting phenomenon which is
- Page 259 and 260: An additional consequence of alignm
- Page 261 and 262: Conversely, in considering the next
- Page 263 and 264: 100 KP: I mean you see two or three
- Page 265 and 266: however, such narrating selves are
- Page 267 and 268: Running alongside these narrative s
- Page 269 and 270: capabilities of KP&EP and in this w
- Page 271 and 272: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
- Page 273 and 274: 6 (0.5) 7 EP: America is booming at
- Page 275 and 276: own unemployment levels -a concern
- Page 277 and 278: In terms of the selves mobilised, t
- Page 279 and 280: in 'Cookie's Party'- again, a secon
- Page 281 and 282: 35 GB: kann man nie als [endgültig
- Page 283 and 284: is HB: =Yeah not at all but e:: rm=
- Page 285 and 286: episode takes place. Rather, the ta
- Page 287 and 288: The excerpt begins as HB is proffer
- Page 289 and 290: What this talk demonstrates is that
- Page 291 and 292: N work or'Arbeit' being an extremel
- Page 293 and 294: demeaned and knowledgeable selves (
- Page 295 and 296: preceding comments regarding sociab
- Page 297 and 298: CHAPTER 9 CONCLUSION: THE TO AND FR
- Page 299: identified in conversational behavi
- Page 303 and 304: to bring themselves and their inter
- Page 305 and 306: sociable conversation. This sociabl
- Page 307 and 308: maintain the underlying equilibrium
- Page 309 and 310: allowed for by the facework as alig
- Page 311 and 312: somebody who is overly-friendly, ge
- Page 313 and 314: Fig 9.2 A Maxim of Conversational P
- Page 315 and 316: Notes to Chapter 9 1 When we are ta
- Page 317 and 318: German Participants Name Age Occupa
- Page 319 and 320: German Gatherings Gathering Date Se
- Page 321 and 322: Brown, G., and Yule, G. (1983) Disc
- Page 323 and 324: Ervin-Tripp, S., Nakamura, K, and G
- Page 325 and 326: Hellweg, S A., Samovar, L A., and S
- Page 327 and 328: Hu, H C. (1944) The Chinese concept
- Page 329 and 330: - (1979) 'Stylistic Strategies with
- Page 331 and 332: - (1994) 'Facework in Communication
- Page 333 and 334: Snell-Hornby, M.. (1984) 'The Lingu
- Page 335 and 336: Trubisky, P., Ting-Toomey, S., and
extant approaches seemed particularly suitable for this, literature addressing<br />
sociability (Simmel 1949 [1911 ]), particularly the dynamics <strong>of</strong> sociable (Riesman<br />
and Watson 1964; Watson 1958; Watson and Potter 1962; Tannen 1984; Schiffrin<br />
1984; Blum-Kulka 1997) or casual conversation (Eggins and Slade 1997) might<br />
help in taking a more heuristic stance to facework in conversation as advocated<br />
by scholars noting these problems associated with discourse analysis for<br />
facework practices. I moved on to suggest how the sociological concepts <strong>of</strong><br />
alignments and equilibrium could be employed to accommodate the inherent<br />
dynamics <strong>of</strong> sociable conversation and, more importantly, could be seen to<br />
provide some analytical purchase on the self in sociable conversation as a<br />
concept directly linked to both positive and negative face needs. I then<br />
presented a framework <strong>of</strong> the analysis <strong>of</strong> facework as a matter not <strong>of</strong> utterances<br />
per se, but <strong>of</strong> selves, what I termed a facework as alignment approach to the<br />
analysis <strong>of</strong> facework in conversation. Based on these theoretical propositions, I<br />
pointed to certain questions which would need to be pursued if an<br />
understanding <strong>of</strong> English and German differences in conversational style as<br />
facework as alignment was to be arrived at.<br />
In Chapter 41 briefly spelled out my methodology for the gathering and<br />
initial analysis <strong>of</strong> conversational data guided by the analytical and empirical<br />
parameters arising from the development <strong>of</strong> the facework as alignment<br />
approach outlined in Chapter 3. Here I also addressed the nature <strong>of</strong> conducting<br />
data gathering and ethnographic observations in a sociable milieu - what I<br />
referred to as social(b)l(e) science. Issues addressed here included ethical<br />
ones, and my particular role as both researcher and bona fide participant in<br />
sociable gatherings.<br />
Chapters 5 to 8 were analytical in nature and were organised around the<br />
presentation and analysis <strong>of</strong> observational and conversational data. In Chapter<br />
51 attempted to delineate sociability as particular form on interaction by<br />
identifying how participants in both cultures aligned at a general level to<br />
sociable gatherings. This was stressed as important as it was within this<br />
normative milieu that sociable conversation developed and participants were<br />
seen to align for alignment as I had termed it. In this chapter I also pointed at<br />
quite a general level to how participants in each respective milieu variously<br />
290