Download (23MB) - University of Salford Institutional Repository

In fact, these two opposing orientations of sameness and difference have
been demonstrated to be the bases for sustaining casual conversation; In effect,
the poles of an interactional motor that effectively keeps conversation running (see
fig 3.2). Indeed, unlike goal oriented talk or pragmatic conversation, which
commonly works towards the achievement of some goal as a recognised end,
casual conversation is talk which is kept going for the sake of it (see Slade, in
press). Thus, casual conversation, due to its very nature, seems to variously allow
for - indeed call for - both the mobilisation of solidaric or similar conversational
selves, and presentation of individual, autonomous, or different selves, what Eggins
and Slade refer to as the 'shifting alignments' of conversation (ibid. 18).
Echoing comments made by Wafts (1989) on the apolite nature of sociable
conversation, Eggins and Slade note that these observations of casual
conversation confirm earlier comments made by Burton (1978), that the 'polite
collaborative consensus model' does not fit casual conversation (ibid., 47).
Based on their observations, Eggins and Slade suggest that Gricean
maxims and pragmatic principles (see Chapter 1) although they cannot fully explain
conversation, might be used as heuristic devices for the analysis of casual
conversation, allowing maxims such as 'be provocative' or'be consensual' to be
posited (ibid. 42).
87