Refine
Document Type
- Article (3)
- Part of a Book (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (6) (remove)
Keywords
- Konversationsanalyse (4)
- Deutsch (2)
- Callcenter (1)
- Dialogisches Prinzip (1)
- Interaktion (1)
- Kommunikationsforschung (1)
- Kommunikatives Handeln (1)
- Negation (1)
- Nichtverbale Kommunikation (1)
- Recipient Design (1)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (6) (remove)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (5)
- Peer-Review (1)
Publisher
- De Gruyter (2)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (1)
- Lang (1)
- de Gruyter (1)
Speakers’ dialogical orientation to the particular others they talk to is implemented by practices of recipient-design. One such practice is the use of negation as a means to constrain interpretations of speaker’s actions by the partner. The paper situates this use of negation within the larger context of other recipient-designed uses of negation which negate assumptions the speaker makes about what the addressee holds to be true (second-order assumptions) or what the addressee assumes the speaker holds to be true (third- order assumptions). The focus of the study is on the ways in which speakers use negation to disclaim interpretations of their turns which partners have displayed or may possibly arrive at. Special emphasis is given to the positionally sensitive uses of negation, which may occur before, after or inserted between the nucleus actions whose interpretation is constrained by the negation. Interactional motivations and rhetorical potentials of the practice are pointed out, partly depending on the position of the negation vis-à-vis the nucleus action. The analysis shows that the concept of ‘recipient design’ is in need of distinctions which have not been in focus in prior research.
In diesem Beitrag werden Möglichkeiten und Grenzen einer konversationsanalytischen Erforschung wortsemantischer Fragestellungen exploriert. Anhand der Verwendung des Ausdrucks „Freiheit“ in unterschiedlichen Phasen einer umweltpolitischen Diskussion wird gezeigt, wie Gesprächsteilnehmer durch metasemantische Aktivitäten die Bedeutung des Ausdrucks kontextsensitiv lokal jeweils neu und in konkurrierender Weise konstituieren. Aus der Fallanalyse werden Überlegungen zur Adäquatheit semantiktheoretischer Konzepte als Instrumente zur Rekonstruktion situierter Wortverwendung und zu möglichen Leistungen der Konversationsanalyse als Methodologie semantischer Untersuchungen entwickelt.
This paper attempts a critique of the notion of 'dialogue' in dialogue theory as espoused by Linell, Markova, and others building on Bakhtin’s writings. According to them, human communication, culture, language, and even cognition are dialogical in nature. This implies that these domains work by principles of other-orientation and interaction. In our paper, we reject accepting other-orientation as an a priori condition of every semiotic action. Instead, we claim that in order to be an empirically useful concept for the social sciences, it must be shown if and how observable action is other-oriented. This leads us to the following questions: how can we methodically account for other-orientation of semiotic action? Does other-orientation always imply interaction? Is every human expression oriented towards others? How does the other, as s/he is represented in semiotic action, relate to the properties which the other can be seen to exhibit as indexed by their observable behavior? We study these questions by asking how the orientation towards others becomes evident in different forms of communication. For this concern, we introduce ‘recipient design’, ‘positioning’ and ‘intersubjectivity’ as concepts which allow us to inquire how semiotic action both takes the other into account and, reflexively, shapes him/her as an addressee having certain properties. We then specifically focus on actions and situations in which other-orientation is particularly problematic, such as interactions with children, animals, machines, or communication with unknown recipients via mass media. These borderline cases are scrutinized in order to delineate both limits and constitutive properties of other-orientation. We show that there are varieties of meaningful actions which do not exhibit an orientation towards the other, which do not rest on (the possibility of) interaction with the other or which even disregard what their producer can be taken to know about the other. Available knowledge about the other may be ignored in order to reach interactional goals, e. g. in strategical interactions or for concerns of socialization. If semiotic action is otherorientated, its design depends on how the other is available to and matters for their producer. Other-orientation may build on shared biographical experiences with the other, knowledge about the other as an individual and close attention to their situated conduct. However, other-orientation may also rest on (stereo-)typification with respect to institutional roles or group membership. In any case, others as they are represented in semiotic action can never be just others-as-such, but only othersas-perceived-by-the-actor. We conclude that the strong emphasis which dialogue theories put on otherorientation obscures that other-orientation is neither universal in semiotic action, that it must be distinguished from an interactive relationship, and that the ways in which the other figures in semiotic actions is not homogeneous in any of its most general properties. Instead, there is a huge variation in the ways in which the other can be taken into account. Therefore close scrutiny of how the other precisely figures in a certain kind of semiotic action is needed in order to lend the concept of ‘other-orientation’ empirical substance and a definite sense.
Aus psychologischer Sicht wird Verstehen als ein kognitiver Prozess begriffen. Im Gegensatz dazu stellt der Aufsatz einen konversationsanalytischen Zugang zu Verstehen dar. Es wird rekonstruiert, wie Verstehen in Gesprächen durch verschiedene Verfahren der Verstehensdokumentation verdeutlicht und durch wechselseitig aufeinander bezogene Reaktionen ausgehandelt wird. Anhand von sechs Gesprächssequenzen wird eine linguistische Typologie von Verstehensdokumentationen in der Interaktion vorgestellt. Auf Basis der Fallanalysen werden grundlegende Eigenschaften von Verstehensdokumentationen sowie Aufgaben, die die Interaktionsteilnehmer bei der Produktion von und bei der Reaktion auf Verstehensdokumentationen bearbeiten, rekonstruiert. Dazu gehören: Identifikation des Bezugs von Verstehensdokumentationen, Interpretation des Verstehensgegenstands, Sicherung der Verständlichkeit und Legitimität (accountability) der Verstehensdokumentation, Herstellung des Bezugs der Verstehensdokumentation zu den praktischen Zwecken der laufenden Interaktion, Aushandlung intersubjektiven Verständnisses, rhetorische Nutzung von Verstehensdokumentationen und ihr indikativer Bezug auf Beteiligungsrollen und sozialstrukturelle Rahmen der Interaktion.