Refine
Year of publication
- 2012 (7) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (6)
- Article (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (7)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (7)
Keywords
- Deutsch (3)
- Konversationsanalyse (3)
- Hörgerät (2)
- Hörschädigung (2)
- Interaktion (2)
- conversation analysis (2)
- hearing aid use (2)
- hearing impairment (2)
- interaction (2)
- Arzt (1)
Publisher
- Verl. für Gesprächsforschung (4)
- De Gruyter (1)
- Stauffenburg (1)
In this brief presentation of Conversation Analysis (“CA”), we take up some of the communication problems associated with hearing loss and link them to conversation analytic concepts. We explain how attempts to control the conversation, embarrassment and miscommunication can be analyzed as interactional achievements in the areas of turn-taking, repair and nonverbal actions. The chapter also explains which kinds of data are used in CA, how the participants’ perspective is analyzed and some of the theoretical assumptions underlying the analysis. Examples of transcribed interactional sequences with hearing loss illustrate how turn-taking, eye gaze and trouble in hearing/understanding (“repair”) are sensitive to this communication disorder.
Introduction
(2012)
Hearing loss is a prevalent communication disability, yet to date there is almost no research on naturally occurring interaction which examines how participants handle hearing loss and the use of hearing aids in communication. In contrast, research focussing on the medical and technological dimensions has advanced tremendously. Still, the social reaction to hearing loss is frequently stress, withdrawal and isolation. Despite the enormous technological development, most people who could benefit from a hearing aid do not use it. The goal of this edited volume is to present a theoretically founded, interdisciplinary research approach geared at understanding and improving social interaction impacted by hearing loss and (non-)use of hearing technologies. Towards this end, we are integrating Conversation Analysis, audiology and User Centered Design.
In developing an interdisciplinary approach integrating Conversation Analysis (“CA”), audiology and User Centered Design, the applied goal of this international collaboration is to analyze real-world social interaction from the perspective of the participants in order to build an empirical basis for innovation in the field of communication with hearing impairment and hearing aid use. In reviewing theory, methodology and analysis of eight cases analyzed in this volume, the editors assess the potential of application for the various stakeholders in communication with hearing loss and hearing aids, including the estimated impact factor. The chapter closes with a consideration of desiderata for future research.
This paper deals with a case study of a first visit of a person with hearing loss to her family doctor. In the first part of the paper, basic properties of doctor-patient interaction, which are also relevant for treatment of hearing loss, are outlined: the relevance of institutional conditions for interaction, asymmetries between the participants, goal-orientation, specific conditions of trust, and the relevance of the specific genre of doctor-patient interaction. The second part of the paper presents a case study, which focuses on three interactional phenomena: a) the negotiation of the hearing loss as an existential threat to the patient and her identity; b) the discrepancy of illness theories between doctor and patient; c) the collaborative work of negotiating an intersubjectively viable description of the experience of hearing loss.
Der vorliegende Beitrag soll nun diese Diskussion um Sinn, Unsinn und Definition der Kategorie "Satz" als Grundeinheit der gesprochenen Sprache nicht fortsetzen. Ich will vielmehr kurz darlegen, in welcher Weise ein traditioneller Satzbegriff m.E. für die Analyse gesprochener Sprache relevant ist, und wie er sich zu gesprächsanalytischen Kategorien wie "Turn" und "Turnkonstruktionseinheit" verhält. Dies geschieht aber nur als Voraussetzung, um sodann die traditionelle Fragerichtung umzukehren: Anstatt zu fragen, warum in Gesprächen oft nicht-sentenzielle Strukturen vorkommen, gehe ich vom Befund aus, dass ein großer Teil von Turns aus nicht-sentenziellen Strukturen besteht und frage umgekehrt, wieso in Gesprächen überhaupt Sätze (im Sinne der eingangs gegebenen klassischen Definition) verwendet werden. Den Schlüssel zur Antwort suche ich dabei in der temporalen Struktur der Äußerungsproduktion und der Position, die Sätze in Bezug auf diese einnehmen.
Conversation Analysis (CA) and Discursive Psychology (DP) reject the view that assumptions
about cognitive processes should be used to account for discursive phenomena. Instead, cognitive
issues are respecified as discursive phenomena. Discursive psychologists do this by
studying discursive practices of talking about mental phenomena and using mental predicates.
This approach is exemplified by a study of the use of constructions with German verstehen
(‘to understand’) in conversation. Some conversation analysts take another approach,
namely, inquiring into how participants display mental states in talk-in-interaction. This is
exemplified by a study of how grammatical constructions are used to display different types
of inferences drawn from a partner’s prior turn. It will be argued that the constructivist, antiessentialist
stance which CA and DP take with regard to cognition is a prosperous line of
research, which has much in its favor from a methodological point of view. However, it
can be shown that tacit assumptions about cognitive processes are still inevitable when
doing CA and DP. As a conclusion, the paper pleads for an enhanced awareness of how cognitive
processes come into play when analysing talk-in-interaction and it advocates the integration
of a more explicit cognitive perspective into research on talk-in-interaction.