Question-answer sequences in conciliation hearings and interviews with political candidates
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/sols.v7i1.83Keywords:
talk-in-interaction, institutional talk, interviews, conciliation hearingsAbstract
This paper works at the intersection between applied linguistics and ethnomethodological conversation analysis. Applied linguistics has as its central concern the interest in the study of discourse, especially in the professions, and addresses itself to real world problems of language use in interaction. In conversation analysis, social action must be interpreted taking centrally into account participant’s conduct in sequences of action in interaction. Combining the two, social meaning is studied from an inherently emic point of view. In this paper we will compare the interactional practice of asking questions in conciliation hearings in consumers’ relations and in interviews with political candidates. The following questions have guided our study: 1) What actions are associated with the practice of questioning and answering in these settings? 2) What do they tell us about the institutional mandate of its participants? Results show that the point of convergence in the two data sets is the conduciveness embedded in the mediator’s and the interviewer’s questions. Differences are tied to their specific institutional mandates of framing legally the situation and trying to bring disputants to an agreement in the first case, and clarify the public opinion with confrontational questions in the second case, considering the candidates’ future government programs and, when this is the case, their previous political career.
References
Atkinson, J.M. & J. Heritage (1984). “Introduction”. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1-16.
Bolinger, D. (1957). Interrogative Structures of American English. Alabama: University of Alabama Press.
Capellani, D.Z. (2004). Projeção e negociação de identidades em entrevistas com candidatos à presidência da república nas eleições de 2002. Dissertação de mestrado, Programa de Mestrado em Letras da Universidade Federal de Juiz de Fora, 189 pp.
Clayman, S. (1988). “Displaying neutrality in television news interviews”. Social Problems 35, 474-92.
Clayman, S. (1992). “Footing in the achievement of neutrality: The case of news-interview discourse”. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 163-98.
Clayman, S.E. & J. Heritage (2002). “Questioning Presidents: Journalistic Deference and Adversarialness in the Press Conference of U.S. Presidents Eisenhower and Reagan”. Journal of Communication 34, 749-75.
Drew, P. & J. Heritage (1992). “Analyzing talk at work: An introduction”. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 3-65.
Ford, C. & S. Thompson (1996). “Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic recourse for the management of turns”. In E. Ochs, E.A. Schegloff & S. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 134-84.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction Ritual. New York: Pantheon Books.
Goodwin, C. & J. Heritage (1990). “Conversation analysis”. Annual Review of Anthropology 19, 283-307.
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Heritage, J. (1997). “Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analyzing Data”. In D. Silverman (ed.), Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 161-82.
Heritage, J. (2002). “The limits of questioning: Negative interrogatives and hostile questions content”. Journal of Pragmatics 34, 1427-46.
Heritage, J. & D. Greatbatch (1991). “On the institutional character of institutional talk: the case of news interview”. In D. Boden & D. Zimmerman (eds.), Talk and Social Structure. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press, 93-137.
Heritage, J., D. Greatbatch & A. Roth (1995). “Grammar and institution: Questions and questioning in the broadcast news interview”. Research on Language and Social Interaction 28, 1-60.
Hudson, R.A. (1975). “The meaning of questions”. Language 51(1), 1-31.
Jacoby, S. & E. Ochs (1995). “Co-construction: An introduction”. In S. Jacoby & E. Ochs. (eds.), Co-construction (= Special Issue, Research on Language and Social Interaction 28(3)), 171-84.
Labov, W. & D. Fanshel (1977). Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.
Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pomerantz, A (1978). “Compliment responses: Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints”. In J. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York: Academic Press, 79-112.
Quirk, R. et al. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. New York: Longman.
Sacks, H., E.A. Schegloff & G. Jefferson (1974). “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn Taking for Conversation”. Language 50(4), 696-735.
Schegloff, E.A. (1972). “Sequencing in Conversational Openings”. In J.J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 123-42.
Schegloff, E.A. (1984). “On some questions and ambiguities in conversation”. In J. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 28-52.
Schegloff, E.A. (1988). “Pre-sequences and indirection: Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 12, 55-62.
Schegloff, E.A. (1992). “On talk and its institutional occasions”. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in Institutional Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 101-34.
Scott, M.B. & S.M. Lyman (1968). “Accounts”. American Sociological Review 33, 46-62.
Scott, M.B. & S.M. Lyman (1996). “Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction”. In E. Ochs, E.A. Schegloff & S. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. New York: Cambridge University Press, 52-133.
