Article Title：Questions and strategic orientation in verbal conflict sequences
Abstract：
In this paper a non-cognitive, interactional concept of strategy is presented. It is argued that strategies are interactional products that may be recognizable for analysts (and interactants) under certain conditions, whereas 'intentions' (or 'strategic orientations') are analysts' and members' interpretative constructs that are used to explain the behavior of participants in an interaction. Features that are used to infer the possible strategic use of a move include global interactional concerns of participants (avoidance of FTAs in consent phases of talk, doing FTAs in dissent phases of talk) as well as local aspects of a turn (its projected next action, its cohesive relation to the previous move, its possibly 'unofficial' use). This concept of strategy is used to analyze different forms of questions and their interactional consequences for addressees in consent and dissent phases of talk. The results suggest that the attribution of a strategic orientation to speakers by analysts is justifiable in dissent phases of talk (where the result of a strategy is the self- weakening of the addressee's position) rather than in consent phases, where the result of a strategy might only tie the avoidance of an FTA. In a second step of analysis, these results are corroborated by taking into account situational and contextual factors like 'real life' roles of interlocutors and their possible consequences for their orientation towards the conversations, as well as power differentials between discussants which are established by second position questions. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: conflict communication; interaction strategies; media communication; conversation analysis; communication principles; participants' expectations; German
DOI: 10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00083-7
Source：JOURNAL OF PRAGMATICS
Welcome to correct the error, please contact email: humanisticspider@gmail.com
