This article proposes an analytical framework that combines Conversation Analysis, Positioning Theory, and Stance Analysis to study communalization and distinction as basic interactive mechanisms within group interactions. The framework is based on the premise that participants in multi-party interactions constantly manage the local demands of the ongoing conversation and turn-by-turn talk as well as implicitly or explicitly evoked references to global discourses, which in turn are closely related to the topic currently discussed. By considering both micro- and macro-contextual features in (...) the analysis of group interactions, it is possible to reach a deeper understanding of dynamic group activities. The framework has been empirically developed based on data from a study on epistemic positioning practices in adolescents’ group interactions about popular TV series in Germany. The data comprises ten videotaped focus group discussions that have been elicited in a school context. By applying the framework to the analysis of a single case from the corpus, insights can be gained, both on how group members’ finely adjust their epistemic and evaluative stances as well as on how the participants themselves interactively link their stances to broader discourses. (shrink)

This article suggests that there are systematic ways in which the identity of the ‘self’, as created and performed through first-person markers, can be made relevant and consequential in particular episodes of interaction. More specifically, the study looks at generalizations that people present about themselves in local interactional contexts: displays of the types of people they are and the ways in which they always or never behave. It will be shown that such self-generalizations are typically used to account for one’s (...) behavior, and that this tendency is tied to the epistemic and moral rights provided by the first-person perspective, having the primary rights to one’s own experience. The study suggests that speakers’ personal characteristics or habitual behavior can be offered as a locally produced micro-identity, which can come to have interactional significance. (shrink)

Interactional functions of story-opening in everyday conversations across different languages have been widely examined in Conversation Analysis. However, there is a paucity in research on story-openings in institutional talk. This paper addresses this research gap by examining how story-opening contributes to advice-giving in doctoral research supervision. It draws on a data corpus of 57 storytelling sequences produced by six supervisors during 25 hours of video-recorded supervision meetings at an Australian university. The analysis shows that story-opening supports the on-going advice-giving activity (...) in two ways. First, it invokes the supervisor’s knowledge and experience, which functions to strengthen the advice under way. Second, it works toward building a joint understanding with the student, thereby serving the supervisor’s pursuit of the student’s acceptance of advice. These findings have significant implications for research on storytelling in institutional interaction, advice and supervision practices. (shrink)

This study examines interactional sequences in which students make assertions about topic-relevant matters in classroom interactions. Using a Conversation Analytical approach, I show how the students’ knowledge claims lead to negotiations of sequential and epistemic rights to make such claims. Through these negotiations, the students upgrade their epistemic stance by repeating or backing their claims with accounts and providing evidence of them. The teachers’ acceptance or rejection of the students’ initiatives displays an orientation to the sequential and topical relevance of (...) the information provided by the students. This study contributes to a better understanding of student initiatives in the classroom, a topic that until now has received scarce attention. Additionally, it contributes knowledge about the negotiation of epistemic authority in relation to assertions and their responses, which may have more general implications for the study of talk-in-interaction. (shrink)

We start this article from Gilbert Ryle’s distinction between propositional knowledge, ‘knowing-that’, and procedural knowledge, ‘knowing-how’, and investigate how participants in interaction display orientation to the latter in various settings. As the knowledge of how things are done, know-how can be analyzed in terms of its relevance and consequentiality for parties in interaction. Similarly, as participants adjust their actions and understandings according to their sense of what they know and assume others to know, their know-how and its distribution may form (...) the basis for adjusting and reshaping their actions, forms of participation and identities. In this sense, we aim at opening an investigation of know-how, and its conventionalized form, expertise, in interaction. In as much as it forms a distinct domain, a new research object – expertise in interaction – is formulated. Methodological issues of how to study expertise in interaction are discussed. The data are in English and Finnish. (shrink)

This paper investigates how talk and practical action are coordinated during one type of activity involving professional communication: the service-­assessment sequence in hair salons. During this activity, a practical inspection of the haircut must be coupled with sequentially produced verbal acts. Our analysis of four examples reveals that there is no fixed relationship between the organization of talk and practical action. Instead, people manipulate this relationship on a moment-by-moment basis, often coordinating the two into a single, integral package, or relying (...) on one stream of action to achieve progress in the other. These findings imply that some multimodal activities that are brought into alignment may have their own, separate and independent procedural logic and sequencing patterns and that these can be brought into play to create or deal with constraints in each other. (shrink)

Different areas of child welfare work call for psychometric measurement to replace professionals’ judgements with objective numbers. Using data from a national Swedish evaluation of interventions for abused children, the present article investigates child interviewees’ resistance to constraints in psychometric questions. The article contributes to studies of how psychology operates in institutional settings; it looks into the discursive production of the interviewee’s position in the struggle between the principle of recordability and ‘sensitive’ interviewing. The findings suggest that interviewees resist questions’ (...) structural restrictions in the service of telling the interviewer about their lives. Thus, the function of their misalignment is affiliative; it cooperates both with the institutional goal of eliciting information and with the interviewer’s interest in them. However, the interviewer’s solutions to children’s problem presentations remain focused on generating recordable answers. The article concludes that the narrow focus on recordability neglects important opportunities to talk about children’s experiences. (shrink)

This study investigates Japanese compliments produced at a distinct sequential position and how the complimentees treat the compliments. In ordinary conversation, speakers sometimes talk about their accomplishments. Drawing on Conversation Analysis and multimodal interaction analysis, the study demonstrates how telling recipients deploy compliments at the possible completion of such tellings of accomplishment. The analysis also shows how the tellers deal with the complimentary telling responses, taking into consideration the design of tellings and the possibility of engaging in self-praise. The study (...) illuminates a context-sensitive nature of complimenting activity and managing two conflicting preferences by illustrating a specific interactional pattern of compliment sequences in Japanese ordinary conversation. (shrink)

In 2016, Discourse Studies published a special issue on the ‘epistemics of epistemics’ comprising six papers, all of which took issue with a strand of my research on how knowledge claims are asserted, implemented and contested through facets of turn design and sequence organization. Apparently coordinated through some years of discussion, the critique is nonetheless somewhat confused and confusing. In this article, I take up some of more prominent elements of the critique: my work is ‘cognitivist’ substituting causal psychological analysis (...) for the classic conversation analytic focus on the normative accountability of social action, my work devalues and indeed flouts basic tenets of CA methodology such as the ‘next-turn proof procedure’, my analysis of epistemic stance introduces unwarranted themes of conflict and hostility into CA thinking, various concepts that I have introduced involve the invocation of ‘hidden orders’ of social conduct that is inimical to the traditions of our field and that my work rests on an unwarranted ‘informationism’ – the discredited idea that much of human interaction is driven by a need to traffic in information. In this rebuttal, I refute all of these commentaries and correct many other ancillary mistakes of representation and reasoning that inhabit these papers. (shrink)

It is timely and important that new developments in conversation analysis become the subject of principled debate. John Heritage’s recent papers on the role of epistemics constitute one such development, and by re-analysing excerpts from this work, the articles in this Special Issue reveal some significant problems with a programmatic approach to epistemics. This commentary agrees with the critics that there are dangers in an overemphasis on epistemics and in using isolated utterances and proposing abstract scales and terms. But the (...) commentary also warns against totally rejecting epistemics as a domain of inquiry in CA and points to places where the critics exaggerate their criticisms in a way that makes them unnecessarily hostile. (shrink)

Studies in conversation analysis have shown that in assessments, various linguistic resources are used to express epistemic stance in ordinary conversation. In Korean conversation, although the evidential and non-evidential functions of sentence-ending suffixes are well recognized, little research has been done on their relation to epistemic stance and their use in assessments. In this study, using naturally-occurring conversation data and the CA framework, I analyze 59 cases of a speaker’s first assessment regarding his/her interlocutor and 49 responses to these first (...) assessments. I argue that in Korean assessment pairs, the evidential and non-evidential SE suffixes are used as a resource for expressing epistemic stance. The results show that 74.4% of the first assessments were marked with an evidential SE suffix whereas 71.4% of the second assessments were marked with a non-evidential SE suffix. Furthermore, certain evidential SE suffixes are used as a resource to convey a downgraded epistemic stance in first assessments whereas certain non-evidential SE suffixes are used to express epistemic primacy in second assessments. (shrink)

A Special Issue of this journal, edited by Lynch et al., was published critiquing research in conversation analysis on epistemics and on oh. It would be more accurate to say that the articles in that Special Issue critique the work of Heritage on epistemics and oh. Their principal criticism is that Heritage’s analyses of epistemics and oh are cognitivist. Other criticisms are that his analysis of each of these phenomena is not sequential, that it does not attend to the details (...) of turn design, and that his analyses are not truly conversation analytic – indeed that he does not comprehend CA, that his analyses are false and unwarranted, that he has adopted an ‘informationist’ perspective of knowledge transfer, and that epistemics represents some ‘hidden order’ invisible at the surface of conversation. Underlying these criticisms is their contention that Heritage has not adhered to the ‘radical’ agenda of ethnomethodology which, they claim, underlies the origins of CA. In this Introduction, I outline some of the principal reasons for regarding the criticisms in The epistemics of Epistemics to be misguided, inaccurate and scurrilous. In doing so, I am setting out in very broad outline the arguments made by the contributors to this Special Issue rebutting those criticisms of Heritage’s work, and of CA more generally. (shrink)

After decades of epistemological inquiry on the social construction of science, we have observed a renewed consensus on empiricism in application-oriented social sciences and a growing trust in evidence-based practice and decision-making. Drawing on the long-standing debate on value-ladenness, evidence and normativity in sciences, this article theoretically discusses and empirically illustrates the Life-World origins of methods in a domain of inquiry strongly characterized by an empiricist epistemic culture and a normative stance: Children and Media Studies. Adopting a reflexive approach to (...) their own research in such an epistemologically underexplored field, the authors analyze a standard research instrument and two procedures. The analysis illustrates how background assumptions shape the research method and how the procedures routinely conceal this work of shaping. In the discussion the authors cast light on the role scientific procedures play in the naturalization of a given moral order, and put forward the question of whether and how this “morality-building” feature of methods should be taken into account in the assessment of their appropriateness. In the conclusion the authors advance that the situated nature of scientific knowledge, rather than discrediting its relevance, is what makes it relevant, here and now, for the larger community the research may impact on. The authors discuss the risks of such a pragmatic outcome and propose the adoption of an oscillating epistemic stance as a way to cope with them. (shrink)

Resumen Este trabajo tiene dos objetivos. Desde el punto de vista conceptual, nos proponemos contribuir al conocimiento del concepto de voz y su construcción conversacional a partir de la (des)afiliación y el (des)alineamiento en el proceso de validación o rechazo de la voz de los participantes. Desde el punto de vista práctico, esperamos contribuir al desarrollo de los métodos de la investigación participativa, entendidos en ciencias sociales como una metodología de investigación y aprendizaje colectivo, a partir del análisis crítico de (...) un caso. Para ello, adoptamos sobre el análisis de la interacción verbal un punto de vista discursivo que nos permite definir el concepto de voz como un conjunto de regularidades semióticas que indexicalizan una trayectoria biográfica a través de los discursos sociales que la componen. De este modo, la voz individual es producto de la trayectoria social -y discursiva- del hablante, la cual, al recibir validación o rechazo de los demás participantes, se pone a prueba en cada interacción. En ese sentido, proponemos que la (des)afiliación y el (des)alineamiento conversacionales permiten validar o rechazar las dimensiones de voz propuestas por el hablante. Exploraremos esta hipótesis en un corpus de reuniones de un proyecto de investigación participativa desarrollado en Buenos Aires, Argentina, con la participación de investigadoras e investigadores académicos y dirigentes sindicales, deteniéndonos especialmente en el caso de una de las participantes, que abandonó el proyecto al poco tiempo de comenzar. (shrink)

This article examines the emergent relationship between epistemic responsibility and frame awareness in early childhood, wherein a mother uses language socialization practices to guide her child into a new frame. The pair co-constructs the parameters of the new frame through negotiation of epistemic responsibility and remedial interchanges. The analysis demonstrates that these remedial interchanges arise from conflicting understandings of the embeddedness of frames and the epistemic dynamics that these frames entail. The child maintains epistemic primacy in her concurrent play frame, (...) which carries over to the recording activity given that the recording activity is embedded within her larger play frame. I argue that the data predict epistemic responsibility to be acquired earlier than the ability to shift epistemic dynamics outside of role-play. This study contributes to our understanding of frame and epistemic development in early childhood. (shrink)

The review is devoted to one of mainstreams within conversation analytic perspective — multimodal interaction analysis, and is based on the materials of the CA conference which was devoted to multimodal interaction studies. Some key topics and research problems being discussed during conference panels are described in this paper as well as main research directions within contemporary CA sphere.