The Handbook of Discourse Analysis 2005
DOI: 10.1002/9780470753460.ch40
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Imagination in Discourse

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2007
2007
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While metaphor has long been known as a resource for the creation of novel ontological reality (Lakoff and Johnson 1980;Johnson and Erickson 1980;Charteris-Black 2003), in this sense, I assume other aspects and elements of discourse can be equally performative. In this view, I agree with Fairclough that one vital resource for the creation of new realities is what I term 'fictions' and he terms 'imaginaries, ' representations of worlds or states of affairs that are not but that might, could or should be (Fairclough 2001;Clark and van der Wege 2001). Finally, since I assume that language use is to persuade or induce assent, it is evident that the reality it creates is 'ideological' in that it benefits some more than others, highlights some features while hiding others, decrees what is possible and impossible and seeks to legitimate and perpetuate this state of affairs (van Dijk 1993; van Dijk 2001).…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…While metaphor has long been known as a resource for the creation of novel ontological reality (Lakoff and Johnson 1980;Johnson and Erickson 1980;Charteris-Black 2003), in this sense, I assume other aspects and elements of discourse can be equally performative. In this view, I agree with Fairclough that one vital resource for the creation of new realities is what I term 'fictions' and he terms 'imaginaries, ' representations of worlds or states of affairs that are not but that might, could or should be (Fairclough 2001;Clark and van der Wege 2001). Finally, since I assume that language use is to persuade or induce assent, it is evident that the reality it creates is 'ideological' in that it benefits some more than others, highlights some features while hiding others, decrees what is possible and impossible and seeks to legitimate and perpetuate this state of affairs (van Dijk 1993; van Dijk 2001).…”
Section: Approachmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Lines 15-27 begin another dimension of autotelic humour, precisely joint fantasising (Kotthoff 2006;Chovanec 2012). The goal of this sequence is clearly to elicit laughter, and to demonstrate which of the presenters would out-do the other in this exercise of absurdity (Norrick 1993 (Dynel 2017: 93), include the co-construction of absurd or even impossible scenarios or narratives (Stallone & Haugh 2017), which are based on overt, joint pretence (Clark & Van Der Wege 2001;Dynel 2017), and are contributed to on an incremental bases (Kotthoff 1999: 130), either by emulating the format of a previous contribution (Goodwin & Goodwin 1987) or attempting to outperform a previous contribution, and they serve various interpersonal functions ranging from bonding, solidarity, identity work, entertainment, etc. (Chovanec 2012;Stallone & Haugh 2017).…”
Section: Joint Fantasizingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…the collective sender controls characters' interactions before and when they take place (determining the form and content of conversations, which are created by the scriptwriter and rendered by actors under the director's supervision) and after they have been performed, (determining how the interactions are shown thanks to picture and sound editing, for instance). Meanings gleaned by audiences are constructed both by actors who verbalise the lines written by scriptwriters under the director's supervision and by means of an array of cinematographic ploys, which can be viewed as what Clark and Van Der Wege (2001) dub mimetic props, i.e. devices which facilitate imagining the story world.…”
Section: Twofold Layering and Two Communicative Levelsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Clark and Van Der Wege (2001: 783) define it, a joint pretence is "an activity in which two or more people jointly act as if they were doing something that they are not actually, really, or seriously doing at the moment." Joint pretence may then serve as a framework for analysing fictional discourse of books and films (Goffman 1974, Walton 1990, Clark 1996, Clark and Van Der Wege 2001. Film reality subscribes to a coherently constructed fictional frame, in which even the most peculiar illogicalities or impossibilities do not go against the grain, the science-fiction genre typifying this claim.…”
Section: Recipient Design and Recipient's Inferential Processesmentioning
confidence: 99%