Making a Bid for Change: Formulations in Union/Management Negotiations

Walker, E.V.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-042400-2.50011-x

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Brenneis 1988;O'Donnell 1990;Philips 1990;Maynard 1984); during negotiations 1 (cf. Bilmes 1995;Boden 1995;Walker 1995;Firth 1995b;Torode 1995); family dinners and family talk (Schiffrin 1990;Vuchinich 1986Vuchinich , 1987Vuchinich , 1990; and non-western cultures (Watson-Gegeo and White 1990), äs well äs among different groups of Speakers, e.g., conflicts among children and/ or adolescents (Eisenberg and Garvey 1981;Corsaro and Rizzo 1990;Goodwin 1990;Shantz 1987;Sheldon 1992); or in the African-American culture of adolescents (Kochman 1983;Labov 1972), employing not only conversation analytic (Bilmes 1988(Bilmes , 1993Goodwin 1990;Kotthoff 1993a;Maynard 1985) but also discourse analytic approaches (Grimshaw 1990;Jackson and Jacobs 1980;Jacobs and Jackson 1982;Jackson 1986;Jacobs 1986;Vuchinich 1986Vuchinich , 1987Vuchinich , 1990.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disagreeing: Sequential placement and internal structure of disagreements in conflict episodes

Gruber¹

1998

Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on such aspects of discourse äs preference organization, turntaking behavior, andforms of cohesion between turns during interpersonal conflict episodes, this paper presents a definition of interpersonal conflict sequences on the micro-andmacro level of discourse organization. Based on this definition the sequential placement, the internal structure, and cohesive ties between different forms of disagreements in conflict sequences are investigated and two main structural types of disagreeing utterances-overt and pragmatic disagreements-are discussed. In ciosing, the structural proper ties of conflict talk are viewed in the broader context of studies in which 'aberrations' from the classical CA-model of turn-taking werefound. It is proposed that these 'aberrations' can be explained by taking into account differing degrees of cooperativeness and involvement between participants.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disagreeing: Sequential placement and internal structure of disagreements in conflict episodes

Gruber¹

1998

Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Extract 7, there is another humorous orientation to the recording equipment (lines 2-5), with P1 and P2 treating themselves as accountable for its correct use. Note that in each of the four simulated interviews, the word "right" marks (and makes) a boundary between this prefatory material and the interview, and institutional business, "proper" (Extract 2, line 6; Extract 5, line 5; Extract 6, line 3; Extract 7, line 7; see Walker, 1995).…”

Section: Pre-item 1 Talkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The (In)Authenticity of Simulated Talk: Comparing Role-Played and Actual Interaction and the Implications for Communication Training

Stokoe

2013

Research on Language & Social Interaction

194

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…I stipulate at the outset that I am not talking about formulation in the sense proposed originally by Garfinkel and Sacks (1970) and adopted by various other conversation analysts (e.g., Antaki 2008;Arminen 2005;Barnes 2007;Drew 2003;Gafaranga and Britten 2004;Heritage and Watson 1979;Walker 1995); that is, as a statement of the gist, meaning, or upshot of previous conversation. In fact, Sacks himself, in his lectures, uses the term ''formulation'' frequently, and not in this sense.…”

Section: Formulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occasioned Semantics: A Systematic Approach to Meaning in Talk

Bilmes

2011

Hum Stud

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper puts forward an argument for a systematic, technical approach to formulation in verbal interaction. I see this as a kind of expansion of Sacks' membership categorization analysis, and as something that is not offered (at least not in a fully developed form) by sequential analysis, the currently dominant form of conversation analysis. In particular, I suggest a technique for the study of ''occasioned semantics,'' that is, the study of structures of meaningful expressions in actual occasions of conversation. I propose that meaning and rhetoric be approached through consideration of various dimensions or operations or properties, including, but not limited to, contrast and co-categorization, generalization and specification, scaling, and marking. As illustration, I consider a variety of cases, focused on generalization and specification. The paper can be seen as a return to some classical concerns with meaning, as illuminated by more recent insights into indexicality, social action, and interaction in recorded talk.

show abstract

Making a Bid for Change: Formulations in Union/Management Negotiations

Cited by 15 publications

References 0 publications

Disagreeing: Sequential placement and internal structure of disagreements in conflict episodes

Disagreeing: Sequential placement and internal structure of disagreements in conflict episodes

The (In)Authenticity of Simulated Talk: Comparing Role-Played and Actual Interaction and the Implications for Communication Training

Occasioned Semantics: A Systematic Approach to Meaning in Talk

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About