Nominated actions and their targeted agents in Finnish conversational directives

Couper‐Kuhlen, Elizabeth; Etelämäki, Marja

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.010

Cited by 48 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 11 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Treating the normative organization of the adjacency‐pair sequence as the central locus of negotiation over deontic rights, I will now consider how this negotiation happens in practice. Drawing on previous studies by myself (Stevanovic, 2011; Stevanovic, ; Stevanovic, ; Stevanovic, ; Stevanovic, ; Stevanovic, ; Stevanovic, ; Stevanovic & Peräkylä, ; Stevanovic & Monzoni, ) and others (Couper‐Kuhlen & Etelämäki, ; Ekberg & LeCouteur, ; Heritage, ; Ishino & Okada, ; Keevallik, ; Kent, ; Landmark, Gulbrandsen, & Svennevig, ; Lindström & Weatherall, ; Stivers et al, ; Svennevig & Djordjilovic, ; Toerien, ), I will discuss three different patterns of managing deontic concerns in and through sequential relations. Arguably, deontic concerns are a potential part of all adjacency pairs, but they are particularly relevant in those sequences where future actions are at issue.…”

Section: Deontic Patterns In Sequential Relationsmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social deontics: A nano‐level approach to human power play

Stevanovic

2018

J Theory Soc Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The notion of "deontic rights"-the capacity of an individual to determine action-is described as a tool to analyze human power plays in the turn-by-turn unfolding of social interaction. Drawing on various bodies of literature, the paper portrays the organization of the adjacency-pair sequence as the key locus of negotiation over deontic rights. How such negotiations happen in practice is also considered. Two deontic patterns instantiating themselves in sequential relations-deontic congruence and deontic incongruence-are discussed. Negotiations of deontic rights are suggested to take place specifically in and through three different forms of deontic incongruence, each of which involves a subtle mismatch between the claims of deontic rights of the first speaker and the recipient's treatment of these claims. These implicit power plays easily escape the eye and are therefore difficult to reflect upon and counteract by the participants themselves, which makes a thorough understanding of these mechanisms important.KEYWORDS authority, conversation analysis, deontics, power, sequentialityThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

show abstract

Section: Deontic Patterns In Sequential Relationsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Yeah, it would be good (to do X) ). In this case, the recipients displayed the understanding that the participants “have equal rights in determining whether the action should happen at all” (Couper‐Kuhlen & Etelämäki, , p. 23).…”

Section: Deontic Patterns In Sequential Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social deontics: A nano‐level approach to human power play

Stevanovic

2018

J Theory Soc Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Couper-Kuhlen and Etelämäki ( , 2015 studied the interrelations between grammatical formation and requests in two articles based on English and Finnish data. They demonstrate (2014) that Finnish grammar enables more variation than English in division-of-labor constructions, in which speakers offer to do something while requesting their recipient to take over another part of a given project.…”

Section: The Affordances Of Different Linguistic Structures Become Evmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequence and turn design of invitations in Finnish telephone calls

Routarinne

Tainio

2018

Journal of Pragmatics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Likewise, a more recent study on directives states that through them "speakers promote the performance of a putatively desirable or necessary action, in the immediate or remote future" (Couper-Kuhlen & Etelämäki, 2015). Corrections, even those produced during a performance, are typically delivered as directives, such as "Don't rush" at an orchestra rehearsal (Weeks, 1994, p. 259-260).…”

Section: Noticing Breaches With Non-polar Interrogatives: Estonian Kementioning

confidence: 99%