Power and Solidarity in Modern Greek Conversation: Disagreeing to Agree

Abstract

In Modern Greek conversation, disagreement, which can express power, can also be used to create solidarity among participants. Analysis of a segment of tape-recorded, naturally occurring conversation demonstrates that the three primary speakers are pursuing different frames—that is, they have different purposes in the conversation—and that they have different styles of disagreeing. The Greek man disagrees directly; the Greek woman briefly agrees before going on to disagree; the American woman disagrees indirectly. Analysis of other, briefer excerpts of casual conversation reveals that linguistic marfars of solidarity occur at points of disagreement. These markers are (1) first name or figurative kinship term, often in diminutive form, and (2) personal analogy. Finally, two linguistic markers frequently occur at points of disagreement: (1) the particle «ρε» and (2) what we call "adversative imperatives." This discussion furthers our understanding of the relationship between power and solidarity in conversation in general, and in Modern Greek conversation in particular.

Conjunctions versus discourse markers in Greek: the interaction of frequency, position, and functions in context

“…In conversations, its occurrences as a discourse marker are predominant, as can be seen in the following in extract from a discussion on the pros and cons of living in a city like Athens: In the above example, all the discourse-marker uses of aid are turninitial, in contrast to the use of αΐά in the last turn as a conjunction. It has been argued that aid is a common marker of disagreement in Greek conversations, commonly prefaced by ne ( yes\ as a device for mitigating the dispreferred turn (Tannen and Kakava 1992). However, in (12), there is no disagreement between the speakers.…”

Disagreement and Opposition in Multigenerational Interviews with Greek-Australian Mothers and Daughters

“…Kakavá (1993a) and Tannen and Kakavá (1992) demonstrate that disagreements are not dispreferred acts but point out that contentiousness is a form of sociability among Greeks, especially in intimate settings such as with family and friends. In a study of Greek disagreements, Kakavá (1993a) proposes a number of factors that a¤ect the interpretation of disagreement such as context, cultural norms, speech situation, topic, gender, age, status, Greek-Australian culture, context, and intergenerational interaction, compared to Makri-Tsilipakou's Greek casual interaction.…”

Communicating knowledge, getting attention, and negotiating disagreement via videoconferencing technology: A multimodal analysis

“…In many settings disagreements are encouraged, and indeed are an expected part of social practice. Several authors have examined disagreements in different cultural settings (Schiffrin, 1984;Kakava, 1993;Blum-Kulka et al, 2002;Marra, 2012;Goodwin et al, 2002;Tannen & Kakava, 1992). Findings show that disagreements may be discouraged or encouraged depending on the cultural setting.…”