Reframing less conventional speech to disrupt conventions of "compulsory fluency": A conversation analysis approach

Abstract

Our purpose is to illuminate compliances with, and resistances to, what we are calling "compulsory fluency" which we define as conventions for what constitutes competent speech. We achieve our purpose through a study of day-to-day communication between a woman with less conventional speech and her support providing family members and friends. Drawing from McRuer's (2006) compulsory ablebodiedness and Kafer's (2013) compulsory able-mindedness, we use "compulsory fluency" to refer to a form of articulation that is standardized and idealized and imposed on all speakers including those whose speech is less conventional. We see compulsory fluency as central to North American conceptions of personhood which are tied to individual ability to speak for one's self (Brueggemann, 2005). In this paper, we trace some North American principles for linguistic competence to outline widely held ideals of receptive and expressive language use, namely, conventions for how language should be understood and expressed. Using Critical Disability Studies (Goodley, 2013; McRuer, 2006) together with a feminist framework of relational autonomy (Nedelsky, 1989), our goal is to focus on experiences of people with less conventional speech and draw attention to power in communication as it flows in idiosyncratic and intersubjective fashion (Mackenzie & Stoljar, 2000; Westlund, 2009). In other words, we use a critical disability and feminist framing to call attention to less conventional forms of communication competence and, in this process, we challenge assumptions about what constitutes competent speech. As part of a larger qualitative study, we conduct a conversation analysis informed by Rapley and Antaki (1996) to examine day-to-day verbal, vocal and non-verbal communications of a young woman who self identifies as "having autism" - pseudonym Addison - in interaction with her support-providing family members and friends. We illustrate a multitude of Addison's compliances with, and resistances to, compulsory fluency to bring awareness to competence inherent in less conventional speech and we argue this illumination as a call for listening with greater care and more open expectations in efforts to understand, and participate in the expression of, meanings embedded in less conventional speech.

Studies of Depression and Anxiety Using Reddit as a Data Source: Scoping Review

“…As researchers tune the parameters of systems designed to monitor and classify written expressions of depression and anxiety that are actionable for some kind of outreach, they also inherit responsibility for deciding what constitutes proficient and mentally healthy written text. Digital outreach acting on assessments of naturalistic user text will inevitably be rooted in adherence to predetermined, standardized forms of communication that may not be applicable to users’ diverse communicative choices, abilities, and styles [ 90 ]. Furthermore, it would be wise not to underestimate the potential harms to individuals who become aware that a digital outreach system has labeled them as experiencing depression and anxiety.…”

Negotiating Research Participant Consent With, for and by Adults With Developmental Disabilities in Interaction With Their Third-Party Consent Providers

“…Calveley described participants’ comfortable facial expressions and vocalizations that evidenced willingness to go along with intimate care activities and signified implied consent versus participants’ signs of distress, such as scrunching face or biting fingers, which signified withdrawal of consent. Indeed, discernment of consent in these ways is possible only through relational processes that entail participants obtaining and responding to input from others as part of the interactive flow of providing and withdrawing consent (Duque & Lashewicz, 2018). Taken together, Antaki and colleagues’ discernment of meanings expressed by people with profound disabilities, and Calveley’s illustration of people with intellectual disabilities giving and withdrawing of consent during intimate care, underline credibility and consent as fluid and negotiated relational processes.…”