Constituting face in conversation: Face, facework, and interactional achievement

被引:196
作者
Arundale, Robert B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Alaska Fairbanks, Dept Commun, Fairbanks, AK 99775 USA
关键词
Face; Facework; Communication; Interaction; Conversation; Relationship; SOCIAL-ORGANIZATION; TALK; PREFERENCE; REPAIR;
D O I
10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.021
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
Face Constituting Theory addresses the question "How do participants achieve face in everyday talk?" explaining face and facework as achieved by participants engaged in face-to-face communication in situated relationships. Outlining the theory involves first sketching the Conjoint Co-constituting Model of Communication as a conceptualization of the achieving of meaning and action in interaction, and second conceptualizing face as a relational phenomenon at both culture-general and culture-specific levels. Using these conceptualizations, Face Constituting Theory explains face as participants' interpretings of relational connectedness and separateness, conjointly co-constituted in talk/conduct-in-interaction. Face Constituting Theory adds to this explanation a new conceptualization of how of face interpretings are evaluated as threatening to, in stasis, or supportive of relationships, drawing into a single explanation the full range of observations on facework from outright face threat, through face maintenance, to outright face support. Consistent with ethnomethodology and conversation analysis, Face Constituting Theory is framed from the participant's perspective, and applying the theory in examining the achievement of face in an instance of everyday interaction both illustrates the application of the new theory in research, and indicates how it is distinct from the approaches existing theories employ in studying face and facework. (C) 2010 Elsevier By. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2078 / 2105
页数:28
相关论文
共 88 条
[1]  
Arundale R., 1999, PRAGMATICS, V9, P119, DOI DOI 10.1075/PRAG.9.1.07ARU
[2]  
Arundale R., 2006, J POLITENESS RES-LAN, V2, P193, DOI [10.1515/PR.2006.011, DOI 10.1515/PR.2006.011]
[3]  
Arundale RB, 2002, PRAG BEYOND NEW SER, V103, P121
[4]  
Arundale RB, 2005, LEA COMMUN SER, P41
[5]  
ARUNDALE RB, HDB PRAGMAT IN PRESS, V6
[6]  
Arundale RB, 2009, FACE, COMMUNICATION AND SOCIAL INTERACTION, P33
[7]   Against (Gricean) intentions at the heart of human interaction [J].
Arundale, Robert B. .
INTERCULTURAL PRAGMATICS, 2008, 5 (02) :229-258
[8]  
Bavelas J., 1991, UNDERSTANDING FACE T, P119
[9]   Visible acts of meaning - An integrated message model of language in face-to-face dialogue [J].
Bavelas, JB ;
Chovil, N .
JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2000, 19 (02) :163-194
[10]  
Baxter L.A., 1996, Relating: Dialogues dialectics