Suchergebnisse

There has been a remarkable revival of interest in how we conduct social actions in interaction – particularly in requesting, where recent research into video-recorded face-to-face interaction has taken our understanding in novel directions. This collection brings together some of the latest, cutting-edge research into requesting by leading international practitioners of Conversation Analysis. The studies trace a line of conceptual development from 'directive' to 'recruitment', and explore the acquisitional, cultural, situational and species-specific differentiation of forms for requesting in human social interaction.They represent the latest explorations into the complexities and controversies associated with the apparently simple but essential matter of how we ask another to do something for us.

Since human activities are embedded in interactions, they are at the very center of the modeling of any form of social life, shaping societies, groups and interpersonal relationships. All theories of social, cognitive and cultural life are thus associated with explicit or tacit models of the nature of interactions and relations. This book proposes a multifaceted exploration of the complex nature of interactions, and of the modeling of complex interactional systems. It shows that all disciplines can be enriched by exploring alternative paradigms in the modeling of interactions, and that if discipline-bound studies tend to underestimate the multi-dimensional nature of interactions, ignoring it is not an option.It will be of great interest for anyone involved in disciplines such as economics, geography, linguistics, communication studies, education sciences and sociology, and in fields such as the study of networks, interactional systems, relations between agents, and mathematical and computational modeling.

The aim of the study is the examination of the actual process of eruption of the violent act. The study, therefore, concentrates on a stimulus-response interaction and examines the nature of the provocation, the nature of the reaction, and the relationship between the two factors. These three components constitute one cycle, and each cycle acts as a stimulus to the subsequent one. If the first cycle of interaction is not clear to the parties, the interaction will tend to escalate in its intensity until the meaning of Alter's action is clarified; then, if it is perceived as provoking it could erupt into violence. Or, if Alter's meaning was finally defined by Ego as neutral or friendly, the tension will subside and jocular friendship might ensue. However, if the interaction is still ambiguous, the initial cycles might be forgotten, and the subsequent cycles, even if ambiguous, will be defined as provoking, and violence may erupt.

This volume brings together a collection of novel, conversation-analytic studies addressing the related concepts of account, motive, accounting, and accountability, with the goal of re-exposing their multiple senses, reiterating their interrelationships and, in doing so, breaking new conceptual ground and exposing pathways for future research

This volume in the bi-annual Studies in Symbolic Interaction series focuses on new theoretical work in the interactionist tradition by leading interdisciplinary scholars, as well as issues of gender, ethnicity, illness and the urban situation, and autoethnographic reflections on identity, technology, family, work and the self

AbstractThere are several issues with the standard approach to the relationship between conditionals and assertions, particularly when the antecedent of a conditional is (or may be) false. One prominent alternative is to say that conditionals do not express propositions, but rather make conditional assertions that may generate categorical assertions of the consequent in certain circumstances. However, this view has consequences that jar with standard interpretations of the relationship between proofs and assertion. Here, I analyse this relationship, and say that, on at least one understanding of proof, conditional assertions may reflect the dynamics of proving, which (sometimes) generate categorical assertions. In particular, when we think about the relationship between assertion and proof as rooted in a dialogical approach to both, the distinction between conditional and categorical assertions is quite natural.