Non-acceptances in context

Research output: Working paperWorking papers

Standard

Non-acceptances in context. / Fetzer, Anita.
Essen: Universität Duisburg-Essen, 2006. (Linguistic LAUD Agency - Series A: General & Theoretical Papers; No. 653).

Research output: Working paperWorking papers

Harvard

Fetzer, A 2006 'Non-acceptances in context' Linguistic LAUD Agency - Series A: General & Theoretical Papers, no. 653, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Essen. <http://www.linse.uni-due.de/laud-1329/non-acceptances-in-context.html>

APA

Fetzer, A. (2006). Non-acceptances in context. (Linguistic LAUD Agency - Series A: General & Theoretical Papers; No. 653). Universität Duisburg-Essen. http://www.linse.uni-due.de/laud-1329/non-acceptances-in-context.html

Vancouver

Fetzer A. Non-acceptances in context. Essen: Universität Duisburg-Essen. 2006. (Linguistic LAUD Agency - Series A: General & Theoretical Papers; 653).

Bibtex

@techreport{78a711d8af1041bfbfb4ca62d1873291,
title = "Non-acceptances in context",
abstract = "The communicative act of non-acceptance expresses the speaker's intention to deny, reject or disagree with a communicative act. Regarding its sequential status, a non-acceptance is a responsive act par excellence, and from an interpersonal perspective it can be assigned the status of a face-threatening act. While its responsive format does not seem to cause any severe communicative problems in intercultural communication, its face-threatening potential makes it a prime candidate for intercultural miscommunication. The goal of this paper is to systematize the contextual constraints and requirements of a non-acceptance in a dialogue frame of reference based on the dialogue act of a plus/minus-validity claim (Fetzer 2002, 2004), which is anchored to the Gricean cooperative principle (Grice 1975), Habermas' theory of communicative action (Habermas 1987), and Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness (Brown & Levinson 1987). The pragmatic premises of intentionality, rationality, and cooperation are supplemented by the interactional-sociolinguistic universal of contextualization (Gumperz 1996). The dialogue framework allows for a comprehensive examination of culture-preferential modes for the realization and contextualization of nonacceptances and possible perlocutionary effects, illustrated by excerpts from German, British and intercultural German-British political discourse. ",
keywords = "English",
author = "Anita Fetzer",
year = "2006",
language = "English",
series = "Linguistic LAUD Agency - Series A: General &amp; Theoretical Papers",
publisher = "Universit{\"a}t Duisburg-Essen",
number = "653",
address = "Germany",
type = "WorkingPaper",
institution = "Universit{\"a}t Duisburg-Essen",

}

RIS

TY - UNPB

T1 - Non-acceptances in context

AU - Fetzer, Anita

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - The communicative act of non-acceptance expresses the speaker's intention to deny, reject or disagree with a communicative act. Regarding its sequential status, a non-acceptance is a responsive act par excellence, and from an interpersonal perspective it can be assigned the status of a face-threatening act. While its responsive format does not seem to cause any severe communicative problems in intercultural communication, its face-threatening potential makes it a prime candidate for intercultural miscommunication. The goal of this paper is to systematize the contextual constraints and requirements of a non-acceptance in a dialogue frame of reference based on the dialogue act of a plus/minus-validity claim (Fetzer 2002, 2004), which is anchored to the Gricean cooperative principle (Grice 1975), Habermas' theory of communicative action (Habermas 1987), and Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness (Brown & Levinson 1987). The pragmatic premises of intentionality, rationality, and cooperation are supplemented by the interactional-sociolinguistic universal of contextualization (Gumperz 1996). The dialogue framework allows for a comprehensive examination of culture-preferential modes for the realization and contextualization of nonacceptances and possible perlocutionary effects, illustrated by excerpts from German, British and intercultural German-British political discourse.

AB - The communicative act of non-acceptance expresses the speaker's intention to deny, reject or disagree with a communicative act. Regarding its sequential status, a non-acceptance is a responsive act par excellence, and from an interpersonal perspective it can be assigned the status of a face-threatening act. While its responsive format does not seem to cause any severe communicative problems in intercultural communication, its face-threatening potential makes it a prime candidate for intercultural miscommunication. The goal of this paper is to systematize the contextual constraints and requirements of a non-acceptance in a dialogue frame of reference based on the dialogue act of a plus/minus-validity claim (Fetzer 2002, 2004), which is anchored to the Gricean cooperative principle (Grice 1975), Habermas' theory of communicative action (Habermas 1987), and Brown and Levinson's theory of politeness (Brown & Levinson 1987). The pragmatic premises of intentionality, rationality, and cooperation are supplemented by the interactional-sociolinguistic universal of contextualization (Gumperz 1996). The dialogue framework allows for a comprehensive examination of culture-preferential modes for the realization and contextualization of nonacceptances and possible perlocutionary effects, illustrated by excerpts from German, British and intercultural German-British political discourse.

KW - English

M3 - Working papers

T3 - Linguistic LAUD Agency - Series A: General &amp; Theoretical Papers

BT - Non-acceptances in context

PB - Universität Duisburg-Essen

CY - Essen

ER -

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Indicators for relational values of nature’s contributions to good quality of life
  2. Improving the surface quality of AlMgSi1 alloy with the selection of the appropriate vibration grinding stones
  3. Manufacturing, control, and performance evaluation of a Gecko-inspired soft robot
  4. Tetrabutylammonium prolinate-based ionic liquids
  5. Electrical Resistivity of Binary Mg Alloys
  6. Alignment of the life cycle initiative’s “principles for the application of life cycle sustainability assessment” with the LCSA practice
  7. The Making of Urban Computing Environments
  8. Evidence-Based Management and Organizational Reality
  9. Reading the 2011 Riots
  10. Resolving Incompleteness on Social Media
  11. Lung fibroblasts from patients with emphysema show markers of senescence in vitro
  12. Structuring Sustainability Reports for Environmental Standards with LLMs guided by Ontology
  13. Heterogeneity and Diversity
  14. Nonlinear modelling and sliding mode control of a piezo-hydraulic valve system
  15. Optimization and Validation of an LC Method for the Determination of Cefdinir in Dosage Form and Human Urine
  16. First automatic size measurements for the separation of dwarf birch and tree birch pollen in MIS 6 to MIS 1 records from Northern Germany
  17. Understanding the diffusion of domestic biogas technologies.
  18. Contested future-making in containment: temporalities, infrastructures and agency
  19. Learning with summaries
  20. Fluid-structure interaction modelling of a soft pneumatic actuator
  21. Das Inverted Classroom Model (ICM) im Kontext kompetenzorientierter Hochschullehre
  22. A duty-block network approach for an integrated driver rostering problem in public bus transport
  23. Structure and Organization of Product Development Projects
  24. Institutional Perspectives on Digital Transformation
  25. Empire State Building
  26. Focus: Computational history and philosophy of science