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 -