The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation

Cover......Page 1
The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation......Page 3
Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics......Page 4
Title......Page 5
Copyright......Page 6
We dedicate this book to Gail Jefferson and her legacy (1938–2008)
......Page 7
Contents......Page 9
Contributors......Page 11
Preface......Page 13
Acknowledgements......Page 15
1 Temporal and sequential relationships......Page 16
2 Aspects of speech delivery, including aspects of intonation......Page 17
3 Other markings......Page 19
Part I Introduction......Page 23
Introduction......Page 25
Background......Page 26
Knowledge in social interaction......Page 29
Key notions in the study of knowledge in social interaction......Page 30
Epistemic access......Page 31
Epistemic primacy......Page 35
Epistemic responsibilities......Page 39
The morality of knowledge and its implications for interactional cooperation......Page 41
Cooperation in conversation: alignment and affiliation......Page 42
About this volume......Page 45
Conclusion......Page 46
Part II Affiliational consequences of managing epistemic asymmetries......Page 47
Introduction......Page 49
Knowledge and progressivity of talk and action: the example of itinerary descriptions......Page 50
A single case: a knowledgeable speaker who does not know......Page 53
The manifestation of the problem......Page 54
The conjunction of the participants: the opening of the three-way call......Page 55
Resources for expressing epistemic positions: knowledge verbs......Page 59
Claiming not to know and questioning the terms of the previous action ( je ne sais pas )......Page 60
Dealing with reality disjunctures ( je ne connais pas )......Page 64
Evolving epistemic positions......Page 67
Realizing that the knowledgeable speaker possibly does not know: negative questions......Page 68
Alternative sources of knowledge: turning to the computer......Page 69
Call-taker announces results: je vois......Page 72
Contrasting epistemic positions ( je ne vois pas vs. je vois )......Page 73
The resolution of the case......Page 75
Conclusion: reversing knowledge asymmetries......Page 77
Additional transcript conventions......Page 79
Introduction......Page 80
Japanese particle yo......Page 81
Evaluation intensity in interaction......Page 84
Yo- marked first assessments......Page 86
Yo- marked agreements......Page 93
Yo -marked disagreements......Page 99
Conclusion......Page 103
Introduction......Page 104
Contexts of use......Page 110
Orientations to unaskability......Page 116
Multiple responses......Page 123
Discussion......Page 126
Conclusion......Page 128
Introduction......Page 129
Linguistic features and data corpus......Page 132
Preliminary overview of epistemic incongruence and social affiliation in question–answer sequences......Page 134
“As you should know” – jo/ju-accounts that challenge the questioner’s ignorance......Page 137
“As we both know” – jo/ju-accounts after first accounts......Page 140
“Your fault” accounts – treating epistemic incongruence as a moral transgression......Page 145
Discussion......Page 150
Introduction......Page 153
Imaginative transformation: an essential feature of make-believe......Page 154
Exclusive epistemic rights in independent play: “stipulations”......Page 155
Shared epistemic rights in joint play: proposals......Page 163
Violating shared epistemic rights in joint play: report-formatted assertions......Page 166
Reality disjuncture in make-believe......Page 168
Epistemic communities......Page 173
Part III Epistemic resources for managing affiliation and alignment......Page 179
Introduction......Page 181
Empathic moments......Page 183
Ancillary questioning......Page 186
Parallel assessments......Page 190
Subjunctive assessments......Page 191
Observer responses......Page 193
Response cries......Page 195
The affordances of experience descriptions and their demands......Page 198
The sale at the vicarage......Page 199
Discussion......Page 203
Conclusion......Page 204
Introduction......Page 206
The questioning context......Page 208
“No knowledge” prefaces to answers......Page 209
“No knowledge” as question response......Page 210
“No knowledge” and evidentiality......Page 215
Responsibility and types of knowledge......Page 218
A second responsive position......Page 223
Conclusion......Page 227
Introduction......Page 229
Previous studies of ‘you know’......Page 232
Analysis......Page 234
Sequence organization after ‘you know’......Page 251
Discussion......Page 255
Introduction......Page 257
Equivalent epistemic access and unconditional agreement......Page 259
Equivalent but separate epistemic access – agreeing with the facts but not necessarily with the action implications of the prior utterance......Page 264
Displaying resistance in disagreement-indicative contexts......Page 270
Non-committal response: the positive response token......Page 274
Conclusion......Page 277
Introduction......Page 279
Data......Page 281
2. Remedy......Page 282
Problem remedy: a moral project......Page 284
Differential access as a moral matter......Page 286
A cause-and-effect world......Page 287
A canonical problem inquiry sequence......Page 289
Recurrent candidates for cause: injuries and object disputes......Page 290
A child’s responsiveness to the caregiver’s inquiries......Page 292
Joint attention: pointing and showing as resources for answering......Page 293
Case 7 lizard......Page 298
Case 8 ball throw......Page 300
Conclusion......Page 303
Part IV Toward a framework......Page 305
Enchrony......Page 307
Status......Page 313
Propositions and the relativity of knowledge......Page 318
Agency......Page 325
Conclusion......Page 331
References......Page 335
Index......Page 355