Discourse Studies

Based on the analysis of interaction during a public meeting, this article considers how people argue in sequential environments where direct interaction is precluded. The meeting in question was organized so the turns of audience speakers and local authority representatives were produced during different periods; initial actions and their oppositions, counters, etc., could be separated by anything up to 25 minutes. The article describes how speakers adapt their language practices to construct arguing turns and series of action-opposition pairs in social settings thus organized.

This article discusses the results of an investigation on discourse representation in a corpus of 34 million words constituted by texts in Brazilian Portuguese from two different genres: the research article and the science popularization article. Drawing on a systemic functional grammar perspective of language and pursuing a probabilistic approach, it focuses on the realization of lexicogrammatical systems of direct discourse representation as enacting interpersonal and social relationships. It is argued that the citation practices employed by writers in the genres studied negotiate discursive distance and are influenced by the status culturally and historically ascribed to scientific knowledge.

This study is concerned with the productive aspects of confabulation as it occurs spontaneously in dementia care, in its context, and in interaction with other care recipients. Confabulation is approached as a social and discursive event with distinct narrative features; plots and formerly established genres of plots, storylines, are used by confabulators in order to understand, manage and interact socially in the present situation. Three main functions of confabulation are discerned: 1) making sense of the current situation (sense-making); 2) maintaining a personal identity in interaction with others (self-making); and 3) organizing and legitimizing joint action in the world (world-making). The resources used by confabulating subjects are sparse and not well adjusted to changing conditions, as the number of accessible storylines is limited. This makes it difficult to apply storylines that explain the current situation satisfactorily, provide useful guidelines for how to act, as well as preserve a positive self-identity. Helping with this constitutes a major challenge in dementia care.

‘Dialogue’ is an important concept in the contemporary world. It plays a very significant role in English public discourse, and through English, or mainly through English, it has spread throughout the world. For example, the dissident leader Aung San Suu Kyi calls for ‘reconciliation and dialogue’ in Burma (or so she is reported to have done in English language news reports), the Russian pro-democracy groups ask Russian President Vladimir Putin to ‘begin a dialogue’ with them, and Popes Paul VI and John Paul II are praised for opening the Catholic Church to a ‘dialogue’ with other Christian churches and other religions (or criticized for not going far enough in this direction), and so on. But what exactly does the word ‘dialogue’ mean? In his position statement for the plenary session on ‘dialogue in cross-cultural perspective’ (the International Communication Association Conference, New York, 26-30 May 2005), Donal Carbaugh asks: ‘What constitutes “dialogue”? What is this form of communicative action? Is there such a form, or something like it, in various speech communities?’. This article attempts to answer Carbaugh’s questions from the point of view of the NSM theory of semantics, developed by the author and colleagues.