Reactive Remarks with the Illocution of Disagreement in the Context of the Informal Interview: Forms of Expression, Pragmatic Functions, Motives for Implementation

Abstract

Within the framework of this study – based on the texts of informal interviews published in English-language tabloids – the illocution of reactive disagreement is defined as an effective pragmatic mechanism for the coherent unfolding of the text, jointly generated by the interlocutors. Based on the method of conversational analysis, the constructive potential of a negative response to the propositional content and assessments that form a stimulating assertive message of the interviewer is revealed. Attention is focused on the form and content of the responses, explicitly/implicitly expressing disagreement, their pragmatic functions and role in ensuring the coherence of dialogical unity, reflecting the discussion of a specific topic by the interlocutors. It is established that in order to minimize discursive confrontation, the respondent can react with disagreement, which has a delayed character, with a preliminary expression of concession in favor of the effectiveness of the interviewer’s point of view. At the same time, in order to create relevant conditions for the implementation of a relaxed / partial disagreement, the respondent can initiate several dialogical moves. As a result, the stimulating judgments of the interviewer are interpreted as one of the alternative versions of the interpretation of the event or fact being discussed, and an informal conversation produces a pragmatic effect of intrigue. A softened form of disagreement can also be implemented by reacting replicas with blurred semantics due to hedging and markers of epistemic modality, a detailed explanation of the facts associated with the topic under discussion, activation of the shift of the current attention of the interviewer and the target audience. The motives underlying the reactive implementation of direct/implicit disagreement are revealed: the respondent’s desire to hide information about the prospects of his creative activity, which is requested by the interviewer, to avoid disharmony in interpersonal interaction, the gap between the interlocutors’ background knowledge, the dissimilarity of their axiological positions regarding the topic of discussion. A pragmatic justification of these motives is given. It is concluded that the reactive remarks of disagreement, implemented in the context of an informal interview, predetermine the conflict-free unfolding of interpersonal interaction of interlocutors due to the deliberate minimization of the threat to their social face from the respondent.