雷·威尔金森,约翰·P·雷,吉特·拉斯穆森(编辑),《非典型互动:日常谈话中沟通障碍的影响》。Cham:Palgrave Macmillan,2020,XXIII+470页。

Q3 Social Sciences
Dmitry Kolyadov
{"title":"雷·威尔金森,约翰·P·雷,吉特·拉斯穆森(编辑),《非典型互动:日常谈话中沟通障碍的影响》。Cham:Palgrave Macmillan,2020,XXIII+470页。","authors":"Dmitry Kolyadov","doi":"10.31250/1815-8870-2021-17-49-207-222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The collection of articles under review includes conversation analytic studies of interactions involving the participation of at least one person with communicative impairments (aphasia, dementia, dysarthria, etc.). The authors concentrate on how these impairments influence interaction—the organization of repair in particular—as well as on issues of participants’ adaption to impairments, collaboration, the agency of people with impairments, and practices of face maintenance. Three more general issues connected to this field of study are discussed in the review. The first issue is a choice of analytic categories and the application of the category of repair. This category seems justified since participants frequently have to clarify the meaning of their partners’ actions. However, this choice may appear problematic if one does not take into account that interactions with people with impairments have their own progressivity, which differs from the progressivity of ordinary conversation. The second issue is the role of nonverbal actions, which is crucial in circumstances where some of the participants lack verbal resources. The third issue concerns the problem of the understanding which participants try to achieve in the course of interaction and which researchers try to achieve in the course of analysis. This task becomes more challenging in comparison to ordinary conversations. On the one hand, actions of persons with impairments are sometimes ambiguous and require special interpretative efforts from their partners. On the other hand, there is always a risk that the partner will interpret actions of impaired person inadequately.","PeriodicalId":52194,"journal":{"name":"Antropologicheskij Forum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Review of RAY WILKINSON, JOHN P. RAE, GITTE RASMUSSEN (eds.), ATYPICAL INTERACTION: THE IMPACT OF COMMUNICATIVE IMPAIRMENTS WITHIN EVERYDAY TALK. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020, XXIII+470 pp.\",\"authors\":\"Dmitry Kolyadov\",\"doi\":\"10.31250/1815-8870-2021-17-49-207-222\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The collection of articles under review includes conversation analytic studies of interactions involving the participation of at least one person with communicative impairments (aphasia, dementia, dysarthria, etc.). The authors concentrate on how these impairments influence interaction—the organization of repair in particular—as well as on issues of participants’ adaption to impairments, collaboration, the agency of people with impairments, and practices of face maintenance. Three more general issues connected to this field of study are discussed in the review. The first issue is a choice of analytic categories and the application of the category of repair. This category seems justified since participants frequently have to clarify the meaning of their partners’ actions. However, this choice may appear problematic if one does not take into account that interactions with people with impairments have their own progressivity, which differs from the progressivity of ordinary conversation. The second issue is the role of nonverbal actions, which is crucial in circumstances where some of the participants lack verbal resources. The third issue concerns the problem of the understanding which participants try to achieve in the course of interaction and which researchers try to achieve in the course of analysis. This task becomes more challenging in comparison to ordinary conversations. On the one hand, actions of persons with impairments are sometimes ambiguous and require special interpretative efforts from their partners. On the other hand, there is always a risk that the partner will interpret actions of impaired person inadequately.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antropologicheskij Forum\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antropologicheskij Forum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31250/1815-8870-2021-17-49-207-222\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antropologicheskij Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31250/1815-8870-2021-17-49-207-222","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文收集的文章包括至少一个有交流障碍的人(失语症、痴呆、构音障碍等)参与的互动对话分析研究。作者专注于这些损伤如何影响互动——尤其是修复的组织——以及参与者对损伤的适应、协作、残疾人的代理和面部维护的实践等问题。本文还讨论了与这一研究领域有关的三个一般性问题。第一个问题是分析范畴的选择和修理范畴的应用。这种分类似乎是合理的,因为参与者经常需要澄清他们伴侣行为的意义。然而,如果一个人没有考虑到与有障碍的人的互动有自己的进步性,这与普通对话的进步性不同,这种选择可能会出现问题。第二个问题是非语言行为的作用,这在一些参与者缺乏语言资源的情况下是至关重要的。第三个问题涉及参与者在互动过程中试图达到的理解问题,以及研究者在分析过程中试图达到的理解问题。与普通对话相比,这个任务变得更具挑战性。一方面,残疾人的行为有时是模棱两可的,需要他们的伙伴作出特别的解释努力。另一方面,总是有一种风险,即伴侣会不适当地解释残疾人的行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Review of RAY WILKINSON, JOHN P. RAE, GITTE RASMUSSEN (eds.), ATYPICAL INTERACTION: THE IMPACT OF COMMUNICATIVE IMPAIRMENTS WITHIN EVERYDAY TALK. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020, XXIII+470 pp.
The collection of articles under review includes conversation analytic studies of interactions involving the participation of at least one person with communicative impairments (aphasia, dementia, dysarthria, etc.). The authors concentrate on how these impairments influence interaction—the organization of repair in particular—as well as on issues of participants’ adaption to impairments, collaboration, the agency of people with impairments, and practices of face maintenance. Three more general issues connected to this field of study are discussed in the review. The first issue is a choice of analytic categories and the application of the category of repair. This category seems justified since participants frequently have to clarify the meaning of their partners’ actions. However, this choice may appear problematic if one does not take into account that interactions with people with impairments have their own progressivity, which differs from the progressivity of ordinary conversation. The second issue is the role of nonverbal actions, which is crucial in circumstances where some of the participants lack verbal resources. The third issue concerns the problem of the understanding which participants try to achieve in the course of interaction and which researchers try to achieve in the course of analysis. This task becomes more challenging in comparison to ordinary conversations. On the one hand, actions of persons with impairments are sometimes ambiguous and require special interpretative efforts from their partners. On the other hand, there is always a risk that the partner will interpret actions of impaired person inadequately.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Antropologicheskij Forum
Antropologicheskij Forum Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信