PSYC358: Exam #2 Flashcards
What does Grice say about the point of communication?
Communication = rational, purposive and inferential activity
Fundamentally cooperative
Participants work towards a common aim (make sure your contribution is the one that’s required at the time when it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction)
What makes contributions to a convo cooperative? Grice
Cooperative principle can be broken down into diff maxims of conversation (quantity, quality, relation, manner)
Speakers will make sure their contributions apply to these maxims
Grice’s maxim “quantity”
1- make contribution as informative as required depending on the purpose of the exchange
2- not more informative than required
Grice’s maxim “quality”
Try to make your contribution one that’s true:
1- do not say what you believe to be false
2- do not say that for which you lack good evidence
Grice’s maxim “relation”
Be relevant
Grice’s maxim “manner”
Be perspicuous 1- avoid being obscure 2- avoid ambiguity 3- be brief 4- be orderly
Implicatures (grice’s maxims)
Give good reasons for not outwardly following maxims, like in this example:
Dad: is she asleep?
Mom: her light is on and I can hear music playing.
By saying Y, X implicates Z if retrieving Z is necessary in order for X not to be a violation of the CP and maxims
Grice’s four ways in which CP maxims may fail to be fulfilled
1- speaker ‘violates’ maxim covertly by lying or misleading someone
2- speaker ‘opts out’ on maxims and makes it clear that they are unwilling to participate in a convo at all
3- if the speaker is unable to fulfill maxim (example, not knowing the specific answer to someone’s question)
4- sarcasm; both participants understand what’s going on when speaker says something untrue so still follows cooperative principle
Flouting of maxims (Grice)
Hearer guesses that while the speaker is still conforming with the cooperative principle, a maxim has been violated where what they are trying to say may be obvious (just takes some interpretation skills to figure out)
Metaphors, hyperbole, meiosis (understatement) and irony rely on flouting
Innuendo
Hint
Insult
Jokes
Gossip
Criticism of maxims (Grice)
-too general and vague even though designed to make CP less so
Relevance theory
Began as attempt to deal with the issue of what the maxim “relevance” really is
Grice never came back to this, didn’t know the basis
Just observed the behaviour throughout time
Stays true to grice’s original theory that communication=rational, inferential activity
Central to the process of utterance interpretation is fact that utterances raise certain expectations
Pragmatics
Study of meaning in utterances
What did HP Grice come up with?
Maxims of conversation
Cooperative principle
Pragmatics and issues in meaning and conversation
The cooperative principle (Grice)
When we speak or are spoken to, we proceed based on the cooperation principle
Works based on what the listener can assume about the speakers intentions (assume that they want to carry out a successful interaction, even if content negative)
Usually say that speakers=implicate meaning and addressees=infer meaning but Grice said both=implicature!
Listener=infers speakers meaning, using interpretive skills (not decoding)
Possible meanings narrowed down by assumed use of CP
Addressee assumes possible meanings being created by speaker are restricted by CP and maxims
Two conditions of following the CP (Grice)
1- when what speaker says is consistent with CP
2- when speaker’s utterance flouts the CP (to recognize flouting, you are still following the CP; if it couldn’t be figured out it would mean it was breaking CP)
Four ways to violate maxims (Grice; diff than flout!!)
1- lie (violate quality maxim)
2- opt out (violate the quantity maxim, ex: I don’t remember)
3- legalese (violate manner)
4- change in topic (violate relevance) can incur inferences about mental health, guilt
Who invented self-presentation?
Erving goffman
Presentation of self
We have multiple ways of presenting ourselves
Presentation of self depends on how talk is organized
Gives us wide dramatic birth for communicating (we can use reported speech, analogy, move away from the original, exaggerate)
People influence impressions through the control of personal info
Dramaturgy (goffman)
Dramaturgical analysis: relationship between acts we do in everyday life and theatrical performance we put on (social life is theatre, social lives are staged)
Actors have control over their image bc it is language of the self (self=impressions or reproductions of self on others)
As actors, we are fakers and con others into believing our act
Situation determines how we should present ourselves in social situations
Status=what part are you playing? Role=offers a script
To pull it off, you have to believe in your role
Dramaturgy and groups (goffman)
In groups, we act in cozy conspiracy
Seems like everyone knows what they’re talking about, remembers names, agrees but we often don’t know that others don’t know either
Suspension of laying cards out on table
We reach surface agreements because nobody wants to stand out or we just agree that one person’s claims will be honoured
Dramaturgy: impression management (goffman)
Social interactions and ways of communicating in attempt to control how others see us because others are going to inform an impression of us (and us of them!)
We change strategies depending on who we’re trying to impress
Attempt to avoid embarrassment
Control over:
1- appearance
2- scenery
3- manner
How is perception of self divided? (Goffman)
Self=bounded by perceptions, how we want to be perceived which may or may not match how we are perceived
FRONT STAGE:
- where the performance is given
- you who you show for the world to see
- can include gestures, tone, politeness, etc
- what we wear and do is impression management
- acts as social lang that can communicate class, subculture, sexuality, age, mental stability
- present ourselves as acceptable person depending on situation
- use techniques to show ourselves in a way that we want others to see us, relies on cooperation of others
BACK STAGE:
- contradicts how you display yourself in front stage
- front stage constructed here
- area of self free from management
Mystification
Goffman
Technique designed to keep your observers feeling in awe of you
Need to maintain social distance, regulate your contacts, control your image
Front stage: the audience (goffman)
Different roles and audiences require different forms of impression management
We don’t like our worlds colliding so keep our audiences separate
But prefer to feel like single coherent self
Front stage: decorum and its two types (goffman)
Decorum=how one conducts himself in the visual or audio range of the audience
Moral decorum: one needs to be observant of others privacy, observe sexual propriety, follow rules around non-harassment of others
Instrumental decorum: practical requirements; ex: go to a party because boss will notice
The outsider (goffman)
To point out others faults to an extreme and exaggerated degree without revealing the self
Revel in anonymity
Also marked by non acceptance into society by society itself
People with mental illness as they have less ability to build a front stage so back stage exposed
Unmeant gestures (collision of front stage and back stage; goffman)
Signs that performance is false
Finger pointing, squinting, lose muscular control (yawn, stumble, pass wind)
Stutter, forget words, laugh
The interpersonal dimension of talk
Central to social life
Interpersonal considerations are build into talk from BOTTOM UP (in micro details)
Required to satisfy need for:
1- social connection + recognition
2- have ones identity affirmed, created by others
Transactional goLs
Speaker wants addressee to recognize his intention (what action they’re performing) and to respond in some way (aka perlocutionary effect)
Transactional goals turn on efficiency but might be rejected if blunt (need to attend to interpersonal as well)
General idea of face (goffman)
Face=how we present ourself while interacting with others (we display and create certain selves while suppressing the display and creation of certain other versions of self)
We are inclined to show self respect and respect others
The way we frame our interactions has consequences for how those interactions will unfold
Face work (goffman)
We operate from 2 points of view:
1- defensive orientation towards saving our own face
2- protective orientation towards saving other people’s faces
We can take both perspectives at the same time
We can also offend face; unintentionally, intentionally or as the unintentional outcome of an action
Goffman’s ideas on avoiding face-threatening acts
1- ceremonial treatment
2- discretion (don’t question the intentions of others, don’t blab)
3- lie
4- phrase replies with ambiguity, hedge (indirect talk) and humour
5- explain why you are going to engage in a face-threatening act (I’m doing this for your own good… Etc)
Politeness theory (brown & levinson)
Talk displays our identity and views of others; so when we negotiate meaning we negotiate or co-construct identity
Three needs:
1- TRANSACTIONAL: to meet our own goals
2- INTERPERSONAL: to protect others
3- INTRAPERSONAL: self, self esteem, need to be wanted
Negative vs positive face
Negative face= persons desire to be unimpeded by others (free to choose for self, avoid imposition)
Positive face= desire to be approved of, accepted, respected
**face work= protecting and repairing face
Measuring face-threatening acts (brown and levinson)
FTAs= things that threaten negative face (like requests) and things that threaten positive face (like refusing the request)
The weightiness of FTA=power of addressee over speaker plus the social distance between S-H plus rx aka the ranking of the imposition (high or low, has a cultural component)
WFTA = P(A/S) + SD(S between H) + rx
p+s+rx describes interpersonal domain
WFTA predicts kind and how much face work will be done
Four degrees of face threat and their face work strategies
LOW: bald on record - be blunt not ambiguous
MEDIUM: on record with positive politeness (redress threats by displaying caring, valuing other) and/or on negative politeness (redress threats by displaying respect and deference)
MEDIUM HIGH TO HIGH: off record (redress by giving freedom in how to interpret action; flout maxims by hint, metaphor, irony, vague etc)
HIGH: do not do the FTA
Ways to save positive face of others
Notice things about addressee Exaggerate interest, approval, sympathy Exaggerate facts, tell stories Use in-groups words like we us them Seek agreement/avoid disagreement Assert common ground, joke Be optimistic Give gifts Etc etc
Ways to save negative face of others
Be conventionally indirect Hedge Be pessimistic Deferential Apologize Go on record as incurring debt
4 super strategies when performing face threatening acts (how to get what you want)
1- FTA performed baldly (called bald on record): no attempt to acknowledge hearer’s face, thug to another thug “pay up now” (no face saving)
2- FTA performed orienting to others positive face aka positive politeness strategy: shows you recognize addressee’s desire to be respected, somewhat direct but more face saving than BOR “is it okay if I have a cup of tea?”
3- FTA performed orienting to negative face aka negative politeness strategy: somewhat indirect, recognizes the imposition
4- off record, indirect; avoiding making the FTA and maybe they will offer; the classic passive aggressive; imbed the FTA in some other context (ex: I really love your kitchen counter, did you make it yourself? I’d love one but I’m no handyman)
Steps of using the FTA formula
Step 1: identity the threat (ex: negative face threat)
Step 2: what strategy was used? What is the language?
Step 3: the strategy used by speaker can often be observed by how A responds
***goal of using formula: weighing the degree of face threat in speech acts (make a scale 0=no threat, 10 = high threat. Total 30)
WTFA= power of speaker over hearer generally or in this situation, plus degree of social distance, plus degree of imposition given culture
Narrative
Extremely common, universal, seem to be prevalent throughout our known human history
Humans in all cultures make their identity through narratives
They shape the world and thus ourselves
Narrative underlies our way of being and our way of acting in the world
Narrative and psychology
Application to psych through Freud and humanism
Narrative psych= a model predicated on Bruner’s more folk ways of knowing versus logical argument
Bruner’s 2 ways of knowing
1- social sciences/sciences: classifying, categorizing, formal, mathematical systems of description and explanation
2- folk psych: making sense of the world by connecting events over time through stories
Cognition and narratives: 2 tendencies
1- narrative tendencies: an individual’s predisposition to create and identify narratives
2- immersive tendencies: how much you lose yourself when watching a movie, reading a book
Narrative transport
Narrative transport is how involved we get in a story (same as immersion)
3 factors that affect it:
1- how much a situation resonates with us
2- degree of empathy we feel
3- familiarity with character types
Narrative: cognition and memory
Telling a story affects memory and self
Listener may provide an alternate version, give you things to consider
If you withhold a story you may forget the event, feedback can change your memory
Conversational feedback means elaboration of a memory which strengthens memory of the event
Seeing things in a diff light = point of talk therapy
People construct their memories through stories in interaction with others
Functions of narrative
Narratives are stories that bring order to disorder and connect disconnected experiences
Provide a coherent causal account of an event that has occurred or of events expected to occur
-Identity: to make sense of ourselves and others, how we make sense of our experiences
-Autobiographical reasoning: identifying lessons learned, gaining insights, mark our growth, stories tell about consistent self
Only visions of reality
Helps us cope with things not going our way
Means of integrating strange and unknown into everyday life
-personal stories and gossip (aka phatic talk):makes up more than half of what we talk about
-tools for learning and developing relationships in a social group
-as socializers: guide individuals actions in the world, keep track of what others are doing, understand rules of society
-place where we can practice interacting with others and learn customs=rules of society
Narrative: structure
Narratives=retelling of sequenced events (ex: conversational stories)
Distinguishing features like time frame, but coherence varies (for example, child makes less sense)
Provides shape and plot to a sequence of events
Structure varies by culture and function (depends on narrator, audience, culture, reason for telling)
Labov’s structure and content parts of narratives (5 parts)
1- abstract: what is the story about?
2- orientation: who when what where how (aka time place and events)
3- complicating action: what went wrong, the climax or the highlight. The reportable event. Then what happened?
4- evaluation: editorial, why is this tellable? Moral of the tale
5- coda: return to the present
Content of narratives
Power relations: affect what stories get to be told and how (children and the elderly invite impatience)
We tell stories about our lives, people give feedback, building on the stories, asking questions
Reportable events are unusual and therefore less credible (tellings get less credible as they are handed down)
Scripts and tendencies (narrative content and structure)
Scripts for how to behave are a kind of narrative
Examples: quest, voyage and return, comedy, tragedy, overcoming the monster, love story etc
Traditional stories invite addressee to listen with the storyteller the driver
Developmental trajectory of narratives
Children’s narratives can be disjointed (lack typical structure) and unregulated (take too much time)
Adults fill in the blanks for meaning and can hurry it along
Feedback makes children learn what a good story is and that they have social functions
Children learn more about story structure (who what when where why) as their cognition develops
Late teens/early adulthood: cause and effect, how one event leads to the next, overarching themes
**slowly pay less attention to plot as we age, even 18 year olds pay more attention to plot than 40 yr old
Two themes in people’s stories that correlate with better mental health/well being (Adler)
1- agency (feeling like you’re in control of your life)
2- social relationships (good relationships in your life)
Valued vs non-valued narratives
Americans: value individualist redemption story (aka you took control and made a bad situation info a good ending) = outcome of people hiding stories of trauma with reason that they can’t trust anyone
Canadians: value social egalitarian story/land (aka came to Canada, bought property, new life, social stability; but if you had land taken from you a lot of sorrying takes place) = outcome of people who talk about equality may be seen as whiners bc can’t trust certain groups
Good narrative form vs psychopathological or impoverished
Good narrative: chronological order, coherent, relevant, clear descriptions of problems, awareness of listener, reference to inner feelings, plot, awareness of world around them
Other is impoverished
Master narratives
Culture-wide, unstated ideologies that organize discourse and shape the Big N. Implicit assumptions (ex: sisters ought to be close and similar)
Sister discourse example: sisters are expected to support each other; master narratives appear without prompting and are not conscious thing
Master narratives explain why sisters talk about this closeness and distance
Imposed by culture, family
Tannen’s big N and small N
Big N= themes speakers develop when talking about their sisters for example, in support of which they tell the small n narratives
Small N= telling of a story using the details about how or why particular sisters are similar and different
Narrator feels compelled to explain and justify why their story does not match master narrative
Therapy and narrative
Part of purpose of therapy is to construct new and more satisfying stories
Narrative therapists explore the larger plot of someone’s life story
Traumatized people often have disjointed and unfinished accounts, trauma doesn’t match life narrative, threatens individuals personal connectedness
Some people have to bury the past and build a new self based on new stories
The core self story (therapy and narrative)
Core self stories: childhood, coming of age stories; themes of ones childhood form these core stories like love, hate, neglect, loss etc
Often involve parents, friends, even events remembered only by us
Core story= primary events that we perceive made us who we are
Can be centred around loss of identity (things that took away our ability to be who we think we can be)
Therapists job= propose alternatives to core narratives, shift patients perspectives
Narratives in therapy: the relationship story
Clients implicate others in their narratives; often ex partners or current partners
Implicate blame through retelling of incidences
Talk about reoccurring negative problems of other
Therapist has to maintain control and bring the narrative to where the couple claims they want to be
Two stages of how the therapist moves from the clients version of the problem or of events to the therapists version
1- the therapist defines the problem quickly (what the problem really is)
2- reformulates the problem as initially told and throughout the narrative
The art of therapy talk (8 points)
1- therapist describe clients past or present state of affairs, talk about what might happen in the future
2- reformulate the problem; usually tentative or reflect uncertainty (maybe blank is what’s happening…)
3- downgrade the suggestion “I could be wrong but…” This opens the doors to possibilities
4- present their expert view which does not negate the clients view “I agree on that but my own take on that is…”
5- re voicing but often as a better version
6- relabelling “lying is part of your old behaviour but you have been striving to be very honest…”
7- align self with client (agree with them) but then move beneath the surface level of the clients talk “I think that what’s going on is…”
8- agree and confirm but draw a different conclusion than did the client
House and kasper’s politeness analysis
Classified complaints and requests on 8 levels of directedness (greater indirectedness = greater politeness)
Depends on modality markers (2 kinds: downgraders and upgraders)
Supportive moves
Determined no clear relationship between use of directness levels and modality markers)
Penman’s critique of brown-levinson theory
1- neglects issues of face aggravation
2- underplays self directed as compared to other directed strategies
3- lacks a conceptual structure linking together the linguistic meanings used to realize the higher order strategies
Penman’s analysis of politeness
Used concepts of respect and contempt Mode of expression of strategies (direct and indirect) Four types of face work effects: 1- aggravation/depreciation 2- threat 3- protection 4- mitigation/enhancement 16 super strategies Strategies can have dual directions and involve both positive and negative face
