Formulating hypothetical talk: An action-driven approach to communicating stance in business meetings.

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60076658%3A12210%2F23%3A43907507" target="_blank" >RIV/60076658:12210/23:43907507 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.ejournals.eu/Studia-Linguistica/2023/Issue-1/art/23070/" target="_blank" >https://www.ejournals.eu/Studia-Linguistica/2023/Issue-1/art/23070/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.4467/20834624SL.23.001.17261" target="_blank" >10.4467/20834624SL.23.001.17261</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Formulating hypothetical talk: An action-driven approach to communicating stance in business meetings.

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The article focuses on the deployment of hypothetical talk in the CANBEC (Cambridge and Nottingham Business English Corpus) and CCI (Chamber of Commerce and Industry) corpora of business meetings and examines its use as a discursive tool for communicating stance in encounters where participants represent (potentially) incompatible positions. Through the use of hypothetical talk, interactants signal the potential for agreement and resolution by testing the other participants’ position and their preparedness to shift their view. It is argued that although talk introduced to the meeting may be hypothetical, the stance communicated is real. The analysis provides insights into actions applied to resolve impasse or conflict situations, particularly through the rhetorical move of formulating. Formulating aims to resolve or summarize talk at a particular instance in time. The act of formulating requires an evaluative step on the part of the participants in order to consider their contributions or their opposition to the formulation. It is, therefore, of interest to examine how talk that is known to be hypothetical – hence essentially unreal, speculative, potentially untrue or even counterfactual – can be allowed to feature in meetings discourse and to influence a meeting´s outcome. Two theoretical models were applied to understand this – Du Bois’s (2007) “stance triangle” and Hunston’s (1989, 1994, 2011) three functions of evaluation. These offered a new perspective on the role of hypothetical talk in business meetings, where, as the results demonstrate, hypothetical talk is used to signal stance, test that of the other participants, and advance the speakers’ goals. By integrating the two models and applying them in order to understand how hypothetical talk is formulated in business meetings, it was possible to conceptualize the process through which meeting participants evaluate and act upon talk, by making “real life decisions” upon information which has initially been introduced to the meeting as hypothetical.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Formulating hypothetical talk: An action-driven approach to communicating stance in business meetings.

Popis výsledku anglicky

The article focuses on the deployment of hypothetical talk in the CANBEC (Cambridge and Nottingham Business English Corpus) and CCI (Chamber of Commerce and Industry) corpora of business meetings and examines its use as a discursive tool for communicating stance in encounters where participants represent (potentially) incompatible positions. Through the use of hypothetical talk, interactants signal the potential for agreement and resolution by testing the other participants’ position and their preparedness to shift their view. It is argued that although talk introduced to the meeting may be hypothetical, the stance communicated is real. The analysis provides insights into actions applied to resolve impasse or conflict situations, particularly through the rhetorical move of formulating. Formulating aims to resolve or summarize talk at a particular instance in time. The act of formulating requires an evaluative step on the part of the participants in order to consider their contributions or their opposition to the formulation. It is, therefore, of interest to examine how talk that is known to be hypothetical – hence essentially unreal, speculative, potentially untrue or even counterfactual – can be allowed to feature in meetings discourse and to influence a meeting´s outcome. Two theoretical models were applied to understand this – Du Bois’s (2007) “stance triangle” and Hunston’s (1989, 1994, 2011) three functions of evaluation. These offered a new perspective on the role of hypothetical talk in business meetings, where, as the results demonstrate, hypothetical talk is used to signal stance, test that of the other participants, and advance the speakers’ goals. By integrating the two models and applying them in order to understand how hypothetical talk is formulated in business meetings, it was possible to conceptualize the process through which meeting participants evaluate and act upon talk, by making “real life decisions” upon information which has initially been introduced to the meeting as hypothetical.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60203 - Linguistics

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2023

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Studia Linguistica Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis

ISSN

1897-1059

e-ISSN

2083-4624

Svazek periodika

140

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

PL - Polská republika

Počet stran výsledku

25

Strana od-do

1-25

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85151944021