Intellectual discussion in the academy as situated discourse
- 1 December 1993
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Communication Monographs
- Vol. 60 (4) , 300-320
- https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759309376315
Abstract
Intellectual discussion is a form of talk hailed as important but not much studied. After suggesting why it should be given scholarly attention, the paper reports on interviews conducted with graduate students and faculty who attended a weekly colloquium in an academic department. Drawing upon the interviews the first part of the paper provides an in‐depth examination of the multiple, often conflicting concerns, which arose as this academic group “did” intellectual discussion. In the second part of the paper the interview data are extended to offer a model of how intellectual discussants generally make attributions about each other. In the third section, results from the case study are used to critique context‐general communicative theories (attribution, politeness, multiple goals). Finally, the conclusions draw out implications for future study of intellectual discussion as well as academic institutional practices.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Facework Solidarity, Approbation, and TactHuman Communication Research, 1991
- Perspectives on politenessJournal of Pragmatics, 1990
- Multiple Goals in Discourse: An EpilogueJournal of Language and Social Psychology, 1990
- Blame–account sequences in therapy: The negotiation of relational meaningsSemiotica, 1990
- Cats, dogs, and sweets in the clinical negotiation of reality: On politeness and coherence in pediatric discourseLanguage in Society, 1989
- Politeness theory and Shakespeare's four major tragediesLanguage in Society, 1989
- Primary and secondary goals in the production of interpersonal influence messagesCommunication Monographs, 1989
- Women, Fire, and Dangerous ThingsPublished by University of Chicago Press ,1987
- THE DISCOURSE OF REQUESTS.Human Communication Research, 1986
- TOPOIand rhetorical competenceQuarterly Journal of Speech, 1979