Preference Organization of Initiating Actions: The Case of Disaffiliative Account Solicitations

• In Event: Analyzing Action(s): Social Relationships, Epistemics, and 13 Other Matters

Abstract

This paper extends limited prior research on the preference organization of initiating (vs. responding) actions (Schegloff, 2007). Across two languages (English and Russian), we examine a subset of one type of initiating action: Directly soliciting an account for human behavior accomplished via why-type interrogatives (e.g., “Why did you do that?” and “How come you did that?”). Prior research has demonstrated that these types of account solicitations convey a challenging stance toward the accountable event and the agent(s) responsible for its production (Bolden & Robinson, 2008). Account solicitations can be either disaffiliative or affiliative towards the addressee, who may or may not be the responsible party (ibid.). This paper focuses on a subset of account solicitations – those that are disaffiliative towards the addressee – and argues that such account solicitations are dispreferred actions. Drawing on a large collection (over 400 instances) of account solicitations in everyday conversations, we present evidence that disaffiliative account solicitations are systematically delayed in a variety of ways. We show that, in several sequential contexts (e.g., after first-positioned informings and second-positioned dispreferred responses), disaffiliative account solicitations tend to be deployed after opportunity spaces in which accounts are relevantly not offered. This analysis exposes a range of indirect practices for making accounts relevant. We further support our argument by demonstrating that, when account solicitations affiliate with addressees (e.g., when they target addressees’ self-deprecations), they are not delayed.

Authors

• Jeffrey Robinson, Rutgers University

• Galina Bolden, Rutgers University