Polish-Norwegian interethnic conversation analysis

The present contribution deals with the topic of cultural preconditions of talk and can therefore be placed within the broad field of conversation analysis. The data material collected for the study consists of dyadic conversations between native and Polish (hence non-native) speakers of Norwegian. This setting allows the author to compare the language use of both interlocutors and to draw conclusions as to what can be identified as speaking practices typical for Norwegian discourse. Against the background of existing sociological and anthropological research, the study describes the Norwegian ethnic communication pattern and analyses the consequences of its existence for speakers of Norwegian as a second language.


Paulina Horbowicz (born 1981) received her Ph.D. degree in Norwegian linguistics in 2009, and is currently employed as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Scandinavian Studies at Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland.

Studia Nordica 6

Contents

Foreword and acknowledgements 11

1. Introduction 13
   1.1. The purpose of the study 13
   1.2. Methodology 15
      1.2.1. Studying culture in interaction 15
      1.2.2. Conversation analysis 18
      1.2.3. Casual conversation. 19
      1.2.4. Casual conversation and non­native speakers 22
      1.2.5. Focus of the study 24
      1.2.6. Data type 25
      1.2.7. Ethical considerations 25
   1.3. Summary 26


2. Cultural frames 29
   2.1. The notion of frame 29
      2.1.1. Origins and applications 29
      2.1.2. Frames vs. other terms 31
      2.1.3. Frames vs. practices 35
   2.2. The frame of conversing 36
      2.2.1. The rules of conversing – universal or culture- specific 36
      2.2.2. Interethnic vs. intercultural communication 39
      2.2.3. Criticism of studying intercultural encounters 43
   2.3. The frame of “being Norwegian” 45
      2.3.1. Culture and frames 45
      2.3.2. Culture and communication 47
      2.3.3. Comparing cultures. Cultural values surveys 49
      2.3.4. Cultural values in oral communication 54
      2.3.5. Norwegian culture 58
      2.3.6. Norway as a community of practice 64
      2.3.7. Norwegian or Nordic as a whole 67
   2.4. Conclusions. Being Norwegian in oral communication 68


3. Communicative practices 71
   3.1. Practices 71
      3.1.1. The term 71
      3.1.2. Practices in relational work 74
   3.2. Levels of manifestation. Ethnic communication pattern 77
   3.3. Comparative view on speaking practices in Norwegian, Swedish and Polish 79
      3.3.1. Practices on the microlevel 79
      3.3.2. Norwegian politeness 82
      3.3.3. The outsiders’ voice 86
      3.3.4. The practices incorporated into Norwegian ECP 89
   3.4. Conclusions. Frames and practices of Norwegian ECP 91


4. Data collection 95
   4.1. The design of the study 95
   4.2. The participants 96
   4.3. The collected data 103
      4.3.1. Naturalness of the spoken data 103
      4.3.2. Semi­elicited data 106
      4.3.3. Features of semi­elicited data 107
   4.4. Negotiation of social roles 121
   4.5. Conclusions 124


5. Asymmetry in interethnic talk 125
   5.1. NSs’ communicative practices 127
      5.1.1. Paying compliments 128
      5.1.2. Defining the world 138
      5.1.3. Other­repair 154
   5.2. NNSs’ communicative practices 156
      5.2.1. Self­repair 156
      5.2.2. Word search 157
      5.2.3. Comments on language use 157
   5.3. Discussion and conclusions 161


6. Accompanying the interlocutor 165
   6.1. Paraphrasing 168
      6.1.1. Question paraphrases 169
      6.1.2. Paraphrasing the interlocutors’ statements 179
   6.2. Pro­repeats 211
      6.2.1. Pro­repeats as continuers 211
      6.2.2. Pro­repeats as up­or downgrades 213
      6.2.3. Conclusions 216
   6.3. Echo­turns 216
      6.3.1. Echo­turns as corrections 217
      6.3.2. Echo­turns as alignment display 222
      6.3.3. Echo­turns as requests for further information 223
      6.3.4. Echo­turns as retardations 226
      6.3.5. Conclusions 228
   6.4. Discussion and conclusions 229


7. Projecting the forthcoming turn 233
   7.1. The or­inquiry 235
      7.1.1. Clarifying questions 237
      7.1.2. Inquiries about personal matters 240
      7.1.3. Inquiries about the interlocutor’s opinion 247
      7.1.4. Inquiries about the interlocutor’s knowledge 249
      7.1.5. Inquiries about B­events 251
      7.1.6. Suggestions 254
      7.1.7. Conclusions 257
   7.2. Yes/no­answers to wh­questions 258
      7.2.1. Ja projecting a multi­turn answer 259
      7.2.2. Ja signalling delayed response 264
      7.2.3. Nei renouncing the answer 266
      7.2.4. Nei dismissing the question’s presupposition 269
      7.2.5. Nei dismissing the prior statement’s presupposition 273
      7.2.6. Jo as an upgrader 278
      7.2.7. Conclusions 281
   7.3. Indirect questions 282
      7.3.1. Yes/no­questions replacing wh­questions 282
      7.3.2. Direct questions as problematic talk 285
      7.3.3. Explicit marking of coherence 288
      7.3.4. Conclusions 294
   7.4. Discussion and conclusions 295


8. Marking disagreement 301
   8.1. Projecting disagreement 304
      8.1.1. Nja as a disagreement token 305
      8.1.2. Week agreement as disagreement 309
      8.1.3. Conclusions 313
   8.2. Mitigated expression of disagreement 313
   8.3. Questioning as a signal of disagreement 317
   8.4. Constructing disagreement between strangers 325
   8.5. Open expression of opposition – the use of nei 331
   8.6. Honeymoon – a troublesome topic 340
   8.7. Discussion and conclusions 346


9. Conclusions and implementation 349
   9.1. Results of the study 349
      9.1.1. Interethnic conversation as semi­elicited data 350
      9.1.2. Asymmetries in interethnic conversations 350
      9.1.3. Norwegian ethnic communication pattern 352
      9.1.4. Non­native speakers’ realisation of the Norwegian ECP 358
   9.2. Didactic implementation 361
   9.3. Further studies 364 Bibliography 367 Appendices 381


ISSN 0806-1564, ISBN 978-82-7099-573-8, 386 pp., paperback Format: 14,5x20,5 cm, weight 0,6 kg, year of publication: 2010. Language: English