vpn567706038.softether.net/kingdoms-curses.php This, however, is not surprising. Rather, they know or don't know particular things [hence the Object]. Generally the precise specification of what they know, if not present in the sentence itself, is already there in the immediate prior discourse'' p. This, again, is not surprising.
Other examples can follow. In sum, the author seems to reinvent the wheel, spending 43 pages on claiming that linguistic meaning is contextually bound, an idea that could have been ground-braking several decades ago but not in Du Bois emphasizes that stance should be analyzed as a social action in its dialogical and contextual embededdness.
At the same time, however, he himself does not base his claims inductively on data analysis, but uses data extracts rather as illustrations for his theorizing. Part 3. Intersubjectivity of stance, skillfully showed in a thorough data analysis and interpretation in, e. Moreover, the attempts at data analysis in this chapter ''The stance triangle'', in contrast to other chapters, are unconvincing. Let us take, for example, extract 27 on page 1 JAN; Take it downstairs.
However, the author omitted as many as 28 lines of transcript which precede the utterance ''I totally agree''. He claims that the utterance in lines refers to line 1, but we cannot see if this is so just on the basis of the fragmented extract.
Similarly unconvincing is, e. I would love to go:. Du Bois claims that ''Yeah. However, what if the ''Yeah. The author further claims that the rising intonation on the other ''Yeah? On response tokens see e.
Gardner The loose interconnectedness between Du Bois' claims and the data makes some claims rather speculations. If Mary had responded to Alice's utterance with lexically identical utterance [ It is equally unclear what is the basis for his statements about what would happen if something that did not happen happened. His own linguistic knowledge and experience seems to have entered the interpretation of the data extract, but it was not reflected upon and not exposed to the reader.
Needless to say, interaction participants use their own knowledge and experience in making sense of the ongoing interaction, not the knowledge and experience of a post-hoc analyst. However, the other chapters of the volume are of high analytical and theoretical quality, and indeed contribute to a deeper understanding of certain phenomena.
I would recommend the last four chapters to those who are interested in the conversation-analytic data-driven approach; the chapter by Johnstone to those interested in the consequences of stancetaking for sociolinguistic research on the discursive construction of identity; the chapter by Englebretson to those interested in stance-in-grammar-in-use; and the chapter by Hunston to those interested in the analytical possibilities not provided by linguistic corpora.
The fact that most of the space was devoted here to just three of the ten chapters allowed the reviewer to evaluate in more detail stances taken there towards the use of discourse data in theory building.
Other readers may disagree with the reviewer's subjective stance, if they consider it worth their own stance at all. However, such is the nature of stancetaking which the book under review so clearly and nicely demonstrates. Oxford: Blackwell. Gardner, R. Hutchby, I. Cambridge: Polity Press. Jayyusi, L. Boston et al.
If you have previously obtained access with your personal account, Please log in. If you previously purchased this article, Log in to Readcube.
This volume contributes to the burgeoning field of research on stance by offering a variety of studies based in natural discourse. These collected papers explore. Stancetaking in Discourse. Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction. Edited by. Robert Englebretson. Rice University. The stance triangle. John W. Du Bois. University.
Log out of Readcube. Click on an option below to access. Log out of ReadCube. Volume 14 , Issue 3. The full text of this article hosted at iucr. If you do not receive an email within 10 minutes, your email address may not be registered, and you may need to create a new Wiley Online Library account. If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username. Tools Request permission Export citation Add to favorites Track citation. Share Give access Share full text access. Share full text access.
Please review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article. Get access to the full version of this article. View access options below. You previously purchased this article through ReadCube. Institutional Login. Log in to Wiley Online Library. Purchase Instant Access. View Preview.