Navigating contextual constraints in discourse
Design explications in institutional talk
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12657155 |
|---|---|
| Authors | MLC Herijgers (Utrecht University, corresponding author), HLW Pander Maat (Utrecht University) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 272-290 |
| Publication date | 2017-04-24 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Discourse Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1461-4456 • E-ISSN: 1461-7080 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461445617701811 |
| PMID | 28781580 |
| OpenAlex | W2610053621 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 10 |
Although institutional discourse is subject to a vast ensemble of constraints, its design is not fixed beforehand. On the contrary, optimizing the satisfaction of these constraints requires considerable discourse design skills from institutional agents. In this article, we analyze how Dutch banks' mortgage advisors navigate their way through the consultations context. We focus on what we call discourse design explications, that is, stretches of talk in which participants refer to conflicting constraints in the discourse context, at the same time proposing particular discourse designs for dealing with these conflicts. We start by discussing three forms of design explication. Then we will examine the various resolutions they propose for constraint conflicts and show how advisors seek customer consent or cooperation for the proposed designs. Thus our analysis reveals how institutional agents, while providing services, work on demonstrating how the design of these services is optimized and tailored to customers
Constraint (computer-aided design · Context (archaeology · Discourse analysis · Explication · Focus (optics · Linguistics · Sociology · Subject (documents · Work (physics · World Wide Web · Business Process Modeling and Analysis · Computer Science · Information Systems Theories and Implementation · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation
| Citations per year | 0.4 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2021 - 2025 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |