Skip to main content

Framing and Footing: Negotiation of Roles and Status

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 329 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides analyses of the interactive organization of Goffman’s participation frameworks. The chapter attempts to explain the role of participation frameworks, which shop-owners and customers jointly display to each other’s performance. This signals their definition of the situation where the participants interact and form a community of practice in lieu of exclusively adhering to the merchant and customer relationship. This line of inquiry, which investigates how subtle changes in social actors’ position, role or stance may reshape or affect the direction of the ongoing talk, is a useful approach to gaining a finer understanding of interaction in the shop under scrutiny.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For the key elements of Goffman’s Participation Framework and footing, see Chap. 2.

References

  • Agha, A. (2007). Language and social relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al Zidjaly, N. (2009). Agency as an interactive achievement. Language in Society, 38(2), 177–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateson, G. (1955/1972). A theory of play and fantasy: In steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, A. L. (1995). Beyond translation: Essays towards a modern philology. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A critical introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coupland, J., Coupland, N., & Robinson, J. D. (1992). “How are You?”: Negotiating phatic communion. Language in Society, 21(2), 207–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coupland, N., & Ylänne-McEwen, V. (2000). Talk about the weather: Small talk, leisure talk and the travel industry. In J. Coupland (Ed.), Small talk (pp. 163–182). London: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dovchin, S., Pennycook, A., & Sultana, S. (2017). Popular culture, voice and linguistic diversity: Young adults on- and offline. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 3–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Félix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2015). The language of service encounters: A pragmatic-discursive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish. New York: Pantheon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organisation of experience. New York: Harper and Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C. (2007). Interactive footing. In E. Holt & R. Clift (Eds.), Reporting talk: Reported speech in interaction (pp. 16–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1987). Concurrent operations on talk: Notes on the interactive organization of assessment. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics, 1(1), 1–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, C., & Goodwin, M. H. (1992). Context, activity and participation. In P. Auer & A. D. Luzio (Eds.), The contextualization of language (pp. 77–99). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M. H. (1980). Processes of mutual monitoring implicated in the production of description sequences. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3–4), 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M. H. (1990). Byplay: Participant structure and framing of collaborative collusion. Réseaux, 2, 155–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M. H. (1996). Shifting frame. In D. I. Slobin, J. Gerhardt, A. Kyratzis, & J. Guo (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language: Essays in honor of Susan Ervin-Tripp (pp. 71–82). Norwood, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, C. (2003). Aligning as a team: Forms of conjoined participation in (stepfamily) interactions. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(4), 395–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, C. (2009). Making meanings, creating family: Intertextuality and framing in family interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, C. (2015). Framing and positioning. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (2nd ed.). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gumperz, J. (1992). Interviewing in intercultural situations. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 302–327). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holquist, M. (1990). Dialogism: Bakhtin and his world. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Izadi, D. (2017). Semiotic resources and mediational tools in Merrylands, Sydney, Australia: The case of Persian and Afghan shops. Social Semiotics, 27(4), 495–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, A., Thurlow, C., Lawson, S., & Ylänne-McEwen, V. (2003a). The uses and representations of local languages in tourist destinations: A view from British TV holiday programmes. Language Awareness, 12(1), 5–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, A., Ylänne-McEwen, V., Thurlow, C., & Lawson, S. (2003b). Social roles and the negotiation of status in host–tourist interaction: A view from British television holiday programmes. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7(2), 135–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. (2011). C me Sk8: Discourse, technology and bodies without organs. In C. Thrulow & K. Mroczek (Eds.), Digital discourse: Language in the new media (pp. 321–339). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. H. (2005). Sites of engagement as sites of attention: Time, space and culture in electronic discourse. In N. Norris & R. Jones (Eds.), Discourse in action: Introducing mediated discourse analysis (pp. 141–154). New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. H. (2009). Dancing, skating and sex: Action and text in the digital age. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(3), 283–302.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, R. H. (2016). Spoken discourse. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, S. (2008). The balancing act: Framing gendered parental identities at dinnertime. Language in Society, 37(4), 539–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, G. H. (1993). Collectivities in action: Establishing the relevance of conjoined participation in conversation. Text, 13(2), 213–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. (1988). Putting linguistics on a proper footing: Explorations in Goffman’s participation framework. In P. Drew & A. Wootton (Eds.), Goffman: Exploring the interaction order (pp. 161–227). Oxford: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinowski, B. (1923/1972). Phatic communion. In J. Laver & S. Hutcheson (Eds.), Communication in face-to-face interaction (pp. 146–152). Harmondsworth, Middlesex, UK: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mortensen, K., & Hazel, S. (2014). Moving into an interaction—Embodied practices for initiating interactions at a help desk counter. Journal of Pragmatics, 62, 46–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norris, S. (2002). The implication of visual research for discourse analysis. Visual Communication, 1(1), 97–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peräkylä, A., & Vehvilƒinen, S. (2003). Conversation analysis and the professional stocks of interactional knowledge. Discourse & Society, 14(6), 727–750.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarangi, S. (2010). Reconfiguring self/identity/status/role: The case of professional role performance in healthcare encounters. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 7(1), 75–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schiffrin, D. (1993). “Speaking for another” in sociolinguistic interviews: Alignments, identities, and frames. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Framing in discourse (pp. 231–263). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scollon, R. (2008). Discourse itineraries: Nine processes of resemiotization. In V. Bhatia, J. Flowerdew, & R. Jones (Eds.), Advances in discourse studies (pp. 233–244). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. (2004). Nexus analysis: Discourse and the emerging internet. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2007). Nexus analysis: Refocusing ethnography on action. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(5), 608–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. (2004). Talking the dog: Framing pets as interactional resources in family discourse. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(4), 399–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. (2006). Intertextuality in interaction: Reframing family arguments in public and private. Text & Talk, 26(4–5), 597–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. (2007). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D., & Wallet, C. (1993). Interactive frames and knowledge schemas in interaction: Examples from a medical examination/interview. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Framing in discourse (pp. 57–76). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tracy, K., & Coupland, N. (1990). Multiple goals in discourse: An overview of issues. In K. Tracy & N. Coupland (Eds.), Multiple goals in discourse (pp. 1–14). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ylänne-Mcewen, V. (1997). Relational processes within a transactional setting: An investigation of travel agency discourse. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Wales, Cardiff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ylänne-McEwen, V. (2004). Shifting alignment and negotiating sociality in travel agency discourse. Discourse Studies, 6(4), 517–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Izadi, D. (2020). Framing and Footing: Negotiation of Roles and Status. In: The Spatial and Temporal Dimensions of Interactions. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19584-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19584-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-19583-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-19584-7

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics