Abstract
This chapter examines an integral part of Korean politeness—age. Prior research has focused on investigating age as a key determining factor that influences speakers’ choice of speech styles, address terms, and word choices. On the other hand, this study explores what speakers do with age and how age is relevant to them at the moment of their interaction. The focus of the study is on media talk as it reveals how age is represented, negotiated, and utilized by social members in public discourse. The study identifies a categorial practice related to age by utilizing (Stokoe, Discourse Studies 14:277–303, 2012)) five guiding principles for membership categorization analysis (MCA). A collection of data segments from various talk show interviews shows that the speakers routinely evoke age while displaying an epistemic stance, such as in claiming or disclaiming their epistemic rights, to the matter being discussed. Moreover, speakers classify themselves and others into age categories (Stokoe, Discourse Studies 14:277–303, 2012; e.g., the old, the young, acessi) based on their epistemic status or rights. These categories are determined not by the speakers’ chronological age, which is external to the interaction, but are rather spontaneously formulated in the local context of the interaction, which are subject to challenge, resistance, and negotiation by speakers. The study reveals how speakers use age as an interactional tool to negotiate their epistemic stance and category membership.
Chapter PDF
References
Chafe, W. L., & Nichols, J. (Eds.) (1986). Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Ablex.
Cho, Y-m. Y., & Jo, J. (2022). Linguistic politeness in Korean: Speech levels and terms of address. In C. Shei & S. Li (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of Asian linguistics (pp. 339–355). Routledge.
Drew, P. (1992). Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examination: the case of a trial for rape. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), In Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings (pp. 470–520). Cambridge University Press.
Hutchby, I. (2002). Resisting the incitement to talk in child counselling: Aspects of the utterance “I don’t know.” Discourse Studies, 4(2), 147–168.
Evans, B., & Fitzgerald, R. (2017). The categorial and sequential work of ‘embodied mapping’ in basketball coaching. Journal of Pragmatics, 118, 81–98.
Fitzgerald, R., Housley, W., & Butler, C. (2009). Omnirelevance and interactional context. Australian Journal of Communication, 36(3), 45–64 198
Fitzgerald, R., & Housley, W. (Eds.) (2015). Advances in membership categorization analysis. Sage.
Hester, S., & Eglin, P. (1997). Membership categorization analysis: An introduction. In S. Hester & P. Eglin (Eds.), Culture in action: Studies in membership categorization analysis (pp. 1–23). International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.
Housley, W., & Fitzgerald, R. (2002). The reconsidered model of membership categorization analysis. Qualitative Research, 2(1), 59–83.
Heritage, J. (2012a). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(1), 1–29.
Heritage, J. (2012b). The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 45(1), 30–52.
Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 68, 15–38.
Jefferson, G. (2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). John Benjamins.
Jolanki, O. H. (2009). Agency in talk about old age and health. Journal of Aging Studies, 23(4), 215–226.
Kärkkäinen, E. (2003). Epistemic stance in English conversation: A description of its interactional functions, with a focus on I think. John Benjamins.
Kim, M. S. (2021). Negatively valenced questions with the Korean subject particle ka: Interactional practices for managing discrepancies in knowledge, understanding, or expectations. Journal of Pragmatics, 176, 164–185.
Kjær, M., & Krummheuer, A. L. (2018). Doing assisting - Bodily positioning in health care interaction. 5th International Conference on Conversation Analysis, Loughborough, United Kingdom. http://www.icca2018.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Book-of-abstracts-editing-v13.pdf
Mondada, L. (2018). Multiple temporalities of language and body in interaction: Challenges for transcribing multimodality. Research on Language & Social Interaction, 51(1), 85–106.
Raymond, G., & Heritage, J. (2006). The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society, 35(5), 677–705.
Raymond, C. W. (2016a). Reconceptualizing identity and context in the deployment of forms of address. In S. Rivera-Mills & M. I. Moyna (Eds.), Forms of Address in the Spanish of the Americas (pp. 263–286). John Benjamins.
Raymond, C. W. (2016b). Linguistic reference in the negotiation of identity and action: Revisiting the T/V Distinction. Language, 636–670.
Sacks, H. (1972a). An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology. In D. Sudnow (Ed.), Studies in social interaction (pp. 31–74). Free Press.
Sacks, H. (1972b). On the analyzability of stories by children. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication (pp. 325–345). Rinehart & Winston.
Sacks, H. (1979). Hotrodder: A revolutionary category. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 7–14). Irvington.
Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on conversation: Volumes I & II, (G. Jefferson, Ed., introduction by E. A. Schegloff). Blackwell. 199
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007a). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007b). A tutorial on membership categorization. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 462–482.
Sohn, H.-M. (1999). The Korean language. Cambridge University Press.
Stokoe, E. (2012). Moving forward with membership categorization analysis: Methods for systematic analysis. Discourse Studies, 14(3), 277–303.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kim, M.S., Jo, J. (2024). Negotiating Age, Epistemic Stance, and Category Memberships in Korean Talk Shows. In: Kim, M.S. (eds) Exploring Korean Politeness Across Online and Offline Interactions. Advances in (Im)politeness Studies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50698-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50698-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-50697-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-50698-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)