Plan du site I Travaux récents (2010-2014) I Bibliographie I Problématiques et domaines I Liens

tb10inS10.html tb10inS10.html

Trognon, A., Batt, M. (2010). Interlocutory Logic: A Unifierd Framework for Studying Conversational Interaction. In J. Streeck (Ed.), New Adventures in Language and Interaction (pp. 9-46).. New Adventures in Language and Interaction (pp. 9-46).



Abstract


After exhibiting the historical and epistemic context of the discovery of the interaction order, the authors develop a global theory of the cognitive-affective-social organization of talk-in-interaction: «Interlocutory Logic». On the basis of insights provided by the pragmatics of natural languages and the theory and methods of contemporary logic, this theory deals with elementary illocutionary acts and higher-order units (turns, exchanges) of conversation with the help of methods of natural deduction and dialogical logic. The authors present a model constructed within the empirical domain of functional dialogues during «hand-overs» between work-shifts in a factory to demonstrate the descriptive and explicative values of "Interlocutory Logic»

Plan

Introduction

1. Success and failures of the «interactionist paradigm»

1.1. Origins of the «interactionist paradigm»

1.2. Fundamental theses of the interactionist paradigm

1.3. Properties of the «interaction order»

a) Dual opening of the «interaction order»

b) Relative autonomy of the «interaction order»

c) Human beings communication and the «interaction order»

1.4. Advocacy for extending the interactionist paradigm to individual cognition

a) Epistemological consequence of the interactionist revolution

b) And what about psychology?

2. Towards a unified framework for studying talk-in-interaction

2.1. What theoretical requirements shoud the desired theoretical apparatus satisfy?

2.2. Interlocutory logic: A system that satisfies the above requirements

2.3. Conducting an analysis in interlocutory logic

2.4. An example: The interlocutory logic of a shift-changeover dialogue

a) The declared difference of opinion

- Discursive architecture of the difference of opinion

- Dialogical format of the debate

- Reciproqual insemination of each partner's propositions

b) Solving the problem and building intersubjective knowledge

- Discursive architecture

- Dialogical format of the collaboration

- Shared thoughts resulting from idea confrontation

c) The cognitive layers of an interlocution

Conclusion

«The «interaction order» did not invade the «institution order» nor the «language order". Granted, the language institution is partly immersed in the interaction order (see Figure 9), so the formal structures of language are available to interactions, which select the ones that suit the ever-changing state of the interaction.»(pp. 39).«Lewis wrote in 1972: «I distinguish two topics: first, the description of possible languages or grammars as abstract semantic systems whereby symbols are associated with aspects of the world; and second, the description of the psychological and sociological facts whereby a particular one of these abstract semantic systems is the one used by a person or population. Only confusion comes of mixing these two topics» (Lewis, 1972: 170). In the end, then, after thirty years of existence, the interactionist paradigm will have recognized this distinction, on inventing an intermediate area between the two terms of the dichotomy. And it is what Bakhtin want in 1929.»(pp. 40).


Click here for index