Discursive Disputes Research Articles

Intention and diverging interpretings of implicature in the “uncovered meat” sermon

The standard model of communication in linguistic pragmatics is founded on the assumption that “successful” communication involves the addressee making inferences about the intentions of the speaker. Miscommunication of implicatures thus presumably arises when the addressee does not correctly infer the speaker's intention. In this paper, however, it is argued that this view of the (mis)communication of implicatures does not adequately account for the manner in which intentions may become the subject of discursive dispute in interaction thereby giving rise to diverging interpretings of implicatures. Drawing from an analysis of the “uncovered meat” comments made by Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali and the ensuing controversy over what was implied by them, it is argued that to label such an incident as simply a misunderstanding of the speaker's intentions is misleading. Instead, it is suggested that the way in which Hilali's comments were shifted from a specific audience in the Muslim community to wider Australian society by the media engendered discursive dispute over Hilali's intentions, and thus gave rise to the co-constitution of diverging interpretings of what was implied by Hilali. Building a model of the communication of implicatures must therefore move beyond the received view that it involves “correctly” inferring the intentions of speakers to encompass a broader view where both converging and diverging interpretings of implicatures emerge through their conjoint co-constitution in interaction.

Emic conceptualisations of (im)politeness and face in Japanese: Implications for the discursive negotiation of second language learner identities

Learners of languages often face various dilemmas in relation to their identities in that language. In this paper, it is argued that if learners of Japanese are to learn how to successfully manage these various dilemmas, they need to acquire a more emically-grounding understanding of the various dimensions that can influence or be influenced by their second language identities. Two phenomena that have received only mention in passing in relation to the discursive negotiation of identities thus far are ‘(im)politeness’ and ‘face’. An emic analysis reveals the pivotal role occupied by place in the interactional achievement of ‘(im)politeness’ and ‘face’ in Japanese. It is thus proposed that the discursive accomplishment of identities is reflexively indexed through ‘place’ to the interactional achievement of ‘(im)politeness’ and ‘face’. This approach is forwarded in an attempt to offer greater clarity in explicating the manner in which discursive dispute over the respective ‘places’ of interactants can impact upon the negotiation of identities in intercultural conversation. In this way, learners of Japanese may become more empowered in their attempts to manage their second language identities.

TO VEIL OR NOT TO VEIL?

The increasingly pervasive practice of veiling among Muslim women has stimulated a great deal of scholarly investigation and debate. This study brings empirical evidence to bear on current debates about the meaning of the veil in Islam. This article first examines the conflicting meanings of the veil among Muslim religious elites and Islamic feminists. Although the dominant gender discourse among Muslim elites strongly favors this cultural practice, an antiveiling discourse promulgated by Islamic feminists has gained ground within recent years. This study then examines how these discursive disputes affect gender identity negotiation among veiled and unveiled Muslim women living in Austin, Texas. Interviews with these women highlight how their gender identities reproduce and reformulate existing Muslim gender discourses. Special attention is paid to the subjective disparities and points of congruence between both groups of respondents. This study concludes by suggesting avenues for future research on the intersection of gender, religion, and cultural difference.

Habermas fightin' waste. Problems of alternative dispute resolution in the risk society

Since the early 1990s, German environmental policies have been characterized by a broad range of alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as, for instance, ‘mediation’ and ‘risk dialogue’. Based on the ethics of discourse, developed by German social theorist Habermas, they are designed to solve problems in risk management caused by citizen protest. However, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) failed rather often in environmental issues. Based on a ‘risk society’ perspective, this paper presents a systematic argument for the empirical problems of discursive dispute regulation. End-of-pipe practical discourse is not suitable for dealing with questioned expert knowledge claims, problems of unawareness and manufactured uncertainties, central to regulation conflicts in risk society. This calls for an earlier public engagement via discourse, focusing on scientific and technological research and development agendas, as well as replacing traditional risk management with management of uncertainties and unawareness. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Habermas fightin’ waste. Problems of alternative dispute resolution in the risk society

Since the early 1990s, German environmental policies have been characterized by a broad range of alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as, for instance, ‘mediation’ and ‘risk dialogue’. Based on the ethics of discourse, developed by German social theorist Habermas, they are designed to solve problems in risk management caused by citizen protest. However, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) failed rather often in environmental issues. Based on a ‘risk society’ perspective, this paper presents a systematic argument for the empirical problems of discursive dispute regulation. End-of-pipe practical discourse is not suitable for dealing with questioned expert knowledge claims, problems of unawareness and manufactured uncertainties, central to regulation conflicts in risk society. This calls for an earlier public engagement via discourse, focusing on scientific and technological research and development agendas, as well as replacing traditional risk management with management of uncertainties and unawareness. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Habermas fightin? waste. Problems of alternative dispute resolution in the risk society

Since the early 1990s, German environmental policies have been characterized by a broad range of alternative dispute resolution procedures, such as, for instance, ‘mediation’ and ‘risk dialogue’. Based on the ethics of discourse, developed by German social theorist Habermas, they are designed to solve problems in risk management caused by citizen protest. However, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) failed rather often in environmental issues. Based on a ‘risk society’ perspective, this paper presents a systematic argument for the empirical problems of discursive dispute regulation. End-of-pipe practical discourse is not suitable for dealing with questioned expert knowledge claims, problems of unawareness and manufactured uncertainties, central to regulation conflicts in risk society. This calls for an earlier public engagement via discourse, focusing on scientific and technological research and development agendas, as well as replacing traditional risk management with management of uncertainties and una...

Debating Patriarchy: Discursive Disputes over Spousal Authority among Evangelical Family Commentators

Theoretical paradigms that have called attention to the contemporary over the family suggest that religious conservatives in general, and evangelical Protestants in particular, are among the most vociferous defenders of a traditional patriarchal family structure. However, a handful of recent inquiries on contemporary evangelical spousal roles has suggested that conservative Protestants are not unanimous in their support for a patriarchal family structure. Drawing on insights from poststructuralist theories of discourse and gender theory, this study augments such investigations by analyzing the rhetoric contained within a large sample of popular evangelical family manuals. I demonstrate that leading conservative Protestants are engaged in a rancorous debate about spousal authority relatione, with evangelical pur­ veyors of patriarchy attracting significant criticism from prominent biblical feminists and a growing coterie of egalitarian evangelical commentators. After delineating the most salient points of this internecine debate, I trace these antagonists' divergent recommendations for the allocation of spousal authority to their distinctive assumptions about (1) the nature of masculinity and femininity, and (2) Bible's instructions for familial decision making. I conclude by specifying several directions for future empirical research, and by explicating this study's challenge to prevailing assumptions concerning the religious contours of the war over the family.