To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This paper shows that Elizabeth Anderson’s account of relational egalitarianism offers inadequate resources to combat interactional injustice, that is, the injustices in modes of social interaction that reinforce positions of unequal status and social vulnerability. The paper reviews Anderson’s argument that social integration is key to remedying specific kinds of unjust inequalities before exploring examples of interactional injustice for which integration – as Anderson specifies it – is an inadequate solution because the victims are already highly integrated, such as fat people. The paper argues that a policy-focused account such as Anderson’s misses the fact that interactional injustices are often the cumulative result of many individual people making individually legitimate choices to control their own interactional lives, choices which collectively subordinate, marginalise, or ostracise other people. In order to remedy interactional injustices, we must attend not only to government policies as Anderson does, but also to our personal responsibility for our choices and their collective impact.
How should we conceive of the vulnerability which we all experience, and what import does it have for how we think of equality as a political ideal? How should the state express equal respect for its citizens in light of our common vulnerability, and the heightened vulnerability experienced by some citizens? What does it mean for us to treat each other as equals in light of the inevitable dependencies and vulnerabilities which colour our relationship with each other? This volume offers the first systematic exploration of the relationship between two increasingly central concepts in political and moral philosophy and theory, namely vulnerability and relational equality, with essays presenting a range of current philosophical perspectives on the pressing practical question of how to conceive of equality within society in light of vulnerability. It will be valuable for readers interested in political philosophy and theory, ethics, public policy and philosophy of law.
Chapter 3 constructs the broad and historicised conceptualisation of mitigation politics by building on, critiquing and combining insights from constructivist political economy; climate policy, political economy of transitions; and socio-technical transitions research. The aim of this chapter is to present a perspective on mitigation politics that at once allows for analysis of different phases of climate mitigation policymaking and politics over time, recognises and incorporates mitigation-related constraints and opportunities, and takes account of a wide range of features of politics – collective choice, agency and capacity, deliberation, and social interaction. Doing so also offers up a more nuanced and detailed account of different but related varieties of politicisation – and how they interact with one another. The following four chapters apply this broad, inclusive, and historicised framing to explore and interpret different phases of constructing mitigation policies that have emerged over the past 40 years or so.
Kin-enriched morphosyntax has emerged many times in distantly related Australian languages. An examination of language use in conversation reveals that this emergence can be explained in terms of convergent evolutionary pressures. All Australian Aboriginal societies have classificatory kinship, and all have taboos limiting the use of personal names. A conversational preference for avoiding restricted names (Levinson 2007) and preferences for achieving recognition and being succinct (Sacks & Schegloff 1979, Schegloff 1996) provide selection principles that assist speakers in choosing the most suitable expressions for the given occasions of reference. Because kin-based expressions are not names, but are nevertheless useful for securing recipients’ recognition of referents, they are regularly selected when names are unsuitable. Through repeated selection in conversation, the same preferences ultimately drive the diachronic development of kin-based morphosyntax. The Murrinh-Patha case study in this article presents the development of kin-based morphology through reanalysis. It then draws on fragments of face-to-face conversation exemplifying how conversational pressures bias the selection of kin-based structures. Finally, the micro- and macrocausal domains are linked through an ‘invisible hand’ explanation (Keller 1994).
This article introduces the Corpus of Language Discrimination in Interaction (CLDI)—an open-access corpus of transcribed video data, capturing moments where individuals are policed in some way for the language they are speaking or otherwise endorsing while sharing public space (e.g. in stores, restaurants, parking lots, and parks). Despite having thus far largely evaded systematic inquiry, such interactions are illustrative of a particular genre of language policymaking and enforcement that takes place in everyday social life, which the CLDI aims to document and make available for ongoing empirical examination. After presenting the corpus itself, as an initial exploration into some of the practices and actions observable in these data, we describe the recurrent use of Speak English directives, accompanied by nation-state declarative accounts like This is America. Detailed analysis of such turns, and the responses they receive, throws into relief ways that language policies and ideologies can be instantiated, ratified, challenged, defended, and otherwise negotiated in and through the particulars of interactants' joint conduct. We conclude by describing some future avenues for research, teaching, and public engagement on the basis of the CLDI.
The present study uses naturally occurring conversational data from various dialects of Spanish to examine the role of second-person (T/V) reference forms in the accomplishment of social action in interaction. I illustrate how the turn-by-turn progression of talk can occasion shifts in the linguistic means through which speakers refer to their hearers, an interactional commonality between dialects (and possibly languages) that are otherwise pronominally dissimilar. These shifts contribute to the action of an utterance by mobilizing the semantic meaning of a pronominal form in order to recalibrate who the interactants project they are, and who they project they are to one another—not in general, but rather at that particular moment in the ongoing interaction. The analysis posits a distinction between identity status and identity stance to argue in favor of a more microlevel conceptualization of identities and contexts as emergent features of moment-by moment discourse, co-constructed through the deployment of grammatical structure.
Sentence and construction types generally have more than one pragmatic function. Impersonal deontic declaratives such as ‘it is necessary to X’ assert the existence of an obligation or necessity without tying it to any particular individual. This family of statements can accomplish a range of functions, including getting another person to act, explaining or justifying the speaker's own behavior as he or she undertakes to do something, or even justifying the speaker's behavior while simultaneously getting another person to help. How is an impersonal deontic declarative fit for these different functions? And how do people know which function it has in a given context? We address these questions using video recordings of everyday interactions among speakers of Italian and Polish. Our analysis results in two findings. The first is that the pragmatics of impersonal deontic declaratives is systematically shaped by (i) the relative responsibility of participants for the necessary task and (ii) the speaker's nonverbal conduct at the time of the statement. These two factors influence whether the task in question will be dealt with by another person or by the speaker, often giving the statement the force of a request or, alternatively, of an account of the speaker's behavior. The second finding is that, although these factors systematically influence their function, impersonal deontic declaratives maintain the potential to generate more complex interactions that go beyond a simple opposition between requests and accounts, where participation in the necessary task may be shared, negotiated, or avoided. This versatility of impersonal deontic declaratives derives from their grammatical makeup: by being deontic and impersonal, they can both mobilize or legitimize an act by different participants in the speech event, while their declarative form does not constrain how they should be responded to. These features make impersonal deontic declaratives a special tool for the management of social agency.
This chapter delves into the implications of citizen participation in commercial SCS for their support of the state’s digital policies. Unlike the focus on general political trust in Chapter 5, the attention here now turns to assessing support for a specific digital policy. This chapter finds that citizens are highly supportive of state, compared to company, involvement in managing the SCS. It explores potential explanations such as media exposure, social interaction, and potential network effects. However, high levels of state support can only be fully understood once how people experience policy implementation on the ground is taken into account. When these experiences are mostly financial in nature, individuals are more likely to believe that the chances of their data being used for political purposes is low. Therefore, they become more supportive of the state’s involvement in the SCS overall. For most citizens, a primarily financially oriented SCS is acceptable, but its use as a political tool is not.
Sacrificing own resources to punish norm violators is often regarded an altruistic act, promoting cooperation and fairness within social groups. However, recent studies highlight difficulties in interpreting third-party punishment as a prosocial and cooperative signal. Moving beyond abstract, decontextualized settings typically employed in economic game paradigms, we aimed to better understand the appraisal of observed punishment and punishers in real-world situations. To this end, we created and validated 24 written vignettes of everyday-life scenarios depicting interactions between a perpetrator, a victim, and a punisher. Across two preregistered experiments, we systematically manipulated key aspects of third-party punishment: transgression type and punishment type (property-oriented, corporal, or psychological; Experiment 1; N = 48) and punishment severity (weak or strong; Experiment 2; N = 50). Participants rated punishment adequacy and the punisher’s warmth, competence, and suitability as an interaction partner, whether as a friend or team leader. Results indicated preferences for psychological punishments, punishments that aligned with transgression type, and less severe punishments. Our findings support the notion that punishment is an ambiguous issue and reveal important contextual factors that contribute to its evaluation as a useful social strategy.
Emotion permeates every human activity. In this chapter, after briefly reviewing research on emotion in language, discourse, and interaction, the authors outline what a sociopragmatic perspective brings to the study and theorization of emotion, building on an understanding of sociopragmatics as the systematic study of interactional, normative, and social dimensions of language use. They suggest that a sociopragmatic approach to emotion places greater attention on the role that different discourse systems play in how emotions are expressed, interpreted, responded to, and talked about across different languages and cultures. The authors argue that this calls for a need to broaden the scope of research towards a multidimensional and multidisciplinary analysis of emotion in discourse and social interaction. This leads to the introduction of the theoretical framework that underpins and motivates the studies included in this volume. The volume editors propose that a sociopragmatic theory of emotion needs to attend to three foundational phenomena: evaluation, relationships, and morality, and argue that emotion is not simply expressed, but is immanent to all three of these phenomena (and vice versa). The chapter concludes by briefly overviewing the structure of the volume and introducing its constituent chapters.
In the Later Roman Empire (AD 300–650), power seems to manifest itself mostly through legislation, bureaucracy, and an increasingly distant emperor. This book focuses instead on personal interaction as crucial to the exercise of power. It studies four social practices (petitions, parrhesia, intercession, and collective action) to show how they are much more dynamic than often assumed. These practices were guided by strong expectations of justice, which constrained the actions of superiors. They therefore allowed the socially inferior to develop strategies of conduct that could force the hand of the superior and, in extreme cases, lead to overturning hierarchical relations. Building on the analysis of these specific forms of interaction, the book argues for an understanding of late antique power rooted in the character and virtue of those invested with it.
This chapter presents an overview of social interaction, technology, and language learning within the context of a cross-cultural exchange project. Interaction with others and being an active participant in an environment where the language is used is crucial to language learning. We will first look at social interaction and situate it in the context of language teaching and learning. Next, we present some primary themes of social interaction and discuss the practices that inform the role social interaction plays in collaborative projects in language classes. We provide examples of how technological tools were used to facilitate virtual social interaction between language students in France and the United States. Finally, the chapter concludes by offering insights for cross-cultural projects that prioritize social interaction.
Describe what theory of mind is and how it develops; understand the importance of theory of mind for children’s later development; consider the implications of theory of mind for collaboration and human uniqueness.
This chapter explores the unique relationship between music and individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). It highlights the remarkable musical abilities often found in people with autism, contrasting with their challenges in social interaction and communication. Research shows that music can serve as a bridge, facilitating social interaction and emotional expression for those on the spectrum. Brain imaging studies reveal how brain regions typically associated with language processing are activated in autistic individuals when they engage with music. This suggests that music may offer an alternative pathway for communication and emotional understanding. The chapter also discusses the therapeutic applications of music for individuals with autism, such as auditory-motor mapping training (AMMT), which has shown promise in improving verbal communication and social skills. Music therapy can also foster emotional expression, social connection, and a sense of belonging. The chapter concludes by emphasizing the importance of understanding and embracing the individual’s musical preferences and strengths in order to support their development and well-being.
My work has been primarily located in two fields, both characterized by heated disagreements when I entered them. In child language research the nativist view was the default position in the late 1960s and through the next couple of decades. But in 1967 I studied adult input to children, in service of understanding its contributions to language acquisition. By the 2020s the notion that certain features of adult-child interaction are instrumental in language development has been robustly supported by multiple lines of work. I first got involved in thinking about literacy development in the mid-1990s during a time of conflict between what was then framed as “phonics” versus “whole language.” That conflict resurfaces with depressing regularity and is currently characterized as a struggle to implement the “science of reading.” The complexities in the reading domain are far greater than in language acquisition because of the larger role of educational publishers and school administrators in determining a course of action.
This chapter reviews ways of analyzing interactional and grammatical regularities of spoken, dialogically organized language in a constructional framework. The basic tenet is that grammatical constructions, when used in talk-in-interaction, are housed in interactional sequences, and it is the constructions’ positions in certain sequential locations that motivates their use and shapes their form. Therefore, aspects of sequence and discourse organization are potentially distinctive features of constructions, and reflections of the interactional contingencies that generate them. Four types of construction are examined: receipt questions, second assessments, a construction of meaning negotiation, and pseudo-clefts. All these patterns can be said to be responsive in one way or another, thus lending themselves well to a dialogically sensitive analysis. The analytic examples highlight the necessity of abstracted interactional information for a fuller understanding of the workings of grammatical constructions in talk-in-interaction and for how an interactional perspective can enrich constructional approaches to analyzing linguistic structure.
Social interaction with friends and family is pivotal for our cognitive development, mental health, and overall wellbeing. These connections shape our understanding of ourselves, others, and the world around us. Research consistently highlights the positive impact of social engagement on cognition and mental health, from stimulating problem-solving skills to combating loneliness and reducing stress. The brain regions activated during social interactions underscore the significance of social cognition, empathy, and emotional processing. Particularly during adolescence, positive friendships play a crucial role in emotional resilience and healthy development. Studies suggest an optimal number of close friends for mental health benefits, emphasizing quality over quantity in social relationships. Social support networks bolster resilience and aid in recovery from mental health disorders. Conversely, social isolation poses risks to brain health and mental wellbeing, highlighting the importance of maintaining social connections throughout life. Engaging in social activities, whether through clubs, volunteering, or hobbies, fosters social interaction and enhances overall wellbeing. In a world increasingly driven by technology, prioritizing face-to-face social interaction remains essential for brain health, cognition, and mental wellbeing.
Successful language-based interaction depends on the reciprocal interplay of two or more speakers. The production of structural fragments rather than ‘full’ clausal units plays a crucial role for this interplay. This article provides an outline of a descriptive framework labeled ‘dual-mind syntax’, which is designed for describing the social signature in spoken syntax. Fragments are not analyzed as deficient and ‘incomplete’ syntactic units, but as a communicative practice used to design structures in a responsive-contingent fashion in social interaction. Based on empirical data coming from recorded natural interactions, it will be shown how speakers use syntactic fragments for coordinating actions and collaborative structure-building and for contributing to the emergence of a structurally integrated, coherent whole.
Kenny has proposed a variance-components model for dyadic social interaction. His Social Relations model estimates variances and covariances from a round-robin of two-person interactions. The current paper presents a matrix formulation of the Social Relations model. It uses the formulation to derive exact and estimated standard errors for round-robin estimates of Social Relations parameters.