Tannen's article was incredibly interesting, and I have never thought of conversation being used to establish solidarity or dominance. The information in the article actually helps me understand how a lot of miscommunication happens in conversation. I though the example of the woman asking a man she works with, "Where's your coat?" and he replies, "Thanks, Mom." was an excellent example of how intent is miscommunicated. She was attempting to show solidarity, or caring for him as a peer, and he felt like she was being condescending. It's interesting to think that people in general need to work harder to make their intent clear, and less ambiguous.
It's interesting that there is such ambiguity between establishing power over another, as opposed to building rapport. It was also a fascinating example of the person who's friend is always insisting on paying for dinner. The friend is either being generous and "showing solidarity" or establishing power by showing they have more money, and it's nearly impossible to tell. Most people feel that they must reciprocate every nice thing that someone does for them. For example, if someone has their friends over for dinner, most of the time the friends want to reciprocate. In a way, it is showing that most people do not want to be in a subordinate position. It's funny that our language even reflects our attitude that we don't want to "owe" somebody something.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great job!
ReplyDelete