Difference between revisions of "Tam2021"
JakubMlynar (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Catherine L. Tam; |Title=Children’s demands for parental action |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation analysis; Deontic authority; Directives; So...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
|Number=1 | |Number=1 | ||
|Pages=12-32 | |Pages=12-32 | ||
| + | |URL=https://utppublishing.com/doi/10.1558/rcsi.18054 | ||
|DOI=10.1558/rcsi.18054 | |DOI=10.1558/rcsi.18054 | ||
|Abstract=Theory and research on parent–child interaction generally make a priori assumptions of asymmetry in authority between parent and child. Rather than investigating how children exercise autonomy by resisting parental authority, I examine their methods for exercising deontic authority in interaction with their parents. Using conversation analysis and drawing on Stevanovic and Peräkylä’s distinction between deontic status and stance, I analyse video-recorded naturally occurring interactions in which children issue demands to their parents, thus claiming a high deontic stance. Parents may choose to comply and reinforce the claim or not. Domains of deontic authority are (re)negotiated when children pursue compliance; though children can test the boundaries of their authority, parental responses reinforce them, reifying their own authority. | |Abstract=Theory and research on parent–child interaction generally make a priori assumptions of asymmetry in authority between parent and child. Rather than investigating how children exercise autonomy by resisting parental authority, I examine their methods for exercising deontic authority in interaction with their parents. Using conversation analysis and drawing on Stevanovic and Peräkylä’s distinction between deontic status and stance, I analyse video-recorded naturally occurring interactions in which children issue demands to their parents, thus claiming a high deontic stance. Parents may choose to comply and reinforce the claim or not. Domains of deontic authority are (re)negotiated when children pursue compliance; though children can test the boundaries of their authority, parental responses reinforce them, reifying their own authority. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 13:46, 24 June 2025
| Tam2021 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Tam2021 |
| Author(s) | Catherine L. Tam |
| Title | Children’s demands for parental action |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation analysis, Deontic authority, Directives, Socialization, Parent-child interaction, Agency |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2021 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Children and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 5 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 12-32 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1558/rcsi.18054 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Theory and research on parent–child interaction generally make a priori assumptions of asymmetry in authority between parent and child. Rather than investigating how children exercise autonomy by resisting parental authority, I examine their methods for exercising deontic authority in interaction with their parents. Using conversation analysis and drawing on Stevanovic and Peräkylä’s distinction between deontic status and stance, I analyse video-recorded naturally occurring interactions in which children issue demands to their parents, thus claiming a high deontic stance. Parents may choose to comply and reinforce the claim or not. Domains of deontic authority are (re)negotiated when children pursue compliance; though children can test the boundaries of their authority, parental responses reinforce them, reifying their own authority.
Notes
