The interaction of generic structure and interpersonal relations in two-party e-chat discourse

language@internet , 2 , article 3 (2005) - On the basis of a corpus of e-chat IRC exchanges (approximately 10,000 words in total) between Greek- and English-speaking speakers, the paper establishes a typical generic structure for two-party IRC exchanges, by focusing on how participants are oriented towards an ideal schema of phases and acts, as well as on how their interpersonal concerns contribute to the shaping of this schema. It is found that IRC interlocutors are primarily concerned with establishing contact with each other, while the (ideational) development of topic seems to be a less pressing need. The signaling of interpersonal relations is pervasive throughout e-chat discourse, as seen both in the range of devices developed and the two free elements of the generic schema, that is conversation play and channel check. It is also found that the accomplishment of the generic schema in each IRC exchange crucially depends on the acts of negotiation performed by the initiator and the responder.

[1]  Naomi S. Baron.  Letters by Phone or Speech by Other Means: The Linguistics of Email. , 1998 .

[2]  Brian McKenna,et al.  Virtual Community , 1998, Online Inf. Rev..

[3]  Alexandra Georgakopoulou,et al.  Self‐presentation and interactional alliances in e‐mail discourse: the style‐ and code‐switches of Greek messages , 1997 .

[4]  Kathleen Ferrara,et al.  Interactive Written Discourse as an Emergent Register , 1991 .

[5]  C. Werry.  Linguistic and interactional features of Internet relay chat , 1996 .

[6]  Brenda Danet,et al.  "HMMM...WHERE'S THAT SMOKE COMING FROM?" Writing, Play and Performance on Internet Relay Chat , 1998, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[7]  Alexandra Georgakopoulou,et al.  Discourse Analysis: An Introduction , 1997 .

[8]  Robert M. Fano.  Computer-Mediated Communication , 1985, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.

[9]  Ron Scollon,et al.  Mediated Discourse As Social Interaction: A Study of News Discourse , 1998 .

[10]  木村 和夫.  Pragmatics , 1997, Language Teaching.

[11]  Dionysis Goutsos,et al.  Modeling Discourse Topic: Sequential Relations and Strategies in Expository Text , 1996 .

[12]  S. Condon,et al.  Functional comparisons of face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions , 1996 .

[13]  J. Foertsch.  The impact of electronic networks on scholarly communication: Avenues for research , 1995 .

[14]  A. Georgakopoulou,et al.  Conjunctions versus discourse markers in Greek: the interaction of frequency, position, and functions in context , 1998 .

[15]  Anita M. Pomerantz.  Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes , 1984 .

[16]  E. Ventola.  The structure of social interaction : a systemic approach to the semiotics of service encounters , 1989 .

[17]  M. Collot,et al.  Electric language : A new variety of English , 1996 .

[18]  C. Maier,et al.  Genre analysis , 2012 .

[19]  S. Herring.  Two variants of an electronic message schema , 1996 .

[20]  Simeon J. Yates.  Oral and written linguistic aspects of computer conferencing , 1996 .

[21]  Susan C. Herring.  Interactional Coherence in CMC , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[22]  S. Herring.  Computer-mediated communication : linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives , 1996 .

[24]  M. Halliday,et al.  Language, Context, and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective , 1989 .

[25]  Steven G. Jones.  Virtual Culture: Identity and Communication in Cybersociety , 1997 .

[26]  R. Elizabeth,et al.  Electropolis: Communication and community on internet relay chat , 1991 .