BUILDING AN ONLINE COMMUNITY: INGROUP FACE AND RELATIONAL WORK IN ONLINE DISCUSSIONS

Vol.7,No.1(2014)

Abstract
Based on a corpus of internet discussions on medical topics, this study examines the social dimension of the genre, focusing particularly on the strategies through which a distinct ingroup community is created and maintained. Drawing on concepts of face and relational work, the analysis shows how participants typically position themselves as holders of shared ingroup values, altercast their opponents as members of an outgroup, and enact recurring patterns of interaction indicating the existence of a distinct and coherent community of practice. The study then examines the main relational work strategies through which ingroup members establish, maintain and strengthen social bonds within the online community.

Keywords:
altercasting; computer-mediated communication; discourse community; face; facework; ingroup; online discussions; rapport management; relational work; verbal antagonism
References

Angouri, J. and Tseliga, T. (2010) ‘ “you HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT!” From e-disagreement to e-impoliteness in two online fora.’ Journal of
Politeness Research 6, 57-82.


Bhatia, V. J. (2004) Worlds of Written Discourse. A Genre-Based View. London and New
York: Continuum.


Bolander, B. (2013) Language and Power in Blogs. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.


Bousfield, D. (2013) ‘Face in confl ict.’ Journal of Language Aggression and Confl ict 1/1,
37-57. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.1.1.03bou


Bruxelles, S. and Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2004) ‘Coalitions in polylogues.’ Journal of
Pragmatics 36, 75-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00037-7


Eckert, P. and McConnell-Ginet, S. (1992) ‘Think practically and act locally: Language
and gender as community-based practice.’ Annual Review of Anthropology 21, 461-
490. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.002333


Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2009) ‘Impoliteness and identity in the American news
media: The ‘Culture’ wars.’ Journal of Politeness Research 5/2, 273-303.


Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2010) ‘A genre approach to the study of (im)politeness.’
International Review of Pragmatics 2, 46-94. https://doi.org/10.1163/187731010X491747

Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2013) ‘Face, identity, and im/politeness: Looking backwards,
moving forward – From Goffman to Practice Theory.’ Journal of Politeness Research
9/1, 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2013-0001


Goffman, E. (1955) ‘On face-work: An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction.’
Psychiatry: Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes 18/3, 213-231. Reprinted in Goffman, E. (1967) Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1955.11023008

Hardaker, C. (2010) ‘Trolling in asynchronous computer-mediated communication: From
user discussions to academic defi nitions.’ Journal of Politeness Research 6, 215-242. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.011


Hardaker, C. (2013) ‘ “Uh….not to be nitpicky….but…the past tense of drag is dragged,
not drug.”: An overview of trolling strategies.’ Journal of Language Aggression and
Confl ict 1/1, 58-86. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.1.1.04har


Harwood, N. (2009) ‘An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic
writing across two disciplines.’ Journal of Pragmatics 41, 497-518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.06.001


Haugh, M. (2013) ‘Im/politeness, social practice and the participation order.’ Journal of
Pragmatics 58, 52-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.003


Hay, J. (2000) ‘Functions of humour in the conversations of men and women.’ Journal of
Pragmatics 32, 709-742. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00069-7


Hopkinson, C. (2012) ‘Antagonistic facework in online discussion fora.’ In: Hopkinson,
C., Tomášková, R., Zapletalová, G. (eds) The Interpersonal Function of Language
Across Genres and Discourse Domains. Ostrava: University of Ostrava. 113-153.


Hopkinson, C. (2013) ‘Trolling in online discussions: From provocation to communitybuilding.’
Brno Studies in English 39/1, 5-25. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2013-1-1


Hyland, K. (1998) ‘Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse.’
Journal of Pragmatics 30, 437-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5


Joseph, J. E. (2013) ‘Identity work and face work across linguistic and cultural boundaries.’
Journal of Politeness Research 9/1, 35-54. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2013-0002


Kádár, D. Z. and Bax, M. M. H. (2013) ‘In-group ritual and relational work.’ Journal of
Pragmatics 58, 73-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.03.011


Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2004) ‘Introducing polylogue.’ Journal of Pragmatics 36, 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(03)00034-1


Kleinke, S. (2010) ‘Interactive aspects of computer-mediated communication.’ In:
Tanskanen, S.-K., Helasvuo, M.-L., Raitaniemi, M. (eds) Discourses in Interaction.
Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 195-222.


Kreuz, R. and Roberts, R. (1995) ‘Two cues for verbal irony: Hyperbole and the ironic
tone of voice.’ Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 10, 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms1001_3


Lewis, D. (2005) ‘Arguing in English and French asynchronous online discussion.’
Journal of Pragmatics 37, 1801-1818. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.02.014


Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2005) ‘Politeness theory and relational work.’ Journal of
Politeness Research 1/1, 9-33. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2005.1.1.9


Locher, M. A. and Watts, R. J. (2008) ‘Relational work and impoliteness: Negotiating
norms of linguistic behaviour.’ In: Bousfi eld, D. and Locher, M. A. (eds) Impoliteness
in Language: Studies on its Interplay with Power in Theory and Practice. Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter. 77-99.


Lorenzo-Dus, N. and Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, P. (2011) ‘On-line polylogues and
impoliteness: The case of postings sent in response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube
video.’ Journal of Pragmatics 43, 2578-2593. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.03.005


McCall, G. J. (2003) ‘Interaction.’ In: Reynolds, L. T. and Herman-Kinney, N. J. (eds)
Handbook of Symbolic Interactionism. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. 327-348.


Milroy, L. (1980) Language and Social Networks. Oxford: Blackwell.

Neurauter-Kessels, M. (2011) ‘Im/polite reader responses on British online news sites.’
Journal of Politeness Research 7, 187-214. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2011.010


Perelmutter, R. (2013) ‘Klassika zhanra: The fl amewar as a genre in the Russian
blogosphere.’ Journal of Pragmatics 45, 74-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.10.006


Reid, E. (1999) ‘Hierarchy and power: Social control in cyberspace.’ In: Smith, M. and
Kollock, P. (eds) Communities in Cyberspace. London and New York: Routledge.
107-133.


Ruhi, S. (2010) ‘Face as an indexical category in interaction.’ Journal of Pragmatics 42,
2131-2146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.12.020


Sacks, H. (1972a) ‘An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for
doing sociology.’ In: Sudnow, D. N. (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction. New York:
Free Press. 31-74.


Sacks, H. (1972b) ‘On the analyzability of stories by children.’ In: Gumperz, J. J. and
Hymes, D. (eds) Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 325-345.


Schegloff, E. A. (2007) ‘A tutorial on membership categorization.’ Journal of Pragmatics
39, 462-482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.07.007


Schnurr, S. (2010) ‘Humour.’ In: Locher, M. A. and Graham, S. L. (eds) Interpersonal
Pragmatics (Handbook of Pragmatics 6). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
307-326.


Shum, W. and Lee, C. (2013) ‘(Im)politeness and disagreement in two Hong Kong Internet
discussion forums.’ Journal of Pragmatics 50, 52-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.01.010


Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000) ‘Rapport management: A framework for analysis.’ In: Spencer-
Oatey, H. (ed.) Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport Through Talk Across
Cultures. London and New York: Continuum. 11-46.


Spencer-Oatey, H. (2002) ‘Managing rapport in talk: Using rapport sensitive incidents to
explore the motivational concerns underlying the management of relations.’ Journal
of Pragmatics 34, 529-545. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00039-X


Spencer-Oatey, H. (2007) ‘Theories of identity and the analysis of face.’ Journal of
Pragmatics 39, 639-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2006.12.004


Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C. (1979) ‘An integrative theory of intergroup confl ict.’ In:
Austin, W. G. and Worchel, S. (eds) The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations.
Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. 33-47.


Upadhyay, S. R. (2010) ‘Identity and impoliteness in computer-mediated reader
responses.’ Journal of Politeness Research 6, 105-127. https://doi.org/10.1515/jplr.2010.006


Watts, R. J. (2003) Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Waugh, L.R. (2010) ‘Pronominal choice in French conversational interaction: Indices of
national identity in identity acts.’ In: Tanskanen, S.-K., Helasvuo, M.-L., Raitaniemi,
M. (eds) Discourses in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 81-100.


Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.


Wilson, D. (2013) ‘Irony comprehension: A developmental perspective.’ Journal of
Pragmatics 59, 40-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.09.016

Metrics

0

Crossref logo

0


364

Views

168

PDF views