You’re offended, I’m offended: A face-based analysis of confrontational conversation

Despite its ordinariness in everyday interaction, confrontational conversation is rarely examined in the field of pragmatics, particularly in studies concerned with interactional phenomena. So far, there is no account of what specifically makes an exchange confrontational, as opposed to non-confrontational. This dissertation addresses that gap by investigating whether there are necessary and sufficient conditions for confrontational conversation and, if so, what they are. The study draws on notions from Conversation Analysis, speech act theory, as well as politeness theory, particularly the notion of face. The investigation is carried out through corpus analyses using data from reality TV, judgement tasks, and dialogue annotation. I analyse the two minimal turns in conversation separately, focusing on their locution and illocution. The findings lead me to propose that, in order to identify confrontational conversation, the two turns must be considered together, and that the distinction from non-confrontation lies in the perlocution of the turns. I argue that for conversation to be confrontational, each of the two turns must result in the perlocutionary effect of offence.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya)
Published
2025-10-24
Primary Topic
Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

You’re offended, I’m offended: A face-based analysis of confrontational conversation

Sara Amido
Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya)
Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
article

You’re offended, I’m offended: A face-based analysis of confrontational conversation

Sara Amido
article en

Abstract

Despite its ordinariness in everyday interaction, confrontational conversation is rarely examined in the field of pragmatics, particularly in studies concerned with interactional phenomena. So far, there is no account of what specifically makes an exchange confrontational, as opposed to non-confrontational. This dissertation addresses that gap by investigating whether there are necessary and sufficient conditions for confrontational conversation and, if so, what they are. The study draws on notions from Conversation Analysis, speech act theory, as well as politeness theory, particularly the notion of face. The investigation is carried out through corpus analyses using data from reality TV, judgement tasks, and dialogue annotation. I analyse the two minimal turns in conversation separately, focusing on their locution and illocution. The findings lead me to propose that, in order to identify confrontational conversation, the two turns must be considered together, and that the distinction from non-confrontation lies in the perlocution of the turns. I argue that for conversation to be confrontational, each of the two turns must result in the perlocutionary effect of offence.

Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa (Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.