Article published in:
Dialogue and Ways of Relating
Edited by Huey-Rong Chen
[Language and Dialogue 10:1] 2020
► pp. 29–48

On streams and lakes

Metaventriloquism and the technologies of a water controversy

| University of Wisconsin – Parkside , USA
This article advances the notion of metaventriloquism by bringing together the concepts of metacommunication and ventriloquism (Cooren 2010). Metaventriloquism is when one makes claims regarding who or what another is speaking behalf of. To explore the implications of metaventriloquism, a public hearing related to a community water controversy is analyzed. The analysis illustrates how metaventriloquism may be used as a form of critique and operates retrospectively in claiming what motivated another, and prospectively in claiming what another should do. The implications of metaventriloquism for the construction of technological risks are also explored.
Keywords: metacommunication, ventriloquism, public discourse, technological risks, water policy
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
    • 2.1The ventriloquial approach
    • 2.2Metacommunication
    • 2.3Bring metacommunication and ventriloquism together: Metaventriloquism
    • 2.4Technology, risk, and ventriloquism
  • 3.Data
    • 3.1Contextual background
    • 3.2Method of data analysis
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Diversion request as ventriloquial process
    • 4.2Metaventriloquism and legitimation: Water for the public good
    • 4.3Metaventriloquism and presentification: Constructing a responsible partner
    • 4.4Metaventriloquism as critique
    • 4.5Metaventriloquism and technological cautions
  • 5.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 May 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.00058.cas
References
Barad, Karen
2007 Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning. Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Bateson, Gregory
1972 Steps to an Ecology of Mind: Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry, Evolution, and Epistemology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Ulrich
1992 Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
Bencherki, Nicolas and François Cooren
2011 “Having To Be: The Possessive Constitution of Organization.” Human Relations 641: 1579–1607. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bencherki, Nicolas, Frederic Matte, and François Cooren
(eds) 2019 Authority and Power in Social Interaction Methods and Analysis. New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benoit-Barné, Chantal and François Cooren
2009 “The Accomplishment of Authority Through Presentification How Authority Is Distributed Among and Negotiated by Organizational Members.” Management Communication Quarterly 23 (1): 5–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carbaugh, Donal
1989 “Fifty terms for talk: A cross-cultural study.” International and intercultural communication annual 13 (93): 120.Google Scholar
Caronia, Letizia and François Cooren
2014 “Decentering Our Analytical Position: The Dialogicity of Things.” Discourse and Communication 8 (1): 41–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Castor, Theresa R.
2016 “The materiality of discourse: relational positioning in a fresh water controversy.” Communication Research and Practice 2 (3): 334–350. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2017 “Metacommunication.” The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication: 1–9.Google Scholar
Castor, Theresa
2018 “Sustainability and Textual Extensions of Institutional Discourse: Testing the Great Lakes Compact.” Critical Sociology 44 (2): 341–356. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, François
2004 “Textual Agency: How Texts Do Things in Organizational Settings.” Organization 11 (3): 373–393. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2006 “The Organizational World as a Plenum of Agencies.” In Communication as Organizing: Empirical and Theoretical Explorations in the Dynamic of Text and Conversation, ed. by François Cooren, James R. Taylor, and Elizabeth J. Van Every, 81–100. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
2010 Action and Agency in Dialogue: Passion, Incarnation and Ventriloquism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015 “In Medias Res: Communication, Existence, and Materiality.” Communication Research and Practice 1(4): 1–15. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, François and Nicholas Bencherki
2010 “How things do things with words: Ventriloquism, passion and technology.” Encyclopaideia 151: 35–61.Google Scholar
Cooren, François, Frédérik Matte, Chantal Benoit-Barné, and Boris Brummans
2013 “Communication as Ventriloquism: A Grounded-in-Action Approach to the Study of Organizational Tensions.” Communication Monographs 801: 255–277. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, François and Sergeiy Sandler
2014 “Polyphony, Ventriloquism, and Constitution: In Dialogue with Bakhtin.” Communication Theory 241: 225–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cooren, François, Fiona Thompson, Donna Canestraro, and Tamas Bodor
2006 “From Agency to Structure: Analysis of an Episode in a Facilitation Process.” Human Relations 591: 533–565. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Robert
2005 How we talk about how we talk: Communication theory in the public interest. Journal of Communication 551: 659–667. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Craig, Robert T. and Karen Tracy
2014 “Building Grounded Practical Theory in Applied Communication Research: Introduction to the Special Issue.” Journal of Applied Communication Research 42 (3): 229–243. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Rodney H.
2012 Discourse Analysis. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno
2008 What Is the Style of Matters of Concern. Two Lectures in Empirical Philosophy. Amsterdam: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Lucy, John A.
(ed.) 1993 Reflexive Language: Reported Speech and Metapragmatics. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Luhmann, Niklas
1990 “Technology, Environment and Social Risk: A Systems Perspective.” Industrial Crisis Quarterly 4(3): 223–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Martine, Thomas, François Cooren, Aurélien Bénel, and Manuel Zacklad
2016 “What Does Really Matter in Technology Adoption and Use? A CCO Approach.” Management Communication Quarterly 30(2): 164–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McLuhan, Marshall
1994 Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Murphy, Raymond
2004 “Disaster or Sustainability: The Dance of Human Agents with Nature’s Actants.” Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 41(3): 249–266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Robles, Jessica S. and Elizabeth S. Parks
2019 “Complaints about technology as a resource for identity-work.” Language in Society 48(2): 209–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, Everett M.
1986 Communication Technology. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Strifling, David
2018, March 20. Will the Foxconn project “transform” Wisconsin’s water resources? [Blog post]. Retrieved from law​.marquette​.edu​/facultyblog​/2018​/03​/20​/will​-the​-Foxconn​-project​-transform​-wisconsins​-water​-resources/
Tatge-Rozell, Jill
. “Hundreds comment on proposed plan to tap Lake Michigan.” Kenosha News, March 7 2018 Accessed May 31, 2019. www​.kenoshanews​.com​/news​/local​/hundreds​-comment​-on​-proposed​-plan​-to​-tap​-lake​-michigan​/article​_fae6808d​-17a6​-5a29​-8e92​-607b900cbf51​.html
Taylor, James R. and Elizabeth J. Van Every
2014 When organization fails: Why authority matters. Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vasilyeva, Alena, Jessica Robles, Jean Saludadez, Christian Schwägerl, and Theresa Castor
2019 “The varieties of (more or less) formal authority.” In Authority and Power in Social Interaction Methods and Analysis, ed. by Nicolas Bencherki, Frederic Matte, and François Cooren, 37–55. New York: Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verschueren, Jef
1999 Understanding Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watzlawick, Paul, Janet Beavin Bavelas, and Don D. Jackson
1967 Pragmatics of Human Ccommunication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies and Paradoxes. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.Google Scholar
Whitehead, Alfred
1920 The Concept of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar