Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 28:3 (2018) ► pp.333–360

The multimodal enactment of deontic and epistemic authority in Indian meetings

| University of Valenciennes
| KU Leuven
| Independent scholar, India
| I.K.G. Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar

Authority is a much discussed topic in organizational literature, but its in situ enactment is little investigated. Using the notions of deontic and epistemic authority and using multimodal conversation analysis as a research methodology, the purpose of this paper is to provide an empirical study of authority-in-action. We particularly focus on both sequences of talk and the multimodal resources that are mobilised to ‘do’ authority. Furthermore, as research from non-Western contexts remains rare, we complement insights into authority enactment based on ‘Western’ data by using data that is drawn from a corpus of naturally-occurring video-recorded faculty meetings at an Indian University. Findings indicate that the doing of authority can be made visible by explicating participants’ orientation to their respective deontic and epistemic rights and their invocation of particular identities, which are accomplished by means of a complex intertwining of verbal and non-verbal resources.

Keywords: authority, deontics, epistemics, conversation analysis, meetings, India, multimodality
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Authority
  • 3.Method – multimodal conversation analysis and authority
  • 4.Data
  • 5.Analyses
    • 5.1Extract one: The IT club
    • 5.2Extract two: The sports club
    • 5.3Extract three: The finance club
  • 6.Observations
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 27 August 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17011.cli
References
Angouri, Jo, and Meredith Marra
2010 “Corporate Meetings as Genre: A Study of the Role of the Chair in Corporate Meeting Talk.” Text & Talk 30 (6): 615–636. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asmuβ, Birte, and Jan Svennevig
2009 “Meeting Talk: An Introduction.” Journal of Business Communication 46 (1): 3–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barske, Tobias
2009 “Same Token, Different Actions: A Conversation Analytic Study of Social Roles, Embodied Actions, and ok in German Business Meetings.” The Journal of Business Communication 46 (1): 120–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhatnagar, Jyotsna
2005 “The Power of Psychological Empowerment as an Antecedent to Organizational Commitment in Indian Managers.” Human Resource Development International 8 (4): 419–433. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter
2010 “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies 12 (4): 419–442. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf, Reinhold Schmitt, and Lorenza Mondada
2010 “Agenda and Emergence: Contingent and Planned Activities in a Meeting.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (6): 1700–1718. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul
1991 “Asymmetries of Knowledge in Conversational Interactions.” In Asymmetries in Dialogue, ed. by Ivana Markova, and Klaus Foppa, 29–48. Hemel Hempstead UK: Harvester.Google Scholar
Gee, James Paul, Glynda Hull, and Colin Lankshear
1996 The New Work Order. London: Saint Leonards Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles
1981 Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2000 “Action and Embodiment within Situated Human Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 32 (10): 1489–1522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Griswold, Olga
2007 “Achieving Authority: Discursive Practices in Russian Girls’ Pretend Play.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 40 (4): 291–319. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J.
1982 Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heath, Christian, and Paul Luff
2013 “Embodied Action and Organizational Activity.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 283–307. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Heritage, John
2012 “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 “Epistemics in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 370–394. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
2004 “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, ed. by Gene H. Lerner, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kahn, William A., and Kathy E. Kram
1994 “Authority at Work: Internal Models and Their Organizational Consequences.” The Academy of Management Review 19 (1): 17–50. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Kakar, Sudhir
1971 Authority Patterns and Subordinate Behavior in Indian Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 16 (3): 298–307. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landmark, Anne Marie Dalby, Pål Gulbrandsen, and Jan Svennevig
2015 “Whose Decision? Negotiating epistemic and deontic rights in Medical Treatment Decisions.” Journal of Pragmatics 781: 54–69. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Larrue, Janine, and Alain Trognon
1993 “Organization of Turn-taking and Mechanisms for Turn-taking Repairs in a Chaired Meeting”. Journal of Pragmatics 19 (2): 177–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C.
1992 “Activity Types and Language.” In Talk at work – Interaction in institutional settings (Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics 8), ed. by Paul Drew, and John Heritage, 66–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lukes, Steven
1978 “Power and Authority.” In A History of Sociological Analysis, ed. by Thomas B. Bottomore, and Robert A. Nisbet, 633–676. London: Heineman.Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza
n.d. Conventions for multimodal transcription. Available online at: [URL]. Last consulted on 10 January 2018.
2016 “Challenges of Multimodality: Language and the Body in Social Interaction.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 20 (3): 336–366. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peräkylä, Anssi
2011 “Validity in Research on Naturally Occurring Interaction.” In Qualitative Research, ed. by David Silverman, 365–382. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita
1984 “Giving a Source or Basis: The Practice in Conversation of Telling “how I know”.” Journal of Pragmatics 8 (2): 607–625. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita, and Paul Denvir
2007 “Enacting the institutional role of chairperson in upper management meetings: The interactional realization of provisional authority”. In Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting, ed. by François Cooren, 31–51. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey
2000 “The Voice of Authority: The Local Accomplishment of Authoritative Discourse in Live News Broadcasts.” Discourse Studies 2 (3): 354–379 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage
2006 “The Epistemics of Social Relations: Owning Grandchildren.” Language in Society 35 (5): 677–705. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey
1992 Lectures on Conversation (21 vols, edited by Gail Jefferson with introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff). Oxford UK & Cambridge USA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn taking for Conversation”. Language 50 (4): 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinha, Jai B. P., and D. Sinha
1990 “Role of Social Values in Indian Organizations.” International Journal of Psychology 25 (3–6): 705–714. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa
2013 Deontic Rights in Interaction: A Conversation Analytic Study on Authority and Cooperation. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
2015 “Displays of Uncertainty and Proximal Deontic Claims: The Case of Proposal Sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics 781: 84–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä
2012 “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321. DOI logo.Google Scholar
2014 “Three Orders in the Organization of Human Action: On the Interface between Knowledge, Power, and Emotion in Interaction and Social Relations”. Language in Society 43 (2): 185–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Jan Svennevig
2015 Introduction: Epistemics and Deontics in Conversational Directives. Journal of Pragmatics 781: 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanja
2008 “Stance, Alignment, and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1): 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svennevig, Jan
2012 “The Agenda as Resource for Topic Introduction in Workplace Meetings”. Discourse Studies 14 (1): 53–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, Frederick
1911 Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Taylor, James
2009 “The Communicative Construction of Community: Authority and Organizing.” In Learning and expanding with activity theory, ed. by Annalisa Sannino, Harry Daniels, and Kris D. Gutiérrez, 228–239. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 “L’autorité comme base normative de l’organisation [Authority as a normative base for organisations].” Proceedings of the International Communication Association Regional conference in Europe – Communicating in a world of norms, available at: [URL].
Taylor, James, and Elizabeth Van Every
2014 When Organization Fails. Why Authority Matters. New York: Routledge. DOI logo DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van De Mieroop, Dorien, and Jonathan Clifton
2017 “Corporate settings.” In The Routledge Handbook of Language in the Workplace, ed. by Bernadette Vine, 127–137. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van De Mieroop, Dorien, and Stephanie Schnurr
(eds) 2017 Identity struggles: Evidence from workplaces around the world. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Varma, Arup, Ekkirala S. Srinivas, and Linda K. Stroh
2005 “A Comparative Study of the Impact of Leader-Member Exchange in US and Indian Samples.” Cross Cultural Management: An International Journal 12 (1): 84–95. DOI logo.Google Scholar
Verschueren, Jef
2008 “Intercultural Communication and the Challenges of Migration.” Language and intercultural communication 8 (1): 21–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weber, Max
1978 Economy and Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Clifton, Jonathan, Geert Jacobs, Julia Valeiras-Jurado & Astrid Vandendaele
2022. Governmentality-in-action. Language and Dialogue DOI logo
Holmes, Janet
2020. Epilogue: Future Directions—What Next?. In Professional Communication, ► pp. 327 ff. DOI logo
Stephenson, Michael
2020. Setting the group agenda: negotiating deontic rights through directives in a task-based, oral, L2, group assessment. Classroom Discourse 11:4 ► pp. 337 ff. DOI logo
Van De Mieroop, Dorien
2020. A deontic perspective on the collaborative, multimodal accomplishment of leadership. Leadership 16:5 ► pp. 592 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2020. Soziolinguistische Bibliographie europäischer Länder für 2018Sociolinguistic Bibliography of European Countries for 2018Bibliographie sociolinguistique des pays européens pour 2018. Sociolinguistica 34:1 ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 17 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.