Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics
Vol. 31:4 (2021) ► pp.509–532

Power and socialization in sibling interaction

Establishing, accepting and resisting roles of socialization target and agent

ORCID logo | University of Groningen
This paper analyses socialization processes in the interaction between two Belgian, Dutch-speaking sisters, aged 10 and 8, more specifically with regard to power dynamics and establishing the roles of socialization target and agent. Socialization is collaborative, but usually entails some division of roles, which is intricately linked to power dynamics. Consequently, socialization efforts, and the socialization roles of target and agent, can be discarded or contested as part of these power dynamics. The analysis shows that socialization efforts between the sisters are often accepted, but also regularly contested and resisted. Moreover, the data indicates that roles and goals of some socialization efforts are so unclear that the boundaries between socialization efforts and interactional actions that aim to gain control become blurred. In conclusion, socialization must not only be considered in terms of its learning potential, but also as a power struggle with intricate and complex negotiation dynamics.
Keywords: socialization, sibling interaction, power, connection, family talk, deontic authority
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical framework
    • 2.1Socialization in families and among children
    • 2.2Power in family talk
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Background and context
    • 3.2Data processing
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Accepted socialization efforts
    • 4.2Partly accepted and partly challenged or resisted socialization efforts
    • 4.3Blurring boundaries between socialization and gaining control
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 8 June 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.20012.dec
References (36)
References
Blum-Kulka, S. 1997. Dinner Talk. Erlbaum: Mahwah.Google Scholar
Blum-Kulka, S., and C. Snow. 2004. “Introduction: The Potential of Peer Talk.” Discourse, 6 (3): 291–306.Google Scholar
Brody, G., Z. Stoneman, and C. MacKinnon. 1982. “Role Asymmetries in Interactions among School-Aged Children, Their Younger Siblings, and Their Friends.” Child Development, 53 (3): 1364–1370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cho, H. 2018. “Korean – English Bilingual Sibling Interactions and Socialization.” Linguistics and Education 451: 31–39. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duff, P. 2010. “Language Socialization.” In Sociolinguistics and Language Education, ed. by N. Hornberger and S. L. McKay, 427–452. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duff, P., and S. May. 2017. Language Socialization (3rd ed.). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
Duff, P., and S. Talmy. 2011. “Language Socialization Approaches to Second Language Acquisition: Social, Cultural, and Linguistic Development in Additional Languages.” In Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition, ed. by D. Atkinson, 95–116. London: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Dunn, J. 2015. “Siblings.” In Handbook of Socialization, ed. by J. Grusec and P. Hastings, 182–201. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, S., G. Jiansheng, and M. Lampert. 1990. “Politeness and Persuasion in Children’s Control Acts.” Journal of Pragmatics 141: 307–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, M. H., and A. Kyratzis. 2007. “Children Socializing Children: Practices for Negotiating the Social Order Among Peers.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 40 (4): 279–289. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grusec, J., and P. Hastings. 2015. Handbook of Socialization (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Hakulinen, A. 1999. “Conversation Types.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by J. Östman and J. Verschueren. Amsterdan/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. 2012. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J., and G. Raymond. 2005. “The Terms of Agreement: Indexing Epistemic Authority and Subordination in Talk-in-Interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (1): 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keel, S. 2016. Socialization: Parent-Child Interaction in Everyday Life. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendall, S. 2007. “Introduction: Family Talk.” In Family Talk: Discourse and Identity in Four American Families, ed. by D. Tannen, S. Kendall, and C. Gordon, 3–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ladegaard, H. J. 2009. “Pragmatic Cooperation Revisited: Resistance and Non-cooperation as a Discursive Strategy in Asymmetrical Discourses.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (4): 649–666. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landmark, A. M. D., P. Gulbrandsen, and J. Svennevig. 2015. “Whose decision? Negotiating Epistemic and Deontic Rights in Medical Treatment Decisions.” Journal of Pragmatics, 781: 54–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maybin, J. 2006. Children’s Voices: Talk, Knowledge and Identity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mcelwain, N. L., and B. L. Volling. 2006. “Preschool Children’s Interactions With Friends and Older Siblings: Relationship Specificity and Joint Contributions to Problem Behavior.” Journal of Family Psychology 19 (4): 486–496. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moore, L. 2008. “Language Socialization and Second/Foreign Language and Multilingual Education in Non-western Settings.” In Encyclopedia of Language and Education, ed. by P. Duff and N. Hornberger, 175–185. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nilep, C. 2009. “Sibling Interaction and Symbolic Capital: Toward a Theory of Political Micro-Economy.” Journal of Pragmatics 411: 1683–1692. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pepler, D., R. Abramovitch, and C. Corter. 1981. “Sibling Interaction in the Home: A Longitudinal Study.” Child Development 52 (4): 1344–1347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pontecorvo, C., A. Fasulo, and L. Sterponi. 2001. “Mutual Apprentices: The Making of Parenthood and Childhood in Family Dinner Conversations.” Human Development 441: 340–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rowlett, B. L. 2020. “Second Language Socialization in the Margins: Queering the Paradigm.” Multilingua (online first). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schieffelin, B., and E. Ochs. 1986. “Language Socialization.” Annual Review of Anthropology 151: 163–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seals, C. A. 2017. “Dynamic Family Language Policy: Heritage Language Socialization and Strategic Accommodation in the Home.” In Family Language Policies in a Multilingual World, ed. by J. Macalister and S. H. Mirvahedi, 185–204. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stevanovic, M., and A. Peräkylä. 2012. “Deontic Authority in Interaction: The Right to Announce, Propose, and Decide.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, J. 1983. Social Order in Child Communication. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Streeck, J., and S. Mehus. 2005. “Micro-Ethnography: The Study of Practices.” In Handbook Of Language And Social Interaction, ed. by K. Fitch and R. Sanders, 381–404. Mahwah: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tannen, D., S. Kendall, and C. Gordon. 2007. Family Talk: Discourse and Identity in Four American Families. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Schaaf, N. 2016. “Kijk eens wat ik kan!” Sociale praktijken in de interactie tussen kinderen van 4 tot 8 jaar in de buitenschoolse opvang. Phd Dissertation: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.Google Scholar
Weidner, M. 2012. On the Organization of Polish Doctor-Patient Communication. PhD Dissertation: University of Antwerp.Google Scholar
2015. “Telling Somebody what to Tell: “Proszę mi powiedzieć” in Polish doctor–Patient Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 781: 70–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, J., and K. Stapleton. 2007. “Authority.” In Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. by J. Östman and J. Verschueren, 1–26. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zukow, P. G. 1989. “Communicating Across Disciplines: On Integrating Psychological and Ethnographic Approaches to Sibling Research.” In Sibling Interaction Across Cultures, ed. by P. G. Zukow, 1–5. New York: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Liu, Zhiyi
2023. An adult daughter's identity construction: Membership categorization analysis of daily Chinese-Australian family talk. Journal of Pragmatics 207 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.