Cover not available
Article published In:
Pragmatics and Society
Vol. 5:2 (2014) ► pp.191–220

Mapping the epistemic landscape in innovation workshops

| University of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg
| University of Southern Denmark, Sønderborg
This article addresses the epistemic domain of adult make-believe activities in innovation workshops. In particular, we demonstrate how adults initiate imaginary transformations of objects while displaying an orientation to a general order of make-believe in which everyone has equal epistemic rights, and how this can be displayed both verbally and nonverbally. This distribution of equal rights is only overridden by external or locally derived roles, and once invoked they override the general preference for epistemic symmetry, after which interlocutors orient to establishing epistemic congruence, despite the obvious presence of epistemic asymmetry.
Keywords: innovation workshops, interaction, epistemics, transformations, Conversation Analysis
Published online: 25 August 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.5.2.02hei
References (44)
Allee, Verna. 2002. Value networks and evolving business models for the knowledge economy. In: Handbook on Knowledge Management, Clyde W. Holsapple (ed), 605–621. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Asmuß, Birte and Oshima, Sae. 2012. Negotiation of entitlement in proposal sequences. Discourse Studies 14, 1, 67–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beach, Wayne A. 1993. Transitional regularities for ‘casual’ “Okay” usages. Journal of Pragmatics 191, 325–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Betz, Emma and Golato, Andrea. 2008. Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token ach ja . Research on Language and Social Interaction 41, 1, 58–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bolden, Galina. 2008. “So what’s up?”: Using the discourse marker “so” to launch conversational business. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41, 3, 302–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buur, Jacob, Ankenbrand, Bernd and Mitchell, Robb. 2013. Participatory Business Modeling. CoDesign 9, 1, 55–71. DOI logo
Buur, Jacob and Matthews, Ben. 2008. Participatory innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management 12, 3, 255–273. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1991. Asymmetries of knowledge in conversational interactions. In: Asymmetries in Dialogue, Ivana Marková and Klaus Foppa (eds), 29–48. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
. 2012. What Drives Sequences? Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45, 1, 61–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1971. Relations in Public. Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
. 1976. Replies and responses. Language in Society 5, 3, 257–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1996. Transparent Vision. In: Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, 
Emanuel A. Schegloff and Sandra Thompson (eds), 370–404. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haakana, Markku. 2001. Laughter as a patient’s resource: Dealing with delicate aspects of medical interaction. Text 21, 1/2, 187–219.Google Scholar
Hayano, Kaoru. 2011. Claiming epistemic primacy: yo-marked assessments in Japanese. In: The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada and Jakob Steensig (eds), 58–81. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heinemann, Trine, Lindström, Anna and Steensig, Jakob. 2011. Addressing epistemic incongruence in question-answer sequences through the use of epistemic adverbs. In: The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada and Jakob Steensig (eds), 107–130. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine, Landgrebe, Jeanette, Mitchell, Robb and Buur, Jacob. forthc. Narrating value networks and business models through tangible materials. To appear in: Materiality & Storytelling. TAMARA special issue.
Heritage, John. 1984. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In: Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson and John 
Heritage (eds), 229–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. Conversation Analysis as Social Theory. In: The New Blackwell Companion to Social Theory, Bryan S. Turner (ed), 300–320. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2011. Territories of Knowledge, Territories of Experience: Empathic Moments in Interaction. In: The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers, Lorenza 
Mondada and Jakob Steensig (eds), 159–183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012a. The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 451, 30–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012b. Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 451, 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012c. Epistemics in Conversation. In: Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers (eds), 370–394. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell.
Heritage, John and Raymond, Geoffrey. 2005. The terms of agreement: indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly 68, 1, 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John and Roth, Andrew. 1995. Grammar and Institution: Questions and Questioning in the Broadcast News Interview. Research on Language and Social Interaction 28, 1, 1–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an Introduction. In: Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation, Gene H. Lerner (ed), 13–23. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kamio, Akio. 1997. Territories of information. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knudsen, Anette Dahl. 2002/2003. “O(↑)kay(?), ↑Ohkay”: En prosodiafhængig ytringspartikel. [“O(↑)kay(?), ↑Ohkay”: A prosody-dependent discourse particle.] Unpublished manuscript, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
Labov, Willam and Fanshel, David. 1977. Therapeutic Discourse: Psychotherapy as Conversation. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Linell, Per and Luckmann, Thomas. 1991. Asymmetries in dialogue: Some conceptual preliminaries. In: Asymmetries in Dialogue, Ivana Marková and Klaus Foppa (eds), 1–20. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1980. Telling my side: ‘limited access’ as a ‘fishing’ device. Sociological Inquiry 501, 186–198. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984a. Giving a source or basis: the practice in conversation of telling ‘how I know’. Journal of Pragmatics 81, 607–625. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984b. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In: Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage (eds), 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1984c. Pursuing a response. In: Structures of Social Action. Studies in conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage (eds), 152–163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey and Heritage, John. 2006. The epistemics of social relations: owning grandchildren. Language in Society 351, 677–705. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1984. On doing ‘being ordinary’. In: Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage (eds), 413–429. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Schegloff, Emanuel A. and Jefferson, Gail. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 501, 696–735. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2011. The epistemics of make-believe. In: The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers,Lorenza Mondada and Jakob Steensig (eds), 131–155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steensig, Jakob and Heinemann, Trine. In press. The social and moral work of modal constructions in granting remote requests. In: Requesting in Social Interaction, Paul Drew and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logo
Stivers, Tanya, Mondada, Lorenza and Steensig, Jakob. 2011. The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya and Rossano, Federico. 2010. Mobilizing Response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43, 1, 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2011. Morality and question design: ”of course” as contesting a presupposition of askability. In: The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada and Jakob Steensig (eds), 82–106. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Svennevig, Jan. 2008. Trying the easiest solution first in other-initiated repair, Journal of Pragmatics 40, 2, 333–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wu, Regina. 2004. Stance in Talk. A conversation analysis of Mandarin final particles. Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Due, Brian L.
2022. Situated co-operative creativity. Pragmatics and Society 13:4 ► pp. 684 ff. DOI logo
Thompson, Neil Aaron & Orla Byrne
2022. Imagining Futures: Theorizing the Practical Knowledge of Future-making. Organization Studies 43:2 ► pp. 247 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 september 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.