Cover not available

Article published In: Language and Dialogue
Vol. 6:3 (2016) ► pp.422–446

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Cooperative expressions of disagreement in Romanian culture

 | “Iorgu Iordan — Al. Rosetti” Institute of Linguistics of the Romanian Academy (Romania)
Published online: 8 December 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.6.3.04hoi
This paper aims to investigate the pragmatic features and strategies of disagreement in contemporary spoken Romanian, on the basis of authentic data. Disagreement will be regarded in its cooperative dimension, considering that all types of genuine, bona fide communication involve various stages in establishing an intellectual consensus. Special attention will be given to the main causes which generate communicative divergence: metalinguistic/metadiscursive (the dispute on the semantic/pragmatic use of language), dialectical (the debate of general ideas and principles) or factual (contradictory interpretation of facts). We shall try to formulate some general conclusions, in order to configure the profile of intellectual disagreement in Romanian society and to integrate it into an intercultural and anthropological perspective.
References (48)
Angouri, Jo. 2012. “Managing Disagreement in Problem Solving Meeting Talk.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (12): 1565–1579. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Angouri, Jo, and Miriam A. Locher. 2012. “Theorising Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (12): 1549–1553. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Breton, Philippe. 2003. L’argumentation dans la communication. Paris: Éditions La Découverte.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carter, Adam J. 2014. “Disagreement, Relativism, and Doxastic Revision.” Erkenntnis 79 (1): 155–172. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Christensen, David, and Jennifer Lackey (eds). 2013. The Epistemology of Disagreement. New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cohnitz, Daniel, and Teresa Marquez (eds). 2014a. “Disagreements.” Special issue Erkenntnis 79 (1).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014b. “Disagreements.” Special issue Erkenntnis 79 (1): 1–10. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan. 1996. “Towards an Anatomy of Impoliteness”. Journal of Pragmatics 25 (3): 349–367. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald. 1972/1991. Dire et ne pas dire. Principes de sémantique linguistique. Paris: Hermann.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feldman, Richard, and Ted Warfield (eds). 2009. Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geyer, Naomy. 2008. Discourse and Politeness. Ambivalent Face in Japanese. Norfolk: Biddles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glaser, Klaren. 2014. Inductive or Deductive. The Impact of Method of Instruction on The Acquisition of Pragmatic Competence. Lüneburg Universität Dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 2003. “Histrionic and Agonistic Features of Parliamentary Discourse”. Studies in Communication Sciences 3 (1): 25–53.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kakavá, Christina. 1993. Negotiation of Disagreement by Greeks in Casual Conversations and Classroom Discourse. PhD dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kappel, Klemens. 2014. “Factual Disagreement and Political Legitimacy.” In Expertise and Democracy, ed. by Cathrine Holst, 141–171. Oslo: ARENA Centre for European Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kelly, Thomas. 2005. “The Epistemic Significance of Disagreement.” In Oxford Studies in Epistemology. Vol. 11, ed. by John Hawthorne and Tamar Gendler, 167–196. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 1992. Les interactions verbales. Tome II1. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. Les interactions verbales. Tome III1. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koczogh, Helga. 2013. “Scrutinizing the Concept of (Verbal) Disagreement.” Argumentum 91: 211–222.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kotthoff, Helga. 1993. “Disagreement and Concession in Disputes: On the Context Sensitivity of Preference Structures.” Language in Society 22 (2): 193–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London–New York: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. 2004. Power and Politeness in Action. Disagreement in Oral Communication. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton. 2008. “Persuasive Definitions: Values, Meaning and Implicit Disagreements.” Informal logic 28(3): 203–228. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacFarlane, John. 2007. “Relativism and Disagreement.” Philosophical Studies 1231: 17–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGrath, Sarah. 2008. “Moral Disagreement and Moral Expertise.” In Oxford Studies in Metaethics 31, ed. by Russ Shafer-Landau, 87–107. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McMahon, Christopher. 2009. Reasonable Disagreement. A Theory of Political Morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Netz, Hadar. 2014. “Disagreement Patterns in Gifted Classes.” Journal of Pragmatics 611: 142–160. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perelman, Chaïm, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1958/2008. Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique. Brussels: Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plunkett, David, and Tim Sundell. 2013. “Disagreement and the Semantics of Normative and Evaluative Terms.” Philosophers’ Imprint 13 (23): 1–37. [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plunkett, David. 2015. “Which Concepts Should We Use? Metalinguistic Negotiation and The Methodology of Philosophy.” Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy. Special Issue: Philosophical Methodology and Metaphilosophy 58 (7–8): 828–874. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/ Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rees-Miller, Janie. 2000. “Power, Severity, and Context in Disagreement.” Journal of Pragmatics 32 (8): 1087–1111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Scott, Suzanne. 2002. “Linguistic Feature Variation within Disagreements: An Empirical Investigation”. Text 22 (2): 301–328. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sifianou, Maria. 2012. “Disagreement, Face and Politeness.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (12): 1554–1564. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevenson, Charles Leslie. 1960. Ethics and Language. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1963. Facts and Values: Studies in Ethical Analysis. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1998. “The Nature of Ethical Disagreement” (reproduction on Facts and Values) . In Ethical Theory 1. The Question of Objectivity, ed. by James Rachel, 43–50. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah. 2002. “Agonism in Academic Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 34 (11): 1651–1669. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Verbruggen, Freddy. 1965. “The Attitude Theory and the Disagreement or Controversy within Philosophy and between Philosophy and Science. A plea for a Theory of Persuasive Communication and Argumentation”. Philosophica 31: 145–159.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Waldron, Vincent R., and James L. Applegate. 1994. “Interpersonal Construct Differentiation and Conversational Planning. An Examination of Two Cognitive Accounts for the Production of Competent Verbal Disagreement Tactics”. Human Communication Research 21 (1): 3–35. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Walton, Douglas. 2001. “Persuasive Definitions and Public Policy Arguments.” Argumentation and Advocacy 371: 117–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yule, George. 1996. Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cambridge Dictionaries Online: [URL]
Merriam Webster Dictionary Online: [URL]
Ionescu-Ruxăndoiu, Liliana. 2002. Interacţiunea verbală în limba română actuală. Corpus selectiv. Schiţă de tipologie (Verbal Interaction in Present-day Romanian. Selective Corpora. Typology) [IVLRA]. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Interacţiunea verbală (IV II). Aspecte teoretice şi aplicative. Corpus] (Verbal Interaction (IV II). Theoretical and Applicative Aspects. Corpora) [IV II1]. Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
http://www.realitatea.net/realitatea_romaneasca.html
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Miron, Constantin & Livia Miron
2017. Case Study on Rehabilitation Solutions for Single Family Homes Using Eco-Sustainable, Natural, Local Materials. Advanced Engineering Forum 21 ► pp. 445 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue