Article published In: Narrative Inquiry
Vol. 31:2 (2021) ► pp.263–286
Entextualizing and contextualizing the status quo in domestic violence narratives
Published online: 10 February 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.19052.and
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.19052.and
Abstract
Victim/survivors of domestic violence are asked to tell their stories many times, in different contexts, and for
different audiences. These stories are contextualized for the new context and audience at the same time that they become texts –
entextualization – in that context. This article argues that narrative is produced via the co-processes of entextualization and
contextualization (Silverstein, M., & Urban, G. (Eds.). (1996). Natural histories of discourse. University of Chicago Press.). The co-processes of
entextualization/contextualization in domestic violence narratives about staying and leaving violent relationships produce stories
that comport with the status quo, as it is envisioned in the stories of the victim/survivors. Using staying/leaving stories of
domestic violence victim/survivors, I show that entextualizations/contextualizations are (1) socioculturally saturated processes
and (2) rhetorical arguments. I argue that narratives entextualize/contextualize events of domestic violence in ways that involve
and comply with the status quo. Ultimately, these processes create discursive resources that reinforce domestic violence.
Keywords: entextualization, contextualization, argument, status quo, domestic violence
Article outline
- Introduction
- Narrative data
- Text, context, culture
- Discourse analysis and domestic violence
- Staying stories
- Leaving stories
- Conclusions
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (37)
Bamberg, M. (2006). Stories: Big or small: Why do we care? Narrative inquiry, 16(1), 139–147.
Baynham, M. (2003). Narratives in Space and Time. Narrative Inquiry, 13(2), 347–366.
Carranza, I. E. (2015). Narrating and arguing. In A. De Fina & A. Georgakopoulou (Eds.), The Handbook of Narrative Analysis (57–75). John Wiley & Sons.
Carriere, K. R. (2014). Culture cultivating culture: The four products of the meaning-made world. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 48(3), 270–282.
Clevenger, B. J. M., & Roe-Sepowitz, D. (2009). Shelter service utilization of domestic violence victims. Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 19(4), 359–374.
De Fina, A., & Perrino, S. (2011). Introduction: Interviews vs. ‘natural’ contexts: A false dilemma. Language in Society, 40(1), 1–11.
Farmer, A., & Tiefenthaler, J. (2003). Explaining the recent decline in domestic violence. Contemporary Economic Policy, 21(2), 158–172.
Glassie, H. (1982). Passing the time in Ballymenone (Vol. 61). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Kennedy, S., & Ruggles, S. (2014). Breaking up is hard to count: The rise of divorce in the United States, 1980–2010. Demography, 51(2), 587–598.
Mahoney, M. R. (1991). Legal images of battered women: Redefining the issue of separation. Michigan Law Review, 90(1), 1–94.
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (2019). National Statistics Domestic Violence Fact Sheet. [URL]
National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (2017). [URL]
O’Keefe, M. (2005). Teen dating violence: A review of risk factors and prevention efforts. National Electronic Network on violence against women, 11, 1–5.
Ostrowski, C. J. (1996). The clothesline project: women’s stories of gender-related violence. Women and Language, 19(1), 37–41.
Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric: a treatise on argumentation, trans. J. Wilkinson and P. Weaver. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.
Riggs, D. S., Caulfield, M. B., & Street, A. E. (2000). Risk for domestic violence: Factors associated with perpetration and victimization. Journal of clinical psychology, 56(10), 1289–1316.
Roulston, K., & Shelton, S. A. (2015). Reconceptualizing bias in teaching qualitative research methods. Qualitative Inquiry, 21(4), 332–342.
Schiffrin, D. (1996). Narrative as self-portrait: Sociolinguistic constructions of identity. Language in society, 25(2), 167–203.
Silverstein, M., & Urban, G. (Eds.). (1996). Natural histories of discourse. University of Chicago Press.
Slunecko, T., & Hengl, S. (2007). Language, cognition, subjectivity: A dynamic constitution. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociocultural psychology (pp. 40–61). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stark, E. (2009). Coercive control: The entrapment of women in personal life. Oxford University Press.
Stokoe, E., & Edwards, D. (2007). Story formulations in talk-in-interaction. In M. Bamberg (Ed.), Narrative-State of the art (pp. 69–79). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.
Street, B. V. (1993). Culture is a Verb: Anthropological aspects of language and cultural. In Language and Culture: Papers from the Annual Meeting of the British Association of Applied Linguistics Held at Trevelyan College, University of Durham, September 1991 (Vol. 71, p. 23). Multilingual Matters.
Trinch, S. L. (2003). Latinas’ narratives of domestic abuse: Discrepant versions of violence (Vol. 171). John Benjamins Publishing.
(2005). Acquiring authority through the acquisition of genre: Latinas, intertextuality and violence. Speech, Language, and the Law, 12(1), 19–47.
Valsiner, J. (2007). Culture in minds and societies: Foundations of cultural psychology. SAGE Publications India.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Andrus, Jennifer
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 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.