Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 28:3 (2018) ► pp.333–360
The multimodal enactment of deontic and epistemic authority in Indian meetings
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 27 August 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17011.cli
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.17011.cli
Abstract
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
References (48)
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.
Asmuβ, Birte, and Jan Svennevig. 2009. “Meeting Talk: An Introduction.” Journal of Business Communication 46 (1): 3–22.
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.
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. .
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter. 2010. “Directives: Entitlement and Contingency in Action.” Discourse Studies 12 (4): 419–442. .
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. .
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.
Gee, James Paul, Glynda Hull, and Colin Lankshear. 1996. The New Work Order. London: Saint Leonards Allen and Unwin.
Goodwin, Charles. 1981. Conversational Organization: Interaction between Speakers and Hearers. New York: Academic Press.
. 2000. “Action and Embodiment within Situated Human Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 32 (10): 1489–1522.
Griswold, Olga. 2007. “Achieving Authority: Discursive Practices in Russian Girls’ Pretend Play.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 40 (4): 291–319. .
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.
Heritage, John. 2012. “The Epistemic Engine: Sequence Organization and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1): 30–52.
. 2013. “Epistemics in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell, and Tanya Stivers, 370–394. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
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.
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. .
Kakar, Sudhir. 1971. Authority Patterns and Subordinate Behavior in Indian Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 16 (3): 298–307.
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. .
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.
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.
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.
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.
Peräkylä, Anssi. 2011. “Validity in Research on Naturally Occurring Interaction.” In Qualitative Research, ed. by David Silverman, 365–382. London: Sage.
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. “Giving a Source or Basis: The Practice in Conversation of Telling “how I know”.” Journal of Pragmatics 8 (2): 607–625.
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.
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2000. “The Voice of Authority: The Local Accomplishment of Authoritative Discourse in Live News Broadcasts.” Discourse Studies 2 (3): 354–379
Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage. 2006. “The Epistemics of Social Relations: Owning Grandchildren.” Language in Society 35 (5): 677–705. .
Sacks, Harvey. 1992. Lectures on Conversation (21 vols, edited by Gail Jefferson with introduction by Emanuel A. Schegloff). Oxford UK & Cambridge USA: Blackwell.
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.
Sinha, Jai B. P., and D. Sinha. 1990. “Role of Social Values in Indian Organizations.” International Journal of Psychology 25 (3–6): 705–714.
Stevanovic, Melisa. 2013. Deontic Rights in Interaction: A Conversation Analytic Study on Authority and Cooperation. Helsinki: University of Helsinki.
. 2015. “Displays of Uncertainty and Proximal Deontic Claims: The Case of Proposal Sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics 781: 84–97.
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. .
. 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.
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Jan Svennevig. 2015. Introduction: Epistemics and Deontics in Conversational Directives. Journal of Pragmatics 781: 1–6.
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.
Svennevig, Jan. 2012. “The Agenda as Resource for Topic Introduction in Workplace Meetings”. Discourse Studies 14 (1): 53–66.
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.
. 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.
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.
Van De Mieroop, Dorien, and Stephanie Schnurr (eds). 2017. Identity struggles: Evidence from workplaces around the world. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
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. .
Cited by (16)
Cited by 16 other publications
Huang, Xu & Xuekun Liu
Tůma, František
Yu, Buqing & Dorien Van De Mieroop
Huang, Xu & Yongping Ran
Nasi, Nicola
Salomaa, Elina, Dorien Van De Mieroop & Esa Lehtinen
2024. Negotiating leader identities through indirect mockery in talk about decision-making in a distributed
leadership context. Language and Dialogue 14:1 ► pp. 122 ff.
Van De Mieroop, Dorien, Melisa Stevanovic, Minna Leinonen & Henri Nevalainen
Ekström, Mats & Melisa Stevanovic
Nicolaisen, Emilie Munch & Gitte Rasmussen
Clifton, Jonathan, Geert Jacobs, Julia Valeiras-Jurado & Astrid Vandendaele
Mutiara, Rika
Stevanovic, Melisa, Elina Weiste & Lise-Lotte Uusitalo
Holmes, Janet
Stephenson, Michael
Van De Mieroop, Dorien
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.
