Stance-taking in Spanish-speaking Preschoolers’ Argumentative Interaction

Open access

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine what linguistic resources are used for stance-taking in confrontational interactions. For this purpose, we analyze 70 argumentative sequences in spontaneous peer conversations during play situations of 4 dyads (2 mid and 2 low socio-economic status backgrounds) of 4 to 7-year-old Argentinian children. Stance-taking relies on the use of evaluative language, understood as the markers of speaker’s attitude (reference to internal states such as attribute, cognition, emotion, intention, and reported speech, [Shiro, 2003]); and the use of evidential markers, understood as speaker’s reference to the status of the information in the utterance (causality, concession, capacity, deontic and epistemic modality, and inference, [Shiro, 2007]), including markers of politeness which serve to mitigate (or intensify) the confrontation (Watts, 2003). Our findings describe the evaluative resources used for stance-taking strategies produced by children at this early age in confrontational interactions with their peers.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Berman R. (2004). Between emergence and mastery: The long developmental route to language acquisition. In R. Berman (Ed.) Language development across childhood and adolescence (pp. 9–34). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Blum-Kulka S. & Snow C. (2004). Introduction: The potential of peer-talk. Discourse Studies6(3) 291–306.

  • Blum-Kulka S. Huck-Taglicht D. & Avni H. (2004). The social and discursive spectrum of peer talk. Discourse Studies6(3) 307–328.

  • Blum-Kulka S. Hamo M. & Habib T. (2010). Explanations in naturally occurring peer talk: Conversational emergence and function thematic scope and contribution to the development of discursive skills. First Language30(3–4) 440–460.

  • Bornstein M. H. Hahn C.-S. & Haynes O. M. (2004). Specific and general language performance across early childhood: stability and gender considerations. First Language24 267–304.

  • Bova A. & Arcidiacono F. (2013). Investigating children’s why-questions: A study comparing argumentative and explanatory function. Discourse Studies15(6) 713-734.

  • Brown P. & Levinson S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Burdelski M. (2010). Socializing politeness routines: Action other-orientation and embodiment in a Japanese preschool. Journal of Pragmatics 42 1606–1621.

  • Chafe W. (1986). Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing (pp. 261–272). In W. Chafe and J. Nichols (Eds.) Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood NJ: Ablex.

  • Cobb-Moore C. Danby S. & Farrell A. (2009). Young children as rule markers. Journal of Pragmatics41 1477–1492.

  • Dersley I. & Wootton A. J. (2000). Observations about complaint sequences within antagonistic arguments. Research on Language and Social Interaction33 375–406.

  • Dersley I. & Wootton A. J (2001). In the heat of the sequence: Interactional features preceding walkouts from argumentative talk. Language in Society30 611–638.

  • Du Bois J. (2007). The stance triangle. In Englebretson R. (Ed.). Stancetaking in discourse (pp. 139–182). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Dunn J. & Munn P. (1987). Development of justification in disputes with mother and siblings. Developmental Psychology23(6) 791–798.

  • Eisenberg A. (1987). Learning to argue with parents and peers. Argumentation1(2) 113–125.

  • Eisenberg A. (1992). Conflicts between mothers and their young children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly38(1) 21–43.

  • Eisenberg A. & Garvey C. (1981). Children’s use of verbal strategies in resolving conflicts. Discourse Processes4 149–170.

  • Goetz P. J. (2010). The development of verbal justifications in the conversations of preschool children and adults. First Language30(3-4) 403–420.

  • Goetz P. J. & Shatz M. (1999). When and how peers give reasons: justifications in the talk of middle-school children. Journal of Child Language26 721–48.

  • Goffman E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. Garden City: Doubleday.

  • Goodwin C. (2006). Retrospective and prospective orientation in the construction of argumentative moves. Text & Talk26(4-5) 443–461.

  • Goodwin C. & Goodwin M. H. (1990). Interstitial argument. In A. Grimshaw (Ed.) Conflict talk (pp. 85–117). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Goodwin M. H. & Goodwin C. (1987). Children’s arguing. In S. U. Philips S. Steele & C. Tanz (Eds.) Studies in the social and cultural foundations of language. Language gender and sex in comparative perspective (pp. 200–248). New York: Cambridge University Press.

  • Henrich J. Heine S. J. & Norenzayan A. (2010) The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences33 61–135.

  • Heritage J. (1984). Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.

  • Heritage J. & Sorjonen M. L. (1994). Constituting and maintaining activities across sequences: And-prefacing as a feature of question design. Language in Society23 1–29.

  • Köymen B. Rosenbaum L. & Tomasello M. (2014). Reasoning during joint decision-making by preschool peers. Cognitive Development 32 74–85.

  • Köymen B. Schmidt M. Rost L. Lieven E. & Tomasello M. (2015). Teaching versus enforcing game rules in peer interactions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology135 93–101.

  • Küntay A. Nakamura K. & Sen B. A. (2014). Crosslinguistic and crosscultural approaches to pragmatic development. In D. Matthews (Ed.) Pragmatic development in first language acquisition (pp. 317–342). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Kyratzis A. Ross T. S. & Köymen B. S. (2010). Validating justifications in preschool girls’ and boys’ friendship group talk: implications for linguistic and socio-cognitive development. Journal of Child Language37(1) 115–144.

  • Leitão. S. (2007). Argumentação e desenvolvimento do pensamento reflexivo. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica20(3) 454–462.

  • Linell P. (1998). Approaching dialogue. Talk interaction and contexts in dialogical perspectives. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

  • MacWhinney B. (2000). The CHILDES project: Tools for analyzing talk. Volume I: Transcription format and programs. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Matsui T. (2014). Children’s understanding of certainty and evidentiality. In D. Matthews (Ed.) Pragmatic development in first language acquisition (pp. 295–316). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Maynard D. W. (1985). How children start arguments. Language in Society14 1–30.

  • Migdalek M. J. & Rosemberg C. R. (2013). Construcción multimodal de los argumentos de niños pequeños en disputas durante situaciones de juego. Papeles de Trabajo sobre Cultura Educación y Desarrollo Humano9(4) 1–16.

  • Migdalek M.J Rosemberg C. R. & Arrúe J. E. (2015). Argumentación infantil en situaciones de juego: diferencias en función del contexto. Propuesta Educativa44(2) 79–88.

  • Migdalek M. J. Rosemberg C. R. & Santibáñez Yáñez C. (2014a). La génesis de la argumentación. Un estudio con niños de 3 a 5 años en distintos contextos de juego. Íkala Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura19(3) 251–267.

  • Migdalek M. J. Santibáñez Yáñez C. & Rosemberg C. R. (2014b). Estrategias argumentativas en niños pequeños: Un estudio a partir de las disputas durante el juego en contextos escolares. Revista Signos47(86) 435–462.

  • Nelson K. (1996). Language in cognitive development. The emergence of the mediated mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Nelson K. (2007). Young minds in social worlds: Experience meaning and memory. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press

  • Ninio A. & Snow C. (1996). Pragmatic development. Boulder CO: Westview Press.

  • Ochs E. (1986). Introduction. In B. B. Schieffelin E. Ochs (Eds.) Language socialization across cultures (pp. 1–13). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Peronard M. (1991). Antecedentes ontogenéticos de la argumentación. In E. L. Traill (Eds.) Scripta philologica: in honorem Juan M. Lope Blanch 3 (pp. 417–443). México: UNAM.

  • Phinney J. S. (1986). The structure of 5-year-olds’ verbal quarrels with peers and siblings. The Journal of Genetic Psychology147(1) 47–60.

  • Rosemberg C. R Arrúe J. E. & Alam F. (2005-2012). Home language environments of 4-year old Argentinean children from different socio-cultural groups. Buenos Aires: CONICET.

  • Rosemberg C. R. Silva M. L. & Stein A. (2011). Narrativas infantiles en contexto: un estudio en hogares de barrios urbano marginados de Buenos Aires. Revista del Instituto de Ciencias de la Educación Universidad de Buenos Aires28 135–154.

  • Sacks H. Schegloff. E. A. & Jefferson G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language50 696–735

  • Schegloff E. A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. American Anthropologist70 1075–1095.

  • Schegloff E. A. (1990). On the organization of sequences as a source of ‘coherence’ in talk-in-interaction. In B. Dorval (Ed.) Conversational organization and its development (pp.51–77). Norwood NJ: Ablex.

  • Shantz C. U. (1987). Conflicts between children. Child Development58 283–305.

  • Shiro M. (2003). Genre and evaluation in narrative development. Journal of Child Language30(1) 165–194.

  • Shiro M. (2004). Expressions of epistemic modality and construction of narrative stance in Venezuelan children’s narratives. Psychology of Language and Communication8(2) 35–56.

  • Shiro M. (2007). La construcción del punto de vista en los relatos orales de niños en edad escolar: un análisis discursivo de la modalidad. Caracas: UCV.

  • Shiro M. (2008). Narrative stance in Venezuelan children’s stories. In A. McCabe A. Imbaley & G. Melzi (Eds.) Spanish language narration and literacy: Culture cognition and emotion (pp. 213–237). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Shiro M. (2012). “Y entonces le dijo….“ Representación del habla en las narraciones orales de niños venezolanos. Boletín de Lingüística37-38 119–143.

  • Sprott R. A. (1992). On giving reasons in verbal disputes: The development of justifying. Argumentation & Advocacy29(2) 61–76.

  • Stein N. & Albro E. R. (2001). The origins and nature of arguments: Studies in conflict understanding emotion and negotiation. Discourse Processes32(2-3) 113–133.

  • Toulmin S. E. (2003). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Watts. R. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Zadunaisky Ehrlich S. & Blum-Kulka S. (2010). Peer talk as a ‘double opportunity space’: The case of argumentative discourse. Discourse & Society21(2) 211–233.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.29

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.118
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.410

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 70 70 9
PDF Downloads 61 61 15