4.3 Article

Initiating a Complaint: Change Over Time in French L2 Speakers' Practices

Journal

RESEARCH ON LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL INTERACTION
Volume 54, Issue 2, Pages 163-182

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/08351813.2021.1899709

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [P1NEP1_184343]
  2. Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF) [P1NEP1_184343] Funding Source: Swiss National Science Foundation (SNF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the change in French L2 speakers' practices for initiating complaints over time and across proficiency levels. It finds that while elementary speakers tend to launch complaints straightforwardly, advanced speakers use extensive prefatory work and often escalate negative stance expressions in collaboration with coparticipants.
This study documents change over time and across proficiency levels in French second-language (L2) speakers' practices for initiating complaints. Prior research has shown that speakers typically initiate complaints in a stepwise manner that indexes the contingent, moral, and delicate nature of the activity. Although elementary speakers in my data often launch complaint sequences in a straightforward way, they sometimes embodiedly foreshadow verbal expressions of negative stance or delay negative talk through brief positively valenced prefaces. More advanced speakers in part rely on the same initiation practices as elementary speakers. In addition, they recurrently use extensive prefatory work that accounts for and legitimizes the upcoming complaint, and they regularly initiate complaints jointly with coparticipants through a progressive escalation of negative stance expressions. I document interactional resources involved in this change and discuss the findings in terms of speakers' development of L2 interactional competence. Data are in French with English translations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available