Creating inequality: Breaking the rules in debates

Carole Edelsky, Karen Adams

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As both unabashed contests for power and forums for political candidates who, presumably, already have relatively substantial societal power, political debates offer a site for investigating the creation of more powerful language use for some, less powerful for others. Since the canonical debate form promises an equal distribution of turns and topic control to all debators through prespecification of practically everything that might vary in conversation (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1974), the instances within actual debate which violate rules for prespecification are prime sites for revealing gender issues. The out of order and oddly functioning talk in six televised political debates was analysed, holding the promise of fairness of canonical debates as a yardstick. Un-rule-y talk violated rules for who was to speak (uninvited and out of turn order UNs) and what was to be happening (unexpected and oddly functioning MOVEs). UNs and MOVEs were categorised, sorted, and analysed as to where they occurred, who did them, what special features they had, and what consequences they had for subsequent topics, turns, and event structuring. The analysis has implications for the study of gender and language as well as the study and conduct of political debates.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)171-190
Number of pages20
JournalJournal of Language and Social Psychology
Volume9
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1990

Fingerprint

United Nations
UNO
Language
gender
Interpersonal Relations
language
political power
fairness
conversation
candidacy
event
Power (Psychology)
Political Debate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Education
  • Anthropology
  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Creating inequality : Breaking the rules in debates. / Edelsky, Carole; Adams, Karen.

In: Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol. 9, No. 3, 1990, p. 171-190.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c7a8e56aebd447a5946ed2b960eccecd,
title = "Creating inequality: Breaking the rules in debates",
abstract = "As both unabashed contests for power and forums for political candidates who, presumably, already have relatively substantial societal power, political debates offer a site for investigating the creation of more powerful language use for some, less powerful for others. Since the canonical debate form promises an equal distribution of turns and topic control to all debators through prespecification of practically everything that might vary in conversation (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1974), the instances within actual debate which violate rules for prespecification are prime sites for revealing gender issues. The out of order and oddly functioning talk in six televised political debates was analysed, holding the promise of fairness of canonical debates as a yardstick. Un-rule-y talk violated rules for who was to speak (uninvited and out of turn order UNs) and what was to be happening (unexpected and oddly functioning MOVEs). UNs and MOVEs were categorised, sorted, and analysed as to where they occurred, who did them, what special features they had, and what consequences they had for subsequent topics, turns, and event structuring. The analysis has implications for the study of gender and language as well as the study and conduct of political debates.",
author = "Carole Edelsky and Karen Adams",
year = "1990",
doi = "10.1177/0261927X9093001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "171--190",
journal = "Journal of Language and Social Psychology",
issn = "0261-927X",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Creating inequality

T2 - Breaking the rules in debates

AU - Edelsky, Carole

AU - Adams, Karen

PY - 1990

Y1 - 1990

N2 - As both unabashed contests for power and forums for political candidates who, presumably, already have relatively substantial societal power, political debates offer a site for investigating the creation of more powerful language use for some, less powerful for others. Since the canonical debate form promises an equal distribution of turns and topic control to all debators through prespecification of practically everything that might vary in conversation (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1974), the instances within actual debate which violate rules for prespecification are prime sites for revealing gender issues. The out of order and oddly functioning talk in six televised political debates was analysed, holding the promise of fairness of canonical debates as a yardstick. Un-rule-y talk violated rules for who was to speak (uninvited and out of turn order UNs) and what was to be happening (unexpected and oddly functioning MOVEs). UNs and MOVEs were categorised, sorted, and analysed as to where they occurred, who did them, what special features they had, and what consequences they had for subsequent topics, turns, and event structuring. The analysis has implications for the study of gender and language as well as the study and conduct of political debates.

AB - As both unabashed contests for power and forums for political candidates who, presumably, already have relatively substantial societal power, political debates offer a site for investigating the creation of more powerful language use for some, less powerful for others. Since the canonical debate form promises an equal distribution of turns and topic control to all debators through prespecification of practically everything that might vary in conversation (Sacks, Schegloff & Jefferson, 1974), the instances within actual debate which violate rules for prespecification are prime sites for revealing gender issues. The out of order and oddly functioning talk in six televised political debates was analysed, holding the promise of fairness of canonical debates as a yardstick. Un-rule-y talk violated rules for who was to speak (uninvited and out of turn order UNs) and what was to be happening (unexpected and oddly functioning MOVEs). UNs and MOVEs were categorised, sorted, and analysed as to where they occurred, who did them, what special features they had, and what consequences they had for subsequent topics, turns, and event structuring. The analysis has implications for the study of gender and language as well as the study and conduct of political debates.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84970718905&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84970718905&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0261927X9093001

DO - 10.1177/0261927X9093001

M3 - Article

VL - 9

SP - 171

EP - 190

JO - Journal of Language and Social Psychology

JF - Journal of Language and Social Psychology

SN - 0261-927X

IS - 3

ER -