Discourse Theory
Discourse intellectual traditions
Dillion’s Discourse Theory is rooted in various philosophical, anthropological, and social theories This theory is explored through three key intellectual traditions: hermeneutics, which focuses on interpretation; ethnography and social theory, which examine cultural practices and societal structures; and the analysis of power, which investigates the dynamics of influence and authority within discourse.
In the tradition of hermeneutics, discourse occurs within a common horizon of preunderstanding that is often implicit and cannot be fully articulated It is essential to recognize that no discourse is entirely self-sufficient; instead, the capacity to engage as a participant is developed through initiation and experiential learning rather than solely through reading.
Understanding any discourse requires consideration of the unique pre-existing knowledge and experiences of each participant, making complete comprehension elusive Mohanty, in A Dictionary of Cultural and Critical Theory (2010), elaborates on the concept of 'preunderstanding,' highlighting its significance in interpreting meaning.
“Understanding is never without any presupposition, but is always on the basis of a prior “fore- structure” […] This fore-structure consists of fore-having, fore-sight, and fore-conception” (2010:
The relationship between discourse and its participants is rooted in a shared understanding of its practices, necessitating some form of initiation for effective engagement Participation in discourse relies on existing frameworks, which are inherently diverse and cannot be precisely defined Consequently, discourse is dynamic and frequently subject to varying interpretations and challenges.
Ethnography and social theory focus on the observation of cultural practices, highlighting and questioning various institutional discourses This approach views discourse as emerging from social forms and practices, emphasizing the researcher’s role as an outsider Consequently, the findings are influenced by the researcher’s subjective perspective, which contrasts with an insider's understanding.
The analysis of power within the socio-historical framework of late capitalist societies highlights discourse as a tool for enacting and legitimizing inequality (Dillion 1994: 211) Proponents of the non-Marxist tradition view discourse as a regulatory instrument, emphasizing its role in silencing and marginalizing voices through hegemonic narratives These hegemonic discourses operate on the basis of consent, reinforcing existing power dynamics and inequalities.
‘hegemony’ (gr hegemõn – leader, commander, guide, ruler) refers to “political domination or leadership” (ibid.) The notion of ‘hegemony’ was developed by Gramsci, who proposed that
The economic and political dominance of a particular class is closely linked to its cultural and intellectual leadership, achieved through a form of consent rather than explicit obedience This implicit consent reflects an internalized relationship between the dominant and the dominated, where hegemony serves an organizational function by unifying the class's worldview and aligning social institutions with its objectives Hegemonic discourses, therefore, play a crucial role in shaping power dynamics, facilitating the dominant group's control over others through mutual consent.
‘power’, as such, should not be understood solely as a coercive tool of suppression The analysis of
Discourse Theory examines the role of 'power' in language use within institutional contexts, highlighting its ability to influence and manipulate different audiences Much of the research in this area, particularly in fields like medicine, law, education, and media, investigates how discourse intertwines with historical and material realities This includes shaping the roles of individuals, such as students, and managing mass audiences effectively (Dillion 1994: 211).
The three major traditions followed by the Discourse Theory does not encompass a variety of existing approaches, for instance, those proposed by Bhatia, Flowerdew and Jones in Advances in
Discourse Studies (2008) highlights that while there are commonalities between various discourse analysis approaches and discourse theorists' ideas, the former offers a more comprehensive framework This includes corpus-based approaches, genre analysis, conversation analysis, critical discourse analysis, multimodal discourse analysis, mediated discourse analysis, and ethnographic approaches Although the two intellectual traditions share similar study aims and analysis objects, they reflect a tendency toward compartmentalization within academic disciplines Nevertheless, language studies are evolving towards a more integrative and interdisciplinary approach.
2.1.2.3.1 Power and critical discourse analysis
Since one of the aims of the paper is to show how the institutional discourse of television (American
TV talk shows serve as a critical lens for analyzing the interplay of discourse and power, revealing how language usage reflects and shapes broader societal dynamics This analysis goes beyond mere description, focusing on the relationships between institutions, discourse, and the subjects involved By employing critical discourse analysis (CDA) alongside conversation analysis (CA), researchers can examine both the micro-level interpersonal power dynamics and the macro-level social power exerted through institutional discourse This dual approach provides a comprehensive understanding of how power relationships are manifested in television interactions, highlighting the significance of discourse in shaping societal structures.
According to Flowerdew (2008), Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) emphasizes the importance of power relationships in linguistics, with texts serving as the primary unit of analysis This research focuses on television conversations, highlighting the need to connect theories of society with theories of language, as language is a form of social behavior Flowerdew further asserts that discourse and society are mutually constitutive; one cannot exist without the other This perspective aligns with Foucauldian notions of discourse and subjectivity, suggesting that individuals can only exist by identifying with roles created through discourse For a deeper exploration of the subject, refer to section 3.1 of chapter 3.
The author emphasizes that Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) focuses on specific discursive contexts where issues of dominance and inequality are prominent However, he points out that this analysis does not simplify interactions into a binary of heroes and villains, highlighting the complexity of discursive exchanges (Flowerdew 2008: 195).
Participants in discourse often lack awareness of their power dynamics, and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) plays a crucial role in uncovering these relationships Furthermore, Flowerdew aligns with Hegel's perspective that criticism serves not only as a negative assessment but also fulfills a positive, liberating function.
The dynamics between participants in selected TV talk shows reflect their defined roles as interviewer and interviewee This relationship is intricately linked to the institution they represent, as the interviewer is also a member of the media or specific TV channel Consequently, the discourse employed is not solely a personal expression but rather a manifestation of the institutional agenda, highlighting the influence of institutional frameworks on communication.
TV talk shows rely on an audience to represent societal views, with their reactions serving as a reflection of public opinion While some critics argue that Conversation Analysis (CA) is too simplistic for comprehensive discourse analysis, it highlights the intricate social relationships among participants, including passive viewers, which can support broader generalizations about society.
Traditional vs Foucauldian approach to power
Power is often viewed negatively, primarily as a tool for repression, particularly in the context of state institutions like the legal system This perspective highlights a power dynamic where law-abiding citizens represent order through consensus, while lawbreakers are seen as threats to societal stability and are thus subjected to punishment This framework not only safeguards the community but also reinforces the existing system Foucault refers to this perception of power relations as a form of "monarchical rule."
The legal system serves a dual role as both a protector and a punisher, with its function influenced by the type of government in place This duality indicates that power can be effectively utilized to maintain order and safeguard against those who violate the law.
Foucault posits that power is not the exclusive domain of any individual or group, challenging the notion that some possess power while others must submit to it He emphasizes that power should not be viewed as a property or right, nor does it originate from a single source or follow a top-down hierarchy As Hall notes, power is not monopolized by a central authority, highlighting its decentralized and pervasive nature.
Foucault asserts that power is an omnipresent force within all aspects of social organization, suggesting that individuals are never outside its influence and there are no margins for those who resist the system However, this perspective does not imply that one must accept an unyielding form of domination or an absolute authority dictated by the law Being unable to escape power does not equate to a state of perpetual defeat.
Foucault argues that power knows no boundaries, as it is composed of interconnected networks He implies that even when individuals attempt to step outside the system, they remain entangled in the ongoing dynamics of previous power relationships Furthermore, he asserts that power is not exclusively a function of legal authority, suggesting the presence of alternative forms of power beyond traditional frameworks.
“asymmetrical” power relationships (1980: 98) However, by saying that one should not necessarily be paralyzed or “trapped”, Foucault alludes to persistence of some form of resistance.
Foucault introduces six hypotheses about power, asserting that it is intertwined with the social body, leaving no room for absolute freedom within its network (1980: 141) He likens the flow of power to capillary circulation, permeating every part of the social body (1980: 119) Furthermore, individuals play an active role in this dynamic, serving as vehicles of power rather than mere points of application (1980: 98).
Power relationships are intricately linked with various other types of relationships, functioning as both a conditioning and conditioned force Essentially, these pervasive power dynamics are shaped by causality, where 'power' not only influences individuals but also enables them to be active producers of that very power.
Foucault emphasizes that 'power' is not merely a system of prohibition and punishment; it is multifaceted and lacks a singular source of domination Instead of viewing power as a hierarchical structure that generates binary oppositions of domination and resistance, it should be recognized for its adaptive and transformative nature This pervasive quality allows power to seamlessly integrate into "global strategies," highlighting its coherent transmission throughout society.
Fifth, the author argues that “power relations do indeed ‘serve’, but not at all because they are
Power relations extend beyond merely serving economic interests; they are inherently versatile and can be leveraged for various strategic purposes This multifaceted nature of power dynamics enables their application in different contexts, highlighting that their significance is not limited to economic outcomes alone.
Foucault emphasizes that 'power' and 'resistance' are intrinsically linked, asserting that one cannot exist without the other He argues that resistance is not external but operates within the same relational framework as power, manifesting in various forms Foucault states that there are no power relations without corresponding resistances, which are particularly significant as they arise directly where power is exercised This means that resistance does not need to originate from outside to be effective; instead, it gains strength by coexisting with power Consequently, both power and resistance are complex and can be integrated into broader strategies.
Power exists in various forms and is ever-present, which implies that resistance, along with its suitable expressions, is equally active When utilizing a Foucauldian perspective to analyze power dynamics, it is essential to consider the historical context and the discourses generated by its institutions.
Discourse analysis is intricately linked to the examination of power, as power circulates through individuals in a networked manner Individuals do not simply transmit power; they actively produce it This circular dynamic indicates that individuals are shaped by power, leading to the creation of specific subject positions Consequently, a model of power, discourse, and subjectivity can be established.
This chapter explores the concept of the 'subject' in discourse, highlighting two distinct perspectives The traditional view sees individuals as independent subjects, while the Foucauldian perspective presents individuals as dependent subjects, emphasizing their subjection to various influences.
4.1 Traditional vs Foucauldian Conception of Subject
Having established the concept of discourse as a social practice, which draws connection between produced texts to broader social practices and looked at ‘power’ relations as a circular movement to the
To understand the role of individuals within the social structure, it is essential to examine their position as subjects, as highlighted by Foucault (1980: 139) The concept of the 'subject' is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of 'power' and 'discourse,' as individuals are influenced and shaped by both forces.
The traditional view of the 'subject' posits that individuals are autonomous creators of meaning and discourse, as Hall (2005: 79) describes them as "fully endowed with consciousness" and the "independent, authentic source of action." This perspective suggests that individuals are aware of their agency and actively construct their identities and meanings Departing from this notion, the subject is seen not as a product of discourse but as its author, asserting that even if discourse is misinterpreted, the individuals behind it retain a clear understanding of their own meanings (Hall, 2005: 79).
Traditional vs Foucauldian conception of the subject
Having established the concept of discourse as a social practice, which draws connection between produced texts to broader social practices and looked at ‘power’ relations as a circular movement to the
To understand the role of individuals within the social structure, it is essential to examine their position as subjects, as highlighted by Foucault (1980: 139) The concept of the 'subject' is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of 'power' and 'discourse,' as individuals are influenced and shaped by these forces.
The traditional view of the 'subject' posits that individuals are independent and autonomous creators of discourse and meaning According to Hall (2005: 79), individuals are seen as fully conscious, stable entities—the core of the self and authentic sources of action This perspective suggests that individuals are aware of their agency and create meanings that resonate with their self-identity However, Hall challenges this notion by asserting that the subject is not merely produced by discourse; rather, it is the author of discourse He further emphasizes that even when discourse is misunderstood or lacks meaning for others, its authors maintain a clear understanding of themselves, as they are the original sources of meaning (2005: 79).
This conceptualization alters the dynamics of power, disrupting its traditional flow and eliminating the linear transmission of authority Individuals are recognized as free agents, positioned outside conventional power structures They acknowledge the existence of boundaries, or "margins," within power relations, consciously choosing to engage with or withdraw from these dynamics.
The traditional view of the 'subject' empowers individuals, allowing them to become the authors of their own meaningful narratives that shape their identity This autonomy leads to a recognition of the limits of power, as individuals understand the boundaries within which power operates.
The notion of the individual as an autonomous creator of knowledge was famously established by J.S.Mill In his classical work On Liberty (1859), an English philosopher John Stuart Mill (1773 –
In 1836, it was asserted that individuals possess a fundamental right to pursue their own good through their chosen means, provided they do not infringe upon the freedoms of others, with the law and society tasked to safeguard this right Mill envisioned the individual as a creator and seeker of knowledge and truth, whose will, intellect, and talent drive societal progress He staunchly opposed state control over personal opinions and actions that pertain solely to the individual.
In his analysis of society, Mill identified a concerning trend of assimilation and conformity, which he viewed as a significant threat to individualism He posited that those who allow societal norms to dictate their choices lack the need for diverse talents, relying instead on mere mimicry In contrast, individuals who actively shape their own life plans harness their unique skills to achieve their goals Mill emphasized that human nature should not be seen as a rigid machine with a predetermined function; rather, it resembles a tree that thrives and evolves in various directions, driven by intrinsic forces Ultimately, Mill positions the individual as the central figure, serving as the primary source of knowledge and power.
The Foucauldian view posits that discourse, rather than individuals, generates knowledge, positioning the subject as the "object of knowledge" (Hall 2005: 79, 88) In "Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice," Barker supports this perspective by arguing that identities are not inherent but are shaped through "anti-essentialism," which asserts that identities lack essential or universal qualities (2003: 11) Instead, he suggests that identities are "discursive constructions," formed through regulated ways of speaking about the world Consequently, individuals are born into a discourse and encounter various discourses throughout their lives, utilizing these discursive materials to construct their identities.
“representations” to form an identity (ibid.)
Individuals may not actively participate in the creation of discourse; however, as Hall (2005) emphasizes, they do produce discourse that is shaped by specific historical and cultural contexts, governed by particular "discursive formations" and "regimes of truth." This dependency on discourse means that individuals must adhere to its principles, norms, and truths prevalent in their time Consequently, while subjects serve as vehicles for the knowledge and power generated by discourse, they cannot originate it.
The concept of being 'subjected to' originates from the dual meanings of the term 'subject,' which refers to both being under someone else's control and being connected to one's own identity through conscience and self-awareness These interpretations imply a power dynamic that subjugates individuals According to Hall, discourse plays a crucial role in the formation of subjects in two distinct ways.
In his 2005 work, Hall discusses how subjects are defined by the "discursive regimes" of their historical context, which label individuals with terms such as "madman," "hysterical woman," or "homosexual." These regimes not only categorize subjects but also establish a "place" where their knowledge gains significance Consequently, discourse shapes a "subject position" that imparts meaning to knowledge, contingent upon individuals identifying with these positions Hall expands on Foucault's ideas by emphasizing that variations in social class, gender, race, and ethnicity further influence how individuals engage with these discursive frameworks.
Individuals cannot derive meaning from discourse until they align themselves with the positions it establishes, adhering to its rules, and ultimately becoming subjects of its power and knowledge.
Discourse shapes the subject positions individuals identify with, influencing their identities However, it is inaccurate to suggest that individuals are limited to a single subject position, as they embody various roles The diversity in subject positions individuals adopt highlights the complexity of their identities.
The traditional and Foucauldian views of the ‘subject’ present a stark contrast; the former sees the subject as an active doer and creator of unique discourses, while Foucault decentralizes this notion, positioning the subject as a link in a broader chain of power In Foucault's framework, individuals are subjected to external control and become vehicles of discourse, embodying its power and knowledge As discourses create subjects, they also establish subject positions that individuals must adopt to derive meaning The next section will delve into these subject positions and the conditions that allow individuals to assume specific roles.
Subject positions
In "The Language of Television" (2002), Marshall and Werndly build on Foucault's concept that discourses shape subject positions within society They illustrate this by noting how various discourses, such as medicine, law, and education, create defined roles like doctors and patients, judges and prisoners, or teachers and students Similarly, the media discourse establishes roles for communicators, including senders and receivers of information, as well as specific positions in TV and radio formats, such as interviewers and interviewees.
Marshall and Werndly (2002) highlight that roles and identities are fluid and context-dependent, becoming relevant only under specific circumstances For instance, patients are typically examined in a doctor's office, and news anchors do not deliver news in a church setting Certain roles, such as that of a police officer, carry social authority derived from legal discourse, enabling them to monitor and control individuals Conversely, familial roles, like those of a father or mother, are shaped by different discourses Additionally, individuals embrace and internalize these subject positions to form their identities, which can lead to a positive or negative self-perception However, conflicting roles may limit or constrain one's sense of self.
Television discourse shapes various representations, including movie characters, opinions, social norms, and cultural values, influencing audience perceptions and identities Well-known guests on TV talk shows, primarily from the entertainment industry, present their celebrity personas while also revealing personal aspects of their lives, such as family roles This interplay of professional and personal identities creates an identity-forming discourse that audiences absorb, highlighting mediated cultural values and lifestyles.
To understand television discourse, it's essential to examine its structure, which includes both production and consumption aspects Production involves the creators of television programs, while consumption pertains to the audience receiving these messages This chapter highlights key figures in television, referred to by Marshall and Werndly as the “voices” of television, including presenters, guests, and the studio audience, often termed “ordinary people.” The discussion will explore the roles these television voices play and conclude with an overview of television interaction in the studio, paving the way for the subsequent chapter on conversation analysis.
Television and production
Television serves as a powerful medium for representing the world and its cultural practices, illustrating how social constructs are conveyed to audiences in meaningful ways According to Barker (2003), cultural practices and their inherent meanings manifest through various forms such as sounds, images, and television programs, which are produced and interpreted within specific social contexts.
Marshall and Werndly (2002) highlight that television functions within a "production-text-audience cycle," emphasizing that the meanings derived from television texts can vary significantly among viewers The term 'text' extends beyond just written content to encompass all forms of signification, including cultural texts (Barker, 2003) This variability in interpretation underscores the diverse effects that television can have on its audience.
Cultural texts hold diverse meanings for different audience members, as noted by Barker, who argues that there is no single authoritative interpretation; rather, each reading represents a unique perspective This polysemy indicates that meaning is not inherent but emerges from the interaction between the text and the reader Thus, the act of consuming a text also generates new meanings In the cycle of production, text, and audience, television discourse creates texts for audiences to engage with, leading to reinterpretation and the evolution of meaning within various social contexts, perpetuating the cycle of meaning-making.
Marshall (2002) argues that media ownership significantly influences content production, exemplified by Rupert Murdoch, who owns major outlets like "The Times," "The Sun," and BSkyB, and holds sway over various media interests globally Murdoch's alignment with Republican ideologies is evident in Fox News, which promotes a biased narrative supporting the Republican agenda, including the Iraq war and religious viewpoints, while often marginalizing opposing perspectives Although professional journalism requires presenting multiple viewpoints, dissenting opinions on Fox News are frequently discredited, suggesting that the network is the more trustworthy source.
The relationship between television production and audience consumption is interdependent, as each relies on the other for existence Audiences are not a uniform mass; rather, they are composed of diverse individuals and groups with varying social and psychological characteristics, highlighting the complexities involved in audience research (Marshall and Werndly 2002: 4) The following section delves into the evolution of audience studies, offering insights into the dynamics of media audiences.
Television and audience
The ‘voices’ of television
Television texts are conveyed to audiences through TV presenters, described by Marshall and Werndly as the "voices" of the medium These presenters occupy specific roles that influence how messages are interpreted by viewers.
‘voices’ occupy are “the authoritative voices” of journalists anchoring the news; consumer advisors of programmes directed for commercial purposes exclusively; they are “hosts of celebrity chat shows” or
“hosts-performers”, as is the case with the hosts of the three TV talk shows selected for the present analysis (ibid.)
Presenters play a crucial role in news broadcasts by not only providing surveillance but also facilitating media-person interaction through the dissemination and reception of information They are responsible for introducing and directing guests, ensuring continuity across programs, and maintaining viewer engagement This responsibility gives presenters the authority to select and control topics while also facing pressure from media institutions to attract and retain audience attention, thereby fostering a strong relationship between consumers and the medium.
To establish credibility, the program features expert guests who provide authoritative insights As noted by Marshall and Werndly, these experts "interpret and relay things for us," offering a valuable perspective (2002:63) While they possess an authoritative voice, they lack the institutional control that the hosts maintain, creating a dynamic interplay between expertise and authority.
The authors identify a third category of television "voices," comprising ordinary people or members of the public, who typically participate as audiences in studio-bound game shows, chat shows, and sitcoms Their role is to provide responses that reflect the reactions of broader home audiences, although it is important to note that studio audiences should not be seen as definitive indicators of these wider reactions, such as applause or laughter Instead, they serve as a potential representation of home audience feedback While studio audience members may occasionally ask questions or act as self-selected props in game shows, their participation is ultimately regulated by the presenters and hosts, who control the program's direction.
Interaction on television: conversation
In broad terms, Marshall and Werndly provide the following definition of conversation on television:
“Interactive talk on ‘live’ programming takes the form of conversation between those taking a presenting or hosting role and others It is public conversation which is always designed to be
Conversations on television, particularly in chat shows, are inherently public, leading to a degree of self- or other-censorship that differs from spontaneous private discussions While some spontaneity exists, the absence of scripted elements can disrupt the program's flow, necessitating that hosts manage interactions within the show's time constraints Consequently, hosts prepare questions and supporting materials, such as images and guest bios, to facilitate the interview However, the success of the interaction relies not only on the host's preparation but also on the guests' cooperation; without it, the exchange may falter, requiring the host and crew to mitigate any issues that arise.
The selected videos and most TV shows in the "magazine genre" share a similar structural framework Each episode begins with light background music, the show's logo displayed on screen, and an announcement introducing the host and program, accompanied by enthusiastic applause from the audience Hosts typically deliver a brief monologue addressing both the studio and home viewers, focusing on entertaining yet trivial topics to introduce a special guest The ensuing conversation centers on the celebrity's personal life and career, intentionally sidestepping serious issues, while subtly promoting values such as family, friendship, hard work, and empathy Additionally, chat show conversations feature structured conclusions, utilizing summarizing devices before presenters offer final remarks, thanking the audience and encouraging them to tune in again This genre employs distinct strategies compared to political debates or news programs, characterized by the conversational style typical of chat shows.
• informality of the conversation is setting-specific, in that the studio set is arranged in such a way that it reminds the living rooms of the American families;
• “the set communicates a more intimate and domestic” environment in which conversations take place;
• relationship between participants is marked by immediacy, which is evident in paralinguistic features of the conversation;
• “participants make more emotive speech acts” and “phatic contributions”;
• the host “leads the conversation by asking the types of questions which are designed to prompt long declarative statements from the guests”;
• conversations are exclusive of “competition or disagreement” In other words, they are devoid of conflict (2002: 69-71).
This article delves into a comprehensive analysis of specific TV talk shows, emphasizing the importance of understanding Conversation Analysis (CA) The subsequent section offers an overview of CA, along with clear definitions of key terms associated with the field.
6 OVERVIEW OF THE BACKGROUND OF CONVERSATION ANALYSIS
This chapter offers a comprehensive overview of conversation analysis (CA), beginning with the evolution of CA studies as articulated by Drew and Curl (2008), Markee et al (2000), and Richards (2005) Additionally, it includes a brief summary of key CA-related terminology established by Harvey Sacks, recognized as the founder of the conversation analytic method (Mey 2001: 139).
According to Drew and Curl (2008), Conversation Analysis (CA) originated from two key intellectual traditions in sociology The first tradition is based on Goffman's work (1983), which posits that social interactions create a unique institutional framework governed by normative rights and obligations These norms regulate interactions independently of individuals' social, psychological, and motivational traits.
Goffman aimed to distinguish institutional communication from personal interactions by emphasizing the norms and rules governing institutional discourse, while overlooking the socio-psychological factors that influence social interactions His approach to social interaction can be seen as largely prescriptive.
In "Applying Conversation Analysis," Richards highlights the normative quality of conversation as a key principle of Conversation Analysis (CA) He explains that CA research seeks to uncover the patterns and practices that make talk-in-interaction orderly and coherent, emphasizing its normative character (2005: xvi) A prime example of this normative aspect is the expectation surrounding adjacency pairs, where a second part should logically follow a first part in a conversation Typically, in standard interactions without deviations, adjacency pairs create a predictable conversational framework.
Preference organization in media interviews refers to the design of questions aimed at maintaining neutrality, as explained by Richards (2005) This concept not only encompasses the sequential patterns of conversation but also highlights the thematic and power dynamics between interviewers and interviewees By utilizing pre-existing sets of questions, interviewers strive to minimize bias; however, their authority in crafting and asking these questions indicates that media interviews inherently reflect the characteristics of institutional discourse.
The normative approach to conversation analysis (CA) highlights an ideological dimension of human interaction, where speakers must follow specific patterns or rituals This perspective suggests a manipulative element in how conversations are conducted According to Richards, the normative nature of both verbal and non-verbal communication emphasizes the influence of social factors over purely linguistic ones Therefore, the norms affecting speakers extend beyond linguistic rules, permeating social interactions as well.
Garfinkel's ethnomethodology highlights the socially constructed nature of action and its understanding, emphasizing the importance of shared methods in joint activities (Drew & Curl, 2008) According to Markee, conversation analysis (CA), a key development in ethnomethodology, focuses on the procedures involved in ordinary conversation, analyzing elements like sequences, turn-taking, and repair practices (Markee, 2000) CA also considers extralinguistic factors, including non-verbal communication and cultural context, enriching our understanding of interactions.
CA, Drew and Curl (2008) effectively integrate Goffman's perspective on social interaction with Garfinkel's ethnomethodological understanding of action, highlighting how the Goffmanian interaction order influences the real-time production, recognition, and analysis of actions through shared practices This orderliness is demonstrated by participants who reflexively analyze each other's conduct with each interaction, indicating the use of organizational mechanisms that facilitate their ability to follow and respond to one another's actions.
Recent trends in conversation analysis (CA) emphasize the use of "large corpora and quantification" as a research method (Richards 2005: xviii) Richards critiques traditional CA for its "minimalist" approach to discourse analysis, arguing that its qualitative methods often lack practical application (Mey 2001: 135) Nevertheless, he acknowledges that utilizing larger data sets can yield more representative findings.
Conversation Analysis (CA) research typically relies on small, non-representative data sets, which has historically aligned with a qualitative and inductive approach, dismissing statistical methods for documenting phenomena However, the recent trend towards collecting larger and more systematically representative data corpora in CA studies has prompted a reassessment of coding's role in research and raised questions about the potential for findings to be supported by statistical evidence and testing.
The inductive approach to Conversation Analysis (CA) is increasingly viewed as outdated in the context of modern Applied Linguistics (AL), which emphasizes the importance of linguistic research in addressing communication issues between individuals and institutions While CA has made strides in gathering larger and more representative data, highlighting its interdisciplinary and applied nature, it falls short in explaining the 'how' and 'why' behind conversational strategies Quantitative analysis risks overlooking significant aspects of conversational structures, making it essential for CA to rely on analytical or inductive methods that focus on meaningful units of analysis, such as turn-taking and repairs.
Critics argue that the methodology used in transcribing recorded speech can complicate the clarity of dialogues, making them challenging to follow Unlike viewers who benefit from a richer context through visuals, readers miss out on the situational nuances The analysis focuses on longer segments of recorded interactions, approximately 60 minutes each, which not only enhance conversation analysis (CA) but also incorporate extralinguistic factors for a more comprehensive understanding.
Harvey Sacks’ concepts related to CA
Conversation is defined by the principle of 'turn-taking,' where each 'turn' represents a fundamental unit of dialogue, facilitating the natural flow of interaction According to Sacks, this shift signifies a transition in speaking, distinguishing normal conversations from monologues.
Turn-taking in conversation is governed by specific principles rather than being random It occurs at "transition relevant places" (TRPs), which are defined points in dialogue where turns are likely to happen According to Mey (2001), TRPs are influenced by the "rules of next-speaker selection," with the first rule allowing the current speaker to select the next speaker, while the second rule permits a speaker to self-select Self-selection typically occurs naturally at TRPs, such as during pauses at the end of sentences However, some speakers may disrupt this flow by pausing mid-utterance and continuing without acknowledging the TRP, which can confuse listeners.
Listeners play a crucial role in communication as active participants, often known as 'back-channelers' or 'non-floor-holders.' They enhance the speaker's message by offering verbal support through brief utterances or sounds, as noted by Mey (2001: 140) Additionally, their engagement is reflected in body language, including nodding and facial expressions, which further conveys understanding and encouragement.
Conversational predictability, as highlighted by Mey (2001), is crucial for effective dialogue management, allowing participants to anticipate the flow of conversation Mey emphasizes that successfully navigating conversations relies on the ability to foresee upcoming exchanges, which Sacks describes as an "adjacency relationship." This relationship is characterized by immediate responses between participants, exemplified by pairs like "question/answer" or "request/offer." In interviews, the entire interaction can be viewed as a cohesive adjacency pair centered on questions and answers Additionally, conversational devices such as "conversational closers" (e.g., "OK?") and "pre-sequences" (e.g., "You know what") serve as important attention-getters, bridging the formal and content aspects of conversation.
Yet another feature characteristic of the conversation is ‘insertion’ Insertions in the conversation refer to the “remedial exchange, such as repair” (Mey 2001: 146) Insertion, Mey argues,
Spoken discourse often requires repairs due to the irreversible nature of verbal communication, as once words are spoken, they cannot be retracted or deleted To address misunderstandings, speakers typically engage in reformulating their statements through either self-initiated repairs or corrections provided by others Once these corrections are made, conversations generally continue from the point of interruption, allowing for a smoother dialogue.
In spontaneous, unscripted conversations, speakers often use hesitation markers such as "well," "er," and "uhm" to navigate their thoughts without pausing This reliance on hedges reflects a level of insecurity in their speech, as noted by Mey (2001: 151).
In conversational analysis (CA), the terms used highlight the natural and typical nature of interactions, acknowledging minor deviations However, certain conversational deviations, known as "marked sequences," are less acceptable According to Mey (2001), these marked sequences are often more complex than their unmarked counterparts and are viewed as dispreferred due to the increased effort required from participants, leading to noticeable deviations from expected norms Table 6.1 illustrates examples of preferred versus dispreferred sequences in conversation (Mey 2001: 152).
Table 6.1 Preferred and dispreferred sequences in the conversation
FIRST PARTS request offer/invitation assessment question blame
Preferred: acceptance acceptance agreement expected answer denial
Dispreferred: refusal refusal disagreement unexpected answer admission
This section ends the theoretical analysis of literary sources The following chapter introduces the data and methodology used for the analytical analysis of the selected American TV talk shows
The scope of the analysis encompasses 60 minutes of video material, the transcribed version of which is available in appendix A The 6 interviews were extracted from the online video sharing website
YouTube, which is “the leader in online video, and the premier destination to watch and share original videos worldwide through a Web experience” (http://www.youtube.com/t/about).
YouTube serves as a convenient and reliable platform for accessing free first-hand accounts of current events With numerous partnerships with content providers like CBC and BBC, the platform ensures copyright compliance while enabling global video sharing.
The 6 videos are the excerpts of 3 different American TV talk shows: The Ellen DeGeneres
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno and the Late Show with David Letterman exemplify the chat-show genre, focusing on interviews with celebrities Table 6.2 highlights the hosts and guests featured in these popular talk shows, showcasing their unique appeal and entertainment value.
Table 6.2 Basic information of selected American TV talk shows
The Ellen DeGeneres Show Ellen DeGeneres Hugh Laurie, Jackie Chan
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno Jay Leno Larry King, Kim Kardashian
Late Show with David Letterman David Letterman Joaquin Phoenix, Natalie Portman
The analysis aims to apply the Foucauldian power-discourse-subject model to the selected American
This article explores power relations in TV talk shows through a theoretical lens, focusing on both institutional dynamics and interpersonal interactions among participants It employs Foucauldian concepts to analyze how power shapes discourse, which in turn constructs individual identities and subject positions By examining these relationships, the analysis highlights the roles participants adopt within the context of the show, emphasizing the significance of discourse in the formation of subjects.
This analysis encompasses 60 minutes of video content, utilizing Levinson's transcription conventions to accurately convert spoken discourse into written form The transcription employs a specific marking system to capture the nuances of the conversations.
// point at which the current utterance is overlapped by that transcribed below
(0.0) pauses or gaps in what is very approximately tenths of seconds
CAPS relatively high amplitude, or, in double parentheses, analytical labels italics syllables stressed by amplitude, pitch and duration
(( )) specifies some non-verbal action
The analysis focuses on relevant excerpts from the interviews, with full transcriptions available in Appendix A Each selected interview will be accompanied by a brief summary to provide context for the discussions that follow.
8 ANALYSIS OF SELECTED AMERICAN TV TALK SHOWS
This analysis utilizes the Foucauldian model of power, discourse, and subjectivity to examine selected American TV talk shows It highlights the interconnectedness of these elements, demonstrating how power shapes discourse, which in turn constructs subjects and their roles within the media landscape.
Foucault’s theories offer an alternative perspective on discourse analysis that extends beyond linguistics, linking it to institutional discourse This analysis highlights how the discourse of TV talk shows is intertwined with the broader television discourse of media institutions, which serve as intermediaries for messages from various 'discursive regimes.' Consequently, the interconnectedness of discourse within larger systems is a defining feature of Foucault's conceptual framework.
This analysis, grounded in Foucauldian concepts of power, examines the dynamics between institutions and their members on a macro level, as well as between conversationalists on a micro level It emphasizes that power is a neutral force that can be utilized for various ends, including control and emancipation The focus is on how control manifests in the production and mediation of television texts, highlighting that power relations are influenced by specific subject positions, with some roles inherently more powerful than others By scrutinizing the roles of interviewer and interviewee, the analysis assesses the fidelity of these roles and identifies any deviations from expected behaviors.
Institutional discourse: macro control through structure
Structuring of Ellen DeGeneres Show
The Ellen DeGeneres Show is a one-hour magazine-style TV program featuring celebrity guests, with approximately one-third of its runtime dedicated to commercials, resulting in a net duration of 40-43 minutes The show opens with a visually engaging computer graphics sequence set to a custom light music score, showcasing images of past celebrity guests alongside the floating 'ELLEN' logo This introduction emphasizes the show's history and aims to capture viewer attention The consistent use of the soundtrack throughout the episode reinforces auditory recognition, while the logo fosters visual memory, strengthening the audience's connection to the program This habitual exposure effectively establishes a sense of control over the audience, a phenomenon also observed in similar programs.
The camera captures a lively crowd eagerly awaiting the show, as an off-camera voice announces, “From the Warner Bros Studio, here she is - Ellen Degeneres.” Ellen makes her entrance to a standing ovation, greeting both the home and studio audiences with gratitude She engages in a light-hearted monologue, humorously discussing recent events and the weather Known for her comedic flair, Ellen skillfully interacts with the audience, often dancing down the aisles to music, ensuring a vibrant connection that enhances the overall viewing experience throughout the show.
The show begins with a brief solo performance by the hostess, who then introduces a celebrity guest, often supported by pre-prepared background material displayed on a wide-screen TV The guest's entrance is met with enthusiastic applause, and Ellen adds a surprise element, such as a passionate kiss, to celebrate the moment It's important to note that every segment of the show is meticulously pre-planned to ensure a seamless experience.
In a relaxed studio setting, the host and guest engage in a 10-minute interview that explores recent developments in the celebrity's career and personal life A segment of the conversation focuses on promoting a movie or giveaway item for the audience, culminating in a clip from the latest film or music album to encourage viewer engagement.
The show continues even after the guest departs, as Ellen often welcomes another expert to discuss a specific topic This engaging format transforms the experience into an interactive adventure, inviting audience members to participate directly, with some volunteering as props for the experiment.
The final segment of the show focuses on the home audience, highlighting its charitable efforts Ellen often reaches out to financially struggling American families, surprising them with generous gifts such as cars, cash prizes, and vacations For instance, one memorable episode featured Ellen gifting a new car, $10,000, and a trip to a deserving family These heartwarming moments take place outside the studio, directly at the families' homes The program transcends traditional studio boundaries, and it typically concludes with Ellen expressing gratitude to viewers and encouraging them to tune in the following day.
The Ellen DeGeneres Show features a distinctive structure that emphasizes both studio and external events Key information is conveyed through running text on the left side of the screen, including messages like "Coming up…," "Up next…," and "Tomorrow…," which appear intermittently to preview upcoming topics and guest appearances These text boxes not only guide viewers on the show's progression but also serve as teasers for future episodes, directing audiences to additional content online, such as rehearsal outtakes and backstage interviews.
Text box messages frequently appear before commercial breaks and at the end of episodes, highlighting the show's intent to engage viewers and pique their curiosity with intriguing excerpts With six breaks in each episode, the high frequency of these previews aims not only to inform but also to retain audience interest, especially given the presence of interviews with renowned movie and music stars that attract large fan bases This strategy reflects a controlled programme-audience interaction, driven by motivating factors such as diversion, personal relationships, identity, and surveillance, as outlined in McQuail’s typology of media-person interactions.
Table 8.1 summarizes the distribution of stages in Ellen's show, reflecting the typical structure of The Ellen DeGeneres Show This observation is based on extensive viewing of several hours of video material.
Table 8.1 The structure of Ellen DeGeneres Show
1 Stage Opening Music, programme’s logo, programme’s history TB *
Host’s entrance Ovation, host’s performance, host’s monologue, introduction of the guest TB.
2 Stage Guest’s entrance Music, standing ovation, greeting the host TB.
Interview Guest’s personal history, product promotion, gift exchange 2 commercials TB.
3 Stage Expert presenter Experiment, audience member as a prop, Ellen as an assistant 2 commercials TB.
4 Stage Home audience American family, give-away item, phone interaction 2 commercials TB.
5 Stage Closing Thanking, goodbye, music, credits, sponsors, production studio’s logo TB.
Structuring of Tonight Show with Jay Leno
The underlying structure in Tonight Show with Jay Leno is similar to the development of Ellen
The DeGeneres Show begins with an opening and the host's entrance, aligning with stage 1 of the previous show It then features a celebrity guest reception and an interview, which are central to the show's format and correspond to stage 2 However, stages 3 and 4—'expert presenter' and 'home audience'—are substituted with different elements in this show The closing segment, stage 5, closely mirrors that of the other two programs While the development of stages in Jay Leno's show parallels those in Ellen's, their execution differs significantly.
The show opens with a format reminiscent of Ellen's, featuring a brief pre-interview without music or the show's logo Jay Leno, dressed casually, engages with his first celebrity guest in a backstage dressing room This short interview consists of one or two exchanges, where the host poses a question and the guest responds Notably, in pre-interviews with Larry King and Kim Kardashian, the guests' responses often lead to humorous, incongruent actions, adding an element of surprise to the interaction.
The TB text box, located at the bottom left of the screen, previews upcoming content while hinting at the overall theme of the studio interview This pre-interview format resembles the text box used in Ellen's show, serving to foreshadow future developments Additionally, the comedic elements of the episode imply that guests' responses may not be entirely trustworthy, as humor obscures their true motives, which are later unveiled during the in-person conversation Consequently, the pre-interview builds suspense regarding the direction the interview will ultimately take.
For example, the below Larry King and Jay Leno backstage pre-interview consists of one-pair exchange, followed by Larry’s incongruent response:
Jay: Larry, it’s great to have you but I gotta ask you, honestly, do you miss the routine doing the show every day?
Larry: You know something, Jay, after twenty five years, when it’s over – it’s over I never think about it
((phone rings; camera close-up on Larry; Larry answers the phone))
Larry: Albercurcy, you’re on the air.
The exchange was carefully orchestrated, with Larry's seemingly innocent lie being part of a scripted performance This setup creates the illusion that the audience is privy to the truth behind the scenes Central to their interview is the conclusion of Larry King Live, highlighted by Larry's "spontaneous" response to a phone call, which reveals his nostalgia for the show This sentiment is further underscored by subsequent excerpts from their conversation.
11.Jay: Yeah that’s very//-We’re happy to have you here ((audience applaud)) Tell me so the (2.0) last
13.Jay: show Thursday Has it sunk in yet?
16.King: Well it’s mixed you know You have twenty five and a half years, you’re gonna miss it.
18.King: On the other hand I’m gonna go on, as you said, I’m not gonna quit anything I’m going on
19.other things// ((coughs)) It’s a great feeling of mixed emotions// Hard to describe I was speaking in Montreal 20.Jay: //Yeah //Uh-huh
Mixed emotions can be likened to the complex feelings one experiences when faced with a situation that elicits both joy and discomfort, such as the humorous scenario of a mother-in-law driving off a cliff in a brand-new Cadillac.
23.don’t mean my mother-in-law by the way.
The pre-interview opening serves as both an introduction to the guest and a thematic preview of the interview, enhancing the overall coherence of the main program segment featuring Larry, especially since Jay hosts multiple guests on his show.
In a backstage exchange between Jay and Kim Kardashian, the contrast in their readiness for the show is evident; while Jay appears unprepared, Kim is fully set for her appearance This interaction occurs at Kim's dressing room door, where a camera focus highlights a plate displaying the room number, the show's title, and Kim's name, emphasizing the program's branding As Jay knocks and Kim answers, he holds a People magazine featuring her on the cover, setting the stage for their conversation.
Kim: Hey Jay, what’s up?
Jay: Nothing It says in the People magazine you’re looking for a husband.
Kim: Don’t believe everything you read I’m not looking for a husband right now.
Jay: Alright, see you later.
((Kim closes the door, picks up a pen and a notepad from the night table))
Kim: Ok, so which one of you is interested in having kids?
((the camera reveals the rest of the room, where there is a bunch of excited young soldiers))
The humorous contrast between Kim's response to Jay's question and the hidden dynamics behind closed doors serves as a thematic introduction to their upcoming interview, where dating becomes a focal point Additionally, the presence of soldiers in Kim's dressing room enhances the context, as the episode airs on Veteran's Day, with an audience made up entirely of soldiers and veterans, making their interaction a vital part of the show's overall narrative.
The pre-interview opening is immediately followed by the actual opening, which includes a specific soundtrack, logo, credits and structure of the programme itself By contrast, Ellen DeGeneres
The show's opening features a brief montage of flashing images from previous episodes alongside the program's logo However, this production distinguishes itself by offering a narrated outline of the upcoming TV show, delivered by an off-camera voice, rather than relying on running messages for preview information.
Tonight Show with Jay Leno is more concerned with gripping audience’s attention from the very beginning of the programme
Once the pre-interview closes, the programme’s actual opening takes place The show’s logo,
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno features a captivating opening that fills the entire screen with live images of Los Angeles nightlife, accompanied by instrumental music Unlike previous shows that relied on computer graphics, this program showcases bustling streets, traffic, and vibrant city lights The capitalized opening credits overlay these dynamic visuals, introducing Ricky Minor and the studio band, along with the names of guests and performers Additionally, the credits highlight a specific studio rubric, providing a structured preview of the show's events in sequential order, with the rubric presented before the first guest interview.
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno
RICKY MINOR (the studio band) LARRY KING (1 st celebrity guest) GARRETT HEDHUND (2 nd celebrity guest) PINK MARTINI (3 rd guest-performer) HEADLINES (studio rubric).
The opening credits seamlessly transition to the studio set, where live music and a standing ovation set the stage for the arrival of the impeccably dressed host, Jay Leno This iconic entrance is a hallmark of his engaging performance style.
The Tonight Show with Jay Leno begins with the host engaging the audience through a lively "high-five," marking the end of the program's first stage Following this, Jay delivers a seven-minute monologue that serves as a satirical news report, addressing current events across various topics such as politics, sports, and entertainment Acting as a news anchor, he keeps the audience informed while introducing five commercial breaks throughout the show Before each break, Jay encourages viewers to stay tuned and provides a sneak peek of upcoming segments Upon returning, he reintroduces the guest and summarizes previous events for new viewers, effectively fostering interaction between the program and its audience.
Leno previews upcoming segments, but neither these previews nor the show's logo appear on air In contrast, Ellen's show prominently displays its logo on the left side of the screen throughout the episode, while the Tonight Show features a mug with its name on Jay's studio desk.
In stage 3 of his show, Jay Leno features a comedic segment known as "foolery's corner," where he showcases humorous content such as funny images and amusing newspaper clippings submitted by viewers For instance, during an episode with Larry King, he presents a collection of these quirky items, while in another episode with Kim Kardashian, he introduces the segment "Products that should not merge," creatively combining well-known brands to invent comical product names like “Coked Up” and “Toe Cheese.” This entertaining segment captivates the studio audience for seven minutes before a commercial break, during which the studio band, led by Ricky Minor, keeps the audience engaged.
The next segment of the program features the first guest, with a roughly 10-minute interview that includes an introduction, a discussion about the guest's personal life and career, a gift exchange, and a performance, reminiscent of Larry King’s episodes Jay often infuses the conversation with a touch of biting sarcasm, playfully teasing guests like Larry about controversial topics or joking about Kim Kardashian Compared to Ellen's show, the interviews on the Tonight Show tend to be more verbally aggressive and reactive The flow of the conversation is frequently interrupted by commercial breaks, culminating in another ad insertion as the interview concludes, signaling a shift in the program's direction.
Interpersonal intraction: micro power relations in selected interviews
Correlation between setting and control
Language use is influenced by the setting, with the choice of register varying based on context In formal environments, interviews tend to be more controlled Analyzing American TV talk shows, which are inherently informal, reveals that participants still strive to maintain a positive image due to the nature of television The informality in these shows contrasts with private conversations, as interactions are often scripted and staged, despite appearing casual While the format suggests a relaxed atmosphere, the structured progression of the programs indicates a significant level of control, primarily driven by the time constraints of live television production Successful execution relies on maximizing productivity during airtime.
The setting of selected talk shows significantly influences the power dynamics between the interviewer, interviewee, and audience This control is essential in establishing a specific relationship among the host and studio participants, with the environment serving as a key facilitator To illustrate this concept, an analysis of the surroundings in notable TV programs, including those hosted by Ellen DeGeneres, Jay Leno, and David Letterman, is necessary.
The Ellen DeGeneres Show studio is spacious, accommodating over a hundred audience members, a DJ stand, and designated areas for performances and floral displays, with the central focus being the interview stand As Ellen enters, the camera highlights the door and illuminates her presence, while the lighting dynamically shifts throughout the program For instance, when she interacts with the audience or dances down the aisles, the lights concentrate on those areas, and the interview section is more brightly lit during guest interactions This strategic lighting design enhances the show's structure, ensuring that the entire studio is never fully illuminated, instead maintaining a cozy atmosphere with soft tones.
Ellen's studio is designed to evoke the warmth of a typical American living room, featuring dark wooden floors and an abundance of houseplants At the center, a leveled stand is adorned with a coffee table and two large armchairs, complemented by a small night table that often holds a traditional telephone A wide-screen TV displaying the 'Ellen' logo is positioned behind the guests, while the wall features a projected image of trees, enhancing the cozy ambiance This inviting environment allows celebrity guests and the studio audience to feel at home, fostering a deeper sense of engagement for the viewers.
The furniture arrangement on the Ellen DeGeneres Show fosters intimacy, with chairs positioned closely at a 45-degree angle to facilitate face-to-face interaction between guests and the audience Despite the studio's spaciousness, focused lighting and thoughtfully chosen furniture create a cozy atmosphere Ellen's supportive and attentive interviewing style enhances this environment, setting expectations for a relaxed level of formality during interviews This setting positively influences relationship-building with both celebrity guests and viewers, promoting an egalitarian power dynamic rather than a traditional dominant-submissive relationship.
As well as being highly similar in the structure of their programmes, Tonight Show with Jay
Leno's and David Letterman's Late Show share similar studio settings, organized to enhance the flow of their programs, much like Ellen's setup Each studio features distinct areas, including an interview stand, a space for the studio band, an open area for stand-up comedy, and a stage for musical performances The localized, focus-oriented lighting enhances the shows' ambiance, while the titles of both programs resonate with their studio lighting A consistent artificial panoramic view of the city at night serves as the backdrop, creating a familiar atmosphere The studios are furnished with a central desk and office chair, devoid of floral arrangements, promoting a formal vibe A chair and couch for celebrity guests are positioned at a 45-degree angle to the host, further emphasizing the structured environment The formal atmosphere is accentuated by Jay and David's costumes, adding to the overall elegance of the occasion.
Ellen DeGeneres' show creates an intimate living room atmosphere, contrasting sharply with the more formal settings of David Letterman and Jay Leno, where the hosts dominate the conversation and guests often adopt a defensive posture This dynamic leads to a power imbalance, diminishing the sense of equality and transforming humor into a blend of innocence and sarcasm In Letterman’s show, the arrangement of chairs suggests a discussion format, yet typically only one guest is engaged at a time, allowing for focused attention Conversely, in Leno's Tonight Show, the first guest remains on set while a second guest is introduced, creating an uncomfortable silence as the initial guest is sidelined While Letterman occasionally hosts two guests simultaneously, he generally prioritizes one guest at a time, ensuring that each receives adequate attention and appreciation, thereby fostering a more balanced interaction.
The analysis of TV talk show settings reveals that increased formality correlates with greater control, while informal environments foster equality and weaker control For instance, the Ellen DeGeneres Show exemplifies a relaxed setting that promotes relationship-building In contrast, the Tonight Show with Jay Leno and Late Show with David Letterman, despite being magazine-style programs, create a negative power dynamic through their studio settings, which do not facilitate the same level of connection as Ellen's show.
Analysis of turn-taking: interruptions
This analysis focuses on turn-taking in six selected interviews, aiming to identify interruptions and their potential connection to power dynamics Each conversation will be examined individually, with context provided for each interview The first two conversations analyzed feature Hugh Laurie and Jackie Chan on the Ellen DeGeneres Show.
Hugh Laurie on Ellen DeGeneres Show : context
In a recent episode, Ellen warmly welcomes British actor Hugh Laurie, discussing his family's adaptation to life in America following his success in the TV series House Hugh humorously notes that British children are well-acquainted with American culture through television, making the transition easier for his kids The conversation shifts to Hugh's father, a humble Olympic gold medalist, whose achievement remained a secret until Hugh discovered the medal as a teenager Ellen then inquires about Hugh's role as a doctor on the show, leading to a light-hearted exchange about his character's addiction to painkillers, resulting in laughter from the audience The discussion transitions to British and American slang, revealing cultural nuances, such as Hugh's playful comments on dental hygiene and the differences between British and American women Overall, the interview is filled with humor and camaraderie, showcasing the enjoyable rapport between Ellen and Hugh.
The analysis of selected interviews reveals that key features of turn-taking in face-to-face conversations include overlapping speech, self-repairs, and back-channeling, which facilitate smooth interaction between participants Overlapping utterances typically do not disrupt the conversation, allowing it to continue without interruption Although interruptions are less common and generally viewed as undesirable, they can occur and may indicate a power dynamic or a display of superiority by one speaker Moreover, the right to interrupt can be influenced by an individual's social status, potentially reducing the negative perceptions associated with interruptions, such as impoliteness The following analysis will explore the validity of these observations in the context of the selected interviews.
Table 8.4 highlights instances of interruption during the interview with Hugh Laurie, where interruptions are indicated by an equals sign ‘=’ In Example 1, two significant interruptions occur within complete question-answer pairs, with Ellen interrupting Hugh and vice versa The first interruption happens in line 10, where Ellen hastily poses another question without allowing Hugh to finish, despite him having already provided the necessary information in line 9 Hugh’s repetition in line 10 suggests a transition relevance place (TRP) for Ellen, although it remains unclear if he intended to elaborate or summarize his previous answer Similarly, in line 12, Hugh interrupts Ellen after she attempts to expand on her question, cutting in with a definitive response The exchange concludes with Ellen acknowledging Hugh’s input with a back-channel response: ‘Uh-huh year tenth.’
Table 8.4 Cases of interruption in Ellen’s interview with Hugh Laurie
9.Ellen: That’s-Well how many years have you been doing the show?
10.Hugh: It’s flown by It’s actually four years It’s four years=
11.Ellen: =In what point did you decide to
12.move your wife and your entire family here? In er what point do you go ‘oh=
14.Ellen: Uh-huh year tenth.
126 Hugh: (2.0) Alright What sounds do they make when you’re right? It-it’s a buzz or=
‘ding’ sound is heard)) Like that Yeah Which is-it’s probably a different sound in England.
Example 3 135 Hugh: No it’s-it’s actually-it’s a verb It means to chat-it’s literary to wag your chin It’s
136.actually very literal-it’s actually not what you=
137 Ellen: =CHIN WAG ((pronounces [chin] this time))
138 Hugh: CHIN CHIN CHIN WAG ((now pronouncing [chin] as well)) did I mispronounced it?
172.CHUFFED TO BITS I’m delighted by=
173 Ellen: =That’s what I meant ((‘ding’ sound, audience laughs))
174 Hugh: I would be chuffed to bits by your BA-DONK-DONK for example.
183 Ellen: ((continuous singing)) shawty had hem sweat pants and the Reeboks with the straps 184.she turned around and gave=
185 Hugh: =It’s solely one word?
190 Ellen: ((still continuing)) next thing you know shawty got low low low low
192 Ellen: =Shawty is a young kid or a woman.
In Example 1, there is no evident imbalance in power dynamics between the two speakers, nor does the hostess exhibit any sense of superiority typically associated with her institutional role Instead, both interlocutors appear to misinterpret each other's comments as the topic of reciprocal interest Furthermore, the video format of the interview shows that neither speaker reacts to interruptions, indicating a level of composure during the conversation.
In the short exchange of example 2, an interruption occurs, yet it appears that Hugh is intentionally guiding Ellen's response Rather than indicating that the hostess is unable to answer promptly, her delayed reaction stems from Hugh's incomplete addition to his question, which begins with "It-it's a buzz or=" but remains unfinished This scenario does not reflect poorly on Ellen's communicative competence as a hostess, suggesting instead a collaborative interaction.
In examples 3 and 4, interruptions during the interview negatively impact the flow of conversation In example 3, line 136 highlights missing crucial information that could have guided Ellen to a correct response Her interruption in line 137 suggests she was distracted, focusing on her own thoughts rather than Hugh's explanation This disruption prevents Hugh from completing his point in line 135, leading to a loss of context in the discussion Similarly, in example 4, Ellen interrupts Hugh while he explains the British phrase "chuffed to bits," asserting, "That's what I meant." This interruption elicits laughter from the audience, allowing Hugh to reclaim the conversational floor and express his original thought: "I would be chuffed to bits by your BA-DONK-DONK, for example."
In example 5, Ellen's lines 183 and 184 serve as a backdrop to the conversation, where she sings to illustrate the term 'shawty' and aid Hugh in formulating his response Despite this, Hugh, as indicated in line 185, requires additional guidance Similarly, in example 6, Ellen continues her singing in line 190 but interrupts Hugh again, preventing him from completing his thought in line 191 This interruption could be seen as mechanical, as Hugh was already inclined to concede, making Ellen's intervention more straightforward.
In the interview with Hugh Laurie, interruptions are not necessarily negative, as they can stem from misunderstandings or a desire to assist With only two instances of uncooperative interruptions, it is unjust to accuse the hostess of power abuse Moreover, the frequency of feedback and back-channeling used by Ellen, which occurs 12 times throughout the conversation, significantly surpasses that of interruptions, highlighting a more cooperative dynamic in the interaction.
75, 158, 188 As for Hugh Laurie, he uses 10 cases of back-channeling in lines 6, 62, 69, 117, 121, 140,
In interviews, it's common for the host or hostess to provide more feedback than the guest, as they are responsible for asking questions, listening, and managing the conversation's pace The guest, in turn, is expected to elaborate on these inquiries However, increased feedback from both parties can enhance cooperation and lead to a more engaging dialogue.
Jackie Chan on Ellen DeGeneres Show : context
Ellen DeGeneres interviews a famous action-movie star Jackie Chan on his new film The Spy Next
Ellen greets Jackie Chan, complimenting his stylish attire and the softness of his shirt, which leads Jackie to reveal his clothing, shoe, and sock lines, showcasing his massaging socks to the audience Despite the initial surprise, the lighthearted moment brings laughter, and Jackie even offers Ellen a pair He then requests a more subdued introduction for his next appearance, preferring a greeting akin to Robert De Niro's The conversation shifts to Jackie’s proficiency in English, prompting Ellen to help him connect with an American operator, though the attempt humorously fails Jackie reflects on his busy schedule during the winter holidays and shares that he learned English from audio cassettes, showcasing his singing talent by performing a popular English song and a traditional Chinese piece The interview wraps up with a discussion about Jackie's new movie, accompanied by a video clip and final remarks from both.
In her second interview with Jackie Chan, Ellen interrupted him three times out of five, mirroring a similar pattern from their previous encounter where she interrupted him five times out of seven An analysis of their 10-minute conversation reveals that interruptions, while generally dispreferred, are often unavoidable and can lead to overlapping dialogue, a common feature in face-to-face interactions Additionally, instances of interruption can be influenced by emotions such as surprise, as demonstrated in specific examples from their conversation.
Table 8.5 Cases of interruption in Ellen’s interview with Jackie Chan
6.Ellen: You look GREAT I love this It’s very soft Very very soft You look=
16.Ellen: So you actually get a little massage when you walk?
17.Jackie: No When I have a meeting with this=
18.Ellen: =Oh you push on that ((showing to the foot))
19.Jackie: See? You want some? I’ll send you some.
24.Jackie: Yeah CHILDREN Um children when I walk on the street in America ((showing a martial- 25.art move)) Nobody sees Robert de Niro ((showing some move again)) So this why=
27.he doesn’t do that That’s why.
107.Ellen: This is kids and=
109.Ellen: =Animals? You love animals?
In the first example, Jackie responds to Ellen's praise of his attire with pride, showcasing his various fashion ventures He enthusiastically lists his clothing, shoe, and sock lines, even asking if Ellen noticed his socks.
In a revealing moment from the conversation, Jackie Chan expresses his frustration over being perpetually associated with the persona of a hyperactive fighter, a sentiment echoed by onlookers worldwide He raises a poignant question, asking why he is always introduced as "Jackie Chan" rather than simply "Jackie Chan," seeking a deeper understanding from Ellen However, Ellen dismisses his request, stating, "Well because he doesn’t do that," in reference to Robert De Niro, indicating her reluctance to engage with Jackie’s concerns This exchange highlights Jackie’s desire for a more nuanced recognition beyond his action star image.
In turn-taking techniques, interruptions are relatively rare compared to back-channeling, with 14 feedback instances noted in the interview—13 from the hostess and only 1 from the guest This indicates that while the hostess interrupts more frequently, she also offers feedback more often, suggesting a high level of involvement in the conversation This correlation between increased interruptions and feedback is further supported by an analysis of two interviews on Jay Leno’s show.
Larry King on Tonight Show with Jay Leno : context
Questions and topic control
Interviews, whether conducted on TV talk shows, radio programs, or during job interviews, revolve around a structured format of questions and answers Typically, the interviewer directs the conversation by posing questions, while the interviewee responds accordingly, adhering to this established framework.
The structure of these programs reveals that interviews with celebrity guests are meticulously pre-planned, with hosts equipped with prepared questions and organized background material about their guests Consequently, the format of the shows is entirely designed for the interview process, with guests expected to follow the hosts' direction.
In the analyzed interviews, the interviewers guide the conversation by strategically framing their questions, establishing a clear topic for discussion Each interview typically starts with a greeting and brief exchanges, such as inquiries about well-being or recent experiences The initial question, often termed a 'head question,' signifies a shift in the conversation's focus, directing the dialogue towards the main subject of interest.
In interviews, hosts prioritize allowing guests to fully respond to questions rather than rapidly firing them off, which would seem unnatural They employ open-ended questions to encourage elaboration, with each primary question followed by related section and subsection inquiries Transitions to new topics are often indicated by the interviewer’s back-channeling, using phrases like "so," "now," or "you know." This structured approach, known as the ‘outline model,’ allows for a controlled flow of conversation, as illustrated in Table 8.9 of the selected interviews.
In interviews, topic questions are typically pre-planned, while section and subsection questions arise organically from the discussion Guest inquiries are rare and usually consist of simple yes/no questions aimed at clarifications However, there are instances where a guest's question can influence the conversation's direction, such as David Letterman's interview with Joaquin Phoenix In another example, Letterman shifts the conversation to Thanksgiving dinner with Natalie Portman, who briefly redirects the focus back to him Similarly, Larry King poses a context-related question about a cat, but the host, Jay Leno, remains focused on his previous topic, indicating a lack of engagement with King's question.
In interviews, questions serve as tools for controlling the topic, with the host primarily responsible for steering the conversation When guests attempt to shift topics, it is generally seen as inappropriate, although there are rare instances where they assert some influence, albeit temporarily This dynamic highlights a power imbalance between the interviewer and interviewee, reflecting their respective roles shaped by television discourse.
Interlocutors’ subject positions
Foucault’s conceptualization of the subject highlights that individuals do not possess inherent meaning; rather, they are influenced by external control Discourse plays a crucial role in shaping subjects and their corresponding positions, requiring individuals to align their identities with these roles In discussing television discourse, it is essential to consider both the subjects and the subject positions it creates Furthermore, identities are fluid, with some roles holding more power than others, and specific conditions must be met for these roles to be enacted.
Television discourse shapes the roles of the interviewer, interviewee, and audience while mediating cultural values and norms Audiences are influenced by the messages conveyed through cultural texts, which are products of broader discourses, creating identity-forming representations Therefore, examining the relationship between discourse and subjectivity is crucial for understanding these dynamics.
This section analyzes selected interviews by examining the subject positions of both the interviewer and interviewee The objective is to determine if additional identities are also reflected in these interviews, beyond the primary roles of the participants.
In his first appearance on The Ellen DeGeneres Show, Hugh Laurie’s multifaceted identities are unveiled through the conversation While not all roles are explicitly acted out, many can be inferred from the context The interview highlights how these identities are shaped by various discourses, with Hugh primarily identified as an actor His strong identification with his profession is evident, as he portrays a fictional doctor on television This duality of identity is influenced by both his educational background and the realm of television, while the scripted role of a doctor stems from medical discourse The interview opens with Ellen referencing Hugh Laurie’s blend of professional and fictional identities, setting the stage for a deeper exploration of his roles.
In an engaging interview, Hugh opens up about his roles as a father and husband, sharing insights into his family's recent visit and his children's adjustment to life in America He reflects on his own upbringing, recalling cherished memories of his parents, particularly focusing on the surprising revelation that his father, an Olympian champion, kept his athletic identity hidden from him This heartfelt discussion emphasizes the importance of family dynamics and the various roles we play within them.
In the conversation, Hugh reveals his identity as a sportsman, having rowed at university, which highlights the influence of educational discourse As the discussion shifts to British and American slang, Hugh's British identity takes center stage, positioning him as a speaker of British English and a representative of British culture This British subject position intertwines with legal, educational, and familial discourses, allowing for the emergence of distinct cultural traits The exchange between the host and Hugh also explores British and American identities through the lens of labeled stereotypes, enriching the dialogue with cultural insights.
The discussion has primarily centered on the guest's role, with the hostess, Ellen, refraining from lengthy monologues about herself The show's format emphasizes the guest, directing questions towards them rather than the hostess However, the program subtly reveals Ellen's multifaceted identities beyond her performance role, showcasing her as a speaker of American English and a mediator of American culture.
Jackie Chan, the second guest, is introduced through multiple identities, primarily as an actor and a martial arts master, emphasizing his physicality and expertise in fighting techniques This aspect of his identity is often linked to Chinese culture, which values martial arts Alongside his acting career, Jackie is also recognized as a successful businessman, further enriching his multifaceted persona.
As he remarks in the beginning of the interview, he has his own shoe line, sock line and clothing line.
Jackie Chan embodies the role of a singer within the market discourse, influenced by various interconnected cultural narratives His singing identity may have been shaped by formal education or through cultural texts that reflect specific cultural discourses Additionally, he notes that listening to English songs has helped him learn the language, highlighting how language acquisition subjects individuals to its norms Chan's identity as a singer is intricately tied to his self-perception as an English speaker, which he actively demonstrates in conversation.
Jackie Chan, despite speaking with a Chinese accent, showcases his fluent English singing skills during an interview with Ellen To test his language proficiency, Ellen calls an American operator and hands the phone to Jackie, highlighting the communication challenges they both face Throughout the interview, Jackie expresses his strong national identity by singing a traditional Chinese song and inviting Ellen to join him, while Ellen maintains her role within the established interview format.
In the Tonight Show with Jay Leno, guest Larry King, whose real name is Lawrence Harvey Zeiger, distinguishes his private identity from his public persona, highlighting the significance of names in personal history As a renowned performer and broadcaster, King shares insights into his life as a husband and father of five, while also revealing his Jewish ethnicity, which becomes a focal point during the interview Jay Leno, as the host, identifies himself as a comedian and public figure, emphasizing the cultural backgrounds of both men, though no additional subject positions for Leno are apparent in this exchange.
In his second interview, Jay Leno welcomes Kim Kardashian, a celebrity known for her reality show fame rather than traditional acting or performance skills Kim represents a modern symbol of female sexuality, challenging the notion that attractiveness is solely based on talent or skill, as it often seems rooted in genetics However, perceptions of beauty and desirability fluctuate across different cultures and eras, indicating that the attention on Kim's sexuality reflects the values and norms of a specific cultural context at a given time.
In her interview with Leno, Kim discusses her dual roles as a daughter and sister, highlighting the societal pressure she faces to marry at the age of thirty while remaining single Despite this scrutiny, she is also portrayed as a successful businesswoman, with a significant focus on her upcoming clothing store opening in New York Throughout the conversation, Kim expresses her concerns about her weight, stating, "I just can’t find a gym in New York," which underscores her struggle to maintain her ideal image amidst public expectations.
In his first appearance on the Late Show with David Letterman, Joaquin Phoenix presents a challenge for the host as he seems uncooperative during the interview While promoting his new movie, Phoenix's demeanor and choice to wear sunglasses contribute to a portrayal that diverges from typical celebrity behavior, highlighting the complexities of his public persona.
Joaquin Phoenix, during his appearance on David Letterman's show, expressed his intention to quit acting and transition to a career in rap music, indicating a significant identity crisis Unlike other guests who focused on self-promotion, Phoenix's announcement highlighted his desire to shed his previous identities, presenting a starkly negative portrayal of his celebrity status and suggesting a desperate need for personal grooming.