Cover not available
Part of
Participation in Public and Social Media Interactions
Edited by Marta Dynel and Jan Chovanec
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 256] 2015
► pp. 99–133

Troubles talk, (dis)affiliation and the participation order in Taiwanese-Chinese online discussion boards

ORCID logo
Online discussion boards are a common forum in which everyday users share troubles, elicit various forms of empathy and sympathy, and also seek advice from others. One challenge facing participants, as well as analysts, is the interpretation of expressions of discontent or dissatisfaction as either troubles talk, complaining, seeking advice, or some combination of these, given that each of these social actions/activities invokes a distinct preference structure and presumed differences in what counts as an affiliative or disaffiliative response. In this paper, drawing on an analysis of threads in a Taiwanese online parenting discussion board, we propose that one way in which participants navigate this complex array of preferences and (dis)affiliative responses is through the instantiation of a locally situated participation order, which is both afforded and constrained by the interactions that are mediated via online discussion boards. We further argue that emotional support can be indicated through both affiliative responses, such as mutual encouraging, mutual bemoaning, and empathic suggesting, as well as through disaffiliative responses, such as accusing and advising. We conclude that soliciting emotional support constitutes an important relational practice in online parenting discussion boards, whereby a warrant for sharing troubles with acquaintances and even strangers is established for these kinds of interactions.
Published online: 12 February 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.256.05hau
References (89)
References
Bell, Allan. 1991. The Language of News Media. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bolander, Brook. 2013. Language and Power in Blogs. Interaction, Agreements and Disagreements. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bou-Franch, Patricia, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, and Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich. 2012. “Social Interaction in YouTube Text-based Polylogues: A Study of Coherence.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17: 501–521. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boxer, Diana. 1993. “Social Distance and Speech Behaviour: The Case of Indirect Complaints.” Journal of Pragmatics 19: 103–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1996. “Ethnographic Interviewing as a Research Tool in Speech Act Analysis: The Case of Complaints.” In Speech Acts Across Cultures, ed. by Susan Gass and Joyce Neu, 217–239. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Burgess, Jean, and Joshua Green. 2008. “Agency and Controversy in the YouTube Community.” Paper presented at IR 9.0: Rethinking Communities, Rethinking Place – Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) Conference , 15–18 October 2008, IT University of Copenhagen, Denmark.
Chan, Annie Hau-Nang. 2008. “‘Life in Happy Land’: Using Virtual Space and Doing Motherhood in Hong Kong.” Gender, Place and Culture 15 (2): 169–188. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chang, Hui-Jung. 2009. “Online Social Support: Which Posts were Answered?” Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia 8 (1): 31–46.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2012. “On Affectivity and Preference in Response to Rejection.” Text & Talk 32 (4): 453–475.Google Scholar
Dresner, Eli, and Susan Herring. 2010. “Functions of the Nonverbal in CMC: Emoticons and Illocutionary Force.” Communication Theory 20: 249–268. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1998. “Complaints about Transgressions and Misconduct.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 31 (3/4): 295–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Elizabeth Holt. 1988. “Complainable Matters: The use of Idiomatic Expressions in making Complaints.” Social Problems 35 (4): 398–417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul, and Traci Walker. 2009. “ Going too Far: Complaining, Escalating and Dissafiliation.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (12): 2400–2414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dynel, Marta. 2011a. “Revisiting Goffman’s Postulates on Participant Statuses in Verbal Interaction.” Language and Linguistic Compass 5 (7): 454–465. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011b. “‘You Talking to Me?’ The Viewer as a Ratified Listener to Film Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 43 (6): 1628–1644. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Participation Framework Underlying YouTube Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 73: 37–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edwards, Derek. 2005. “Moaning, Whinging and Laughing: The Subjective Side of Complaints.” Discourse Studies 7 (1): 5–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eisenchlas, Susana. 2011. “On-line Interactions as a Iesource to Raise Pragmatic Awareness.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 51–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Gendered Discursive Practice On-line.” Journal of Pragmatics 44: 335–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ess, Charles. 2009. Digital Media Ethics. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Ess, CharlesAssociation for Internet Researchers, and . 2002. “Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee.” Association for Internet Researchers. Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.
Eysenbach, Gunther, and James E Till. 2001. “Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research on Internet Communities.” BMJ 323: 1103–1105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Feng, Bo. 2009. “Testing an Integrated Model of Advice giving in Supportive Interactions.” Human Communication Research 29: 115–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, Pilar, Nuria Lorenzo-Dus, and Patricia Bou-Franch. 2013. “Relational Work in Anonymous, Asynchronous Communication: A Study of (dis)affiliation in YouTube.” In Research Trends in Intercultural Pragmatics, ed. by Istvan Kecskes and Jesus Romero-Trillo, 343–365. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff, and Anna Wierzbicka. 2014. Words and Meaning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving. 1978. “Response Cries.” Language 54 (4): 787–815. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1979. “Footing.” Semiotica 25 (1): 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, Daena. 2000. “Soliciting Advice: The Role of Sequential Placement in Mitigating Face Threat.” Communication Monographs 67 (1): 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
González-Lloret, Marta. 2011. “Conversation Analysis of Computer-mediated Communication.” CALICO Journal 28 (2): 308–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles, and Marjorie Harness Goodwin. 2004. “Participation.” In A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology, ed. by Alessandro Duranti, 222–244. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael. 2013. “Im/politeness, Social Practice and the Participation Order.” Journal of Pragmatics 58: 52–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugh, Michael, Wei-Lin Melody Chang, and Dániel Z Kádár. Forthcoming. “‘Doing Deference’: Identities and Relational Practices in Chinese Online Discussion Boards.” Pragmatics.
Heinemann, Trine and Veronique Traverso. 2009. “Complaining in Interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 41 (12): 2381–2384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
. 2011. “Territories of Knowledge, Territories of Experience: Empathic Moments in Interaction.” In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 159–183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Anna Lindström. 2012. “Knowlege, Empathy, and Emotion in a Medical Encounter.” In Emotion in Interaction, ed. by Anssi Peräkylä and Marja-Leena Sorjonen, 256–273. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John, and Sue Sefi. 1992. “Dilemmas of Advice: Aspects of the Delivery and Reception of Advice in Interactions between Health Visitors and First Time Mothers.” In Talk at Work, ed. by Paul Drew and John Heritage, 359–419. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Herring, Susan. 2010. “Computer-mediated Conversation: Introduction and Overview.” Language@Internet 7 (Article 2). Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.Google Scholar
Hinkel, Eli. 1994. “Appropriateness of Advice as L2 Solidarity Strategy.” RELC Journal 25: 71–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1997. “Appropriateness of Advice: DCT and Multiple Choice Data.” Applied Linguistics 18 (1): 1–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 1984. “On Stepwise Transition from Talk about a Trouble to Inappropriately Next-positioned Matters.” In Structures of Social Action, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 191–222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 1988. “On the Sequential Organization of Troubles Talk in Ordinary Conversation.” Social Problems 35 (4): 418–441. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail, and John R. Lee. 1981. “The Rejection of Advice: Managing the Problematic Convergence of a ‘Troubles-telling’ and a ‘Service Encounter’.” Journal of Pragmatics 5: 399–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kádár, Dániel Z, Michael Haugh, and Wei-Lin Melody Chang. 2013. “Aggression and Perceived National Face Threats in Mainland Chinese and Taiwanese CMC Discussion Boards.” Multilingua 32 (3): 343–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, Catherine. 2004. “Introducing Polylogue.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kouper, Inna. 2010. “The Pragmatics of Peer Advice in a LiveJournal Community.” Language@Internet 7 (Article 1). Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.Google Scholar
Koshik, Irene. 2005. Beyond Rhetorical Questions: Assertive Questions in Everyday Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuo, Sai-Hua. 1999. “‘To be a Woman is Extremely Bothersome’: How Young Chinese Women Talk about their Predicaments.” The Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 29 (4): 511–532.Google Scholar
Kupferberg, Irit. 2013. “Introduction: Institutional Computer-mediated Troubles Talk.” Language@Internet 10 (Article 2). Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.Google Scholar
Kupferberg, Irit, and Itay Hess. 2013. “‘Me and My Guide Poodle, Lara, are about to Begin Our Third Year at the Hebrew University: Adults with Visual Impairment and Blindness Position themselves Interactively in Computer-mediated Conversations.” Language@Internet 10 (Article 6). Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.Google Scholar
Lamerichs, Joyce, and Hedwig Te Molder. 2003. “Computer-mediated Communication: from a Cognitive to a Discursive Model.” New Media & Society 5 (4): 451–473. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1988. “Putting Linguistics on a Proper Footing: Explorations in Goffman’s Concepts of Participation.” In Erving Goffman. Exploring the Interaction Order, ed. by Paul Drew and Anthony Wootton, 161–227. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Lii-Shih, Yu-Hwei. 1988. Conversational Politeness and Foreign Language Teaching. Taipei: Crane Publishing.Google Scholar
Lindström, Anna, and Sorjonen, Marja-Leena. 2013. “Affiliation in Conversation.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 350–369. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Locher, Miriam. 2006. Advice Online. Advice-Giving in an American Internet Health Column. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria. 2009. “‘You’re Barking Mad, I’m Out’: Impoliteness and Broadcast Talk.” Journal of Politeness Research 5 (2): 159–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria, Pilar Garcés-Conejos Blitvich, and Patricia Bou-Franch. 2011. “On-line Polylogues and Impoliteness: The Case of Postings sent in Response to the Obama Reggaeton YouTube Video.” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 2578–2593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marcoccia, Michel. 2004. “On-line Polylogues: Conversation Structure and Participation Framework in Internet Newsgroups.” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 115–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markham, Annette, and Elizabeth Buchanan. 2012. “Ethical Decision-Making and Internet Research. Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (Version 2.0).” Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.
Morris, Merrill, and Christine Ogan. 1996. “The Internet as Mass Media.” Journal of Communication 46 (1): 39–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morrow, Phillip. 2006. “Telling about Problems and giving Advice in an Internet Discussion Forum: Some Discourse Features.” Discourse Studies 8 (4): 531–548. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. “Online Advice in Japanese: Giving Advice in an Internet Discussion Forum.” In Advice in Discourse, ed. by Holger Limberg and Miriam Locher, 255–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pederson, Sarah, and Janet Smithson. 2010. “Membership and Activity in an Online Parenting Community.” In Handbook of Research on Discourse Behaviour and Digital Communication: Language Structures and Social Interaction ed. by Rotimi Taiwo, 88–103. Hershey, Pennsylvania: IGI Global. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Planchenault, Gaëlle. 2010. “Virtual Community and Politeness: The Use of Female Markers of Identity and Solidarity in a Transvetites’ Website.” Journal of Politeness Research 6 (1): 83–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1978. “Attributions of Responsibility: Blamings.” Sociology 12 (1): 115–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1984. “Agreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes.” In Structures of Social Action. Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by J. Maxwell Atkinson and John Heritage, 57–101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita, and John Heritage. 2013. “Preference.” In The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, ed. by Jack Sidnell and Tanya Stivers, 210–228. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita, and Jenny Mandelbaum. 2005. “Conversation Analytic Approaches to the Relevance and Uses of Relationship Categories in Interaction.” In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Kristine Fitch and Robert Sanders, 149–171. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Pudlinski, Christopher. 2005. “Doing Empathy and Sympathy: Caring Responses to Troubles Tellings on a Peer Support Line.” Discourse Studies 7 (3): 267–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rodham, Karen, and Jeff Gavin. 2006. “The Ethics of using the Internet to Collect Qualitative Research Data.” Research Ethics Review 2 (3): 92–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1987. “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button and John R. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel. 1995. “Parties and Talking Together: Two Ways in which Numbers are Significant for Talk-in-interaction.” In Situated Order: Studies in the Social Organization of Talk and Embodied Activities, ed. by Paul ten Have and George Psathas, 31–42. Washington, D.C.: International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis & University Press of America.Google Scholar
. 2007. Sequence Organization in Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sharkey, Siobhan, Janet Smithson, Elaine Hewis, Ray Jones, Tobit Emmens, Tamsin Ford, and Christabel Owens. 2012. “Supportive Interchanges and Face-work as ‘Protective Talk’ in an Online Self-harm Support Forum.” Communication & Medicine 9 (1): 71–82.Google Scholar
Shaw, Chloe, and Alexa Hepburn. 2013. “Managing the Moral Implications of Advice in Informal Settings.” Research on Language in Social Interaction 46 (4): 344–362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shum, Winnie, and Cynthia Lee. 2013. “(Im)politeness and Disagreement in Two Hong Kong Internet Forums.” Journal of Pragmatics 50: 52–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sillence, Elizabeth. 2013. “Giving and Receiving Peer Advice in an Online Breast Cancer Support Group.” Cyberpsychology, Behaviour and Social Networking 16 (6): 480–485. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smithson, Janet, Siobhan Sharkey, Elaine Hewis, Ray Jones, Tobit Emmens, Tamsin Ford, and Christabel Owens. 2011. “Problem Presentation and Responses on an Online Forum for Young People who Self-harm.” Discourse Studies 13 (4): 487–501. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steensig, Jakob, and Paul Drew. 2008. “Introduction: Questioning and Affiliation/Disaffiliation in Interaction.” Discourse Studies 10 (1): 5–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2008. “Stance, Alignment, and Affiliation during Storytelling: When Nodding is a Token of Affiliation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41 (1): 31–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stommel, Wyke. 2008. “Conversation Analysis and Community of Practice as Approaches to Studying Online Community.” Language@Internet 5 (Article 5). Available at [URL], accessed January 30, 2014.Google Scholar
Vandergriff, Ilona. 2013. “Emotive Communication Online: A Contextual Analysis of Computer-mediated Communication (CMC) Cues.” Journal of Pragmatics 51: 1–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vásquez, Camilla. 2011. “Complaints Online: The Case of TripAdvisor .” Journal of Pragmatics 43: 1707–1717. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xie, Huimin. 2013. “How do People give Advice in Wu Chinese?” In Cross-Culturally Speaking, Speaking Cross-Culturally, ed. by Bert Peeters, Kerry Mullan, and Christine Béal, 141–182. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Press.Google Scholar
Waring, Hansun Zhang. 2007. “The Multi-functionality of Accounts in Advice Giving.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 11 (3): 367–391. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 2012. “‘Advice’ in English and in Russian: A Contrastive and Cross-cultural Perspective.” In Advice in Discourse, ed. by Holger Limberg and Miriam Locher, 309–332. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (18)

Cited by 18 other publications

Haugh, Michael
2024. Online public denunciation as recursive social practice. Internet Pragmatics 7:1 ► pp. 161 ff. DOI logo
Pan, Zhaoyi
2024. Impoliteness in polylogal intercultural communication among Asian EFL learners. Intercultural Pragmatics 21:2 ► pp. 227 ff. DOI logo
Haugh, Michael, Wei-Lin Melody Chang & Dániel Z. Kádár
2022. “Doing deference”. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) ► pp. 73 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Digital Ideological Grooming. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 100 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Introduction. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Dedication. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. v ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. “Let Them Starve, You Idiots!!! Why Feed VERMIN?”. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 115 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Digital Sexual Grooming. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 58 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Digital Commercial Grooming. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 150 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Digital Grooming, DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Copyright Page. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. iv ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Digital Grooming. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. “You Are Like My Only Friend, Idc If You Are 12”. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. Digital Grooming. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 194 ff. DOI logo
Lorenzo-Dus, Nuria
2022. “Your DrugBuddy”. In Digital Grooming, ► pp. 162 ff. DOI logo
Mitchell, Nathaniel
2022. Duelling contexts: how action misalignment leads to impoliteness in a courtroom. Journal of Politeness Research 18:1 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Chovanec, Jan
2018. Chapter 9. Irony as counter positioning. In The Pragmatics of Irony and Banter [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 30], ► pp. 165 ff. DOI logo
Haugh, Michael & Yasuko Obana
2015. Transformative continuations, (dis)affiliation, and accountability in Japanese interaction. Text & Talk 35:5 ► pp. 597 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.