Cover not available
Part of
The Social Dynamics of Pronominal Systems: A comparative approach
Edited by Paul Bouissac
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 304] 2019
► pp. 35–56

Chapter 2
When we means you

The social meaning of English pseudo-inclusive personal pronouns

| Macquarie University
This chapter uses qualitative and quantitative analysis of interactions collected in a New Zealand rugby team to analyse the way in which pronominal choice impacts upon the social dynamics of leadership discourse. In particular, the pseudo-inclusive first person plural pronoun is examined in terms of its solidarity enhancing effect and mitigation of leadership-focused speech acts. Pronominal use is analysed with reference to the sociolinguistic concept of stance alignment and how this can mitigate potential face-threat. The discussion considers that by including themselves with the addressees of an interaction, leaders can attenuate the illocutionary force of speech acts such as directives and criticism, whilst maximising the directness of their expression, and goes on to question the social function of pseudo-inclusive compliments.
Keywords: clusivity, leadership, speech acts, stance, illocutionary force
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature
    • 2.1Stance
    • 2.2Clusivity, stance and the pronominal system
    • 2.3Control acts, compliments and criticism
  • 3.Methodology
  • 4.Qualitative analysis
  • 5.Quantitative analysis
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 23 July 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.304.02wil
References (50)
References
Adachi, Chie. 2016. ‘Sugoi!–Indexicality and Stancetaking in Japanese Compliments’. Language in Society 45 (02): 193–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bass, Bernard M. 1990. Bass and Stodgill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications. 3rd ed. New York; London; Toronto; Sydney; Singapore: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Berry, Roger. 2009. ‘You Could Say That: The Generic Second-Person Pronoun in Modern English’. English Today 25 (03): 29–34.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Penelope., and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Studies in Interactional Sociolinguistics; 4. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Roger, and Albert Gilman. 1960. ‘The Pronouns of Power and Solidarity’. In Style in Language, ed. by T. A. Sebeok, 253–76. Cambridge, Massachussetts: MIT Press. [URL]Google Scholar
Choi, Seongsook, and Stephanie Schnurr. 2014. ‘Exploring Distributed Leadership: Solving Disagreements and Negotiating Consensus in a “Leaderless” Team’. Discourse Studies 16 (1): 3–24.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Crevani, Lucia, Monica Lindgren, and Johann Packendorff. 2010. ‘Leadership, Not Leaders: On the Study of Leadership as Practices and Interactions’. Scandinavian Journal of Management 26 (1): 77–86.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The Paradigmatic Structure of Person Marking. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
. 2005. ‘Syncretisms Involving Clusivity’. Typological Studies i n Language 63: 73. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cock, Barbara. 2011. ‘Why We Can Be You: The Use of 1st Person Plural Forms with Hearer Reference in English and Spanish’. Journal of Pragmatics 43 (11): 2762–75.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
. 2016. ‘Register, Genre and Referential Ambiguity of Personal Pronouns’. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 26 (3): 361– 378.Google Scholar
DuBois, John. 2007. ‘The Stance Triangle’. In Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, Evaluation, Interaction, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–82. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan, Jiansheng Guo, and Martin Lampert. 1990. ‘Politeness and Persuasion in Children’s Control Acts’. Journal of Pragmatics 14 (2): 307–31.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Filimonova, Elena. 2005. Clusivity: Typology and Case Studies of Inclusive-Exclusive Distinction. Amsterdam: J. Benjamins Pub. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fraser, Bruce. 1980. ‘Conversational Mitigation’. Journal of Pragmatics 4 (4): 341–50.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin.Google Scholar
. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
. 1981. Forms of Talk. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Golato, Andrea. 2003. ‘Studying Compliment Responses: A Comparison of DCTs and Recordings of Naturally Occurring Talk’. Applied Linguistics 24 (1): 90–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 2007. ‘Participation, Stance and Affect in the Organization of Activities’. Discourse & Society 18 (1): 53–73.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Gumperz, John Joseph. 1999. ‘On Interactional Sociolinguistic Method’. In Talk, Work and Institutional Order: Discours e in Medical, Mediation and Management Settings, ed. by Srikant Sarangi and Celia Roberts, 454–71. Berlin; New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haverkate, Henk. 1992. ‘Deictic Categories as Mitigating Devices’. Pragmatics 2 (4): 505–522. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herbert, Robert K., and H. Stephen Straight. 1989. ‘Compliment-Rejection versus Compliment-Avoidance: Listener-Based versus Speaker-Based Pragmatic Strategies’. Language & Communication 9 (1): 35–47.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Holmes, Janet. 1984. ‘Modifying Illocutionary Force’. Journal of Pragmatics 8 (3): 345–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. ‘Compliments and Compliment Responses in New Zealand English’. Anthropological Linguistics 28 (4): 485–508.Google Scholar
. 1988. ‘Paying Compliments: A Sex-Preferential Positive Politeness Strategy’. Journal of Pragmatics 12 (3): 445–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. ‘Leadership Talk: How Do Leaders “Do Mentoring”, and Is Gender Relevant?’ Journal of Pragmatics 37 (11): 1779–1800. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. ‘Men, Masculinities and Leadership: Different Discourse Styles at Work’. In Gender and Spoken Interaction, ed. by Pia Pichler and Eva Eppler, 186–210. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, Janet, and Meredith Marra. 2004. ‘Leadership and Managing Conflict in Meetings’. Pragmatics 14 (4): 439–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Íñigo-Mora, Isabel. 2004. ‘On the Use of the Personal Pronoun We in Communities’. Journal of Language and Politics 3 (1): 27–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiesling, Scott Fabius. forthcoming. Stance and Stancetaking: Theory and Practice in Sociolinguistics. [URL]
. 2004. ‘Dude’. American Speech 79 (3): 281–305. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. ‘Style as Stance’. In Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, edited by Alexandra M Jaffe, 171. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. ‘Stance in Context: Affect, Alignment and Investment in the Analysis of Stancetaking’. In IMean 2011. UWE Bristol. [URL]
Kitagawa, Chisato, and Adrienne Lehrer. 1990. ‘Impersonal Uses of Personal Pronouns’. Journal of Pragmatics 14 (5): 739–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor. 1993. ‘Constructing Social Identity: A Language Socialization Perspective’. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26 (3): 287–306. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oh, Sun-Young. 2010. ‘Invoking Categories through Co-Present Person Reference: The Case of Korean Conversation’. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (5): 1219–42.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Quirk, Randolph, S Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and J Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Raelin, Joe. 2011. ‘From Leadership-as-Practice to Leaderful Practice’. Leadership 7 (2): 195–211.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Richards, Keith. 2010. ‘Professional Orientation in Back Region Humor’. Text & Talk– An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies 30 (2): 145– 167.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Vine, Bernadette. 2004. Getting Things Done at Work: The Discourse of Power in Workplace Interaction. Pragmatics & Beyond, new ser. v. 124. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. ‘Directives at Work: Exploring the Contextual Complexity of Workplace Directives’. Journal of Pragmatics 41 (7): 1395–1405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present -Day English. Cambridge [England]  ;New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wieczorek, Anna Ewa. 2009. ‘This Is to Say You’re Either in or out: Some Remarks on Clusivity’. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 3 (2): 118–29.Google Scholar
. 2010. ‘“And I Quote”: Direct and Indirect Point-of-View Switches in Clusivity-Oriented Discourse’. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 6 (2): 229–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Nick. 2010. ‘Bros, Boys and Guys: Address Term Function and Communities of Practice in a New Zealand Rugby Team’. New Zealand English Journal 24: 33–54.Google Scholar
. 2013. ‘Interaction without Walls: Analysing Leadership Discourse through Dramaturgy and Participation’. Journal of Sociolinguistics 17 (2): 180–199.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
. 2017. ‘Developing Distributed Leadership: Leadership Emergence in a Sporting Context’. In Challenging Leadership Stereotypes through Discourse: Power, Management and Gender., ed. by Cornelia Ilie and Stephanie Schnurr, 147–70. Singapore: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. ‘Linguistic Ethnography’. In The Routledge Handbook of Language in the Workplace, ed. by Bernadette Vine, 40–50. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wolfson, Nessa, and Joan Manes. 1980. ‘The Compliment as a Social Strategy’. Paper in Linguistics 13 (3): 391–410.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Ponton, Douglas Mark, Vladimir I. Ozyumenko & Tatiana V. Larina
2024. Revisiting the rhetorical construction of political consent. Journal of Language and Politics DOI logo
Piippo, Irina
2021. Mirror-like address practice in Arabic-medium classroom interaction. In Intersubjectivity in Action [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 326], ► pp. 109 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 june 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.