Advertisement

The Initial Phase of the Argumentative Discussions Between Parents and Children

  • Antonio BovaEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter examines the initial phase of parent–child argumentative discussions during mealtime. The conceptual tool adopted for the analysis is based on the pragma-dialectical ideal model of a critical discussion (van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 2004). The types of issues leading parents and children to engage in argumentative discussions during mealtime as well as the contribution that parents and children provide to the inception of argumentation are described and discussed. The analysis of the initial phase of parent–child argumentative discussions also considers the role played by the specificity of the parent–child relationship and the distinctive features of the activity of family mealtime for the beginning of an argumentative discussion. Exemplary argumentative sequences that bring to light the results obtained through the qualitative analysis of a larger corpus of argumentative discussions between parents and children are presented and discussed.

References

  1. Arcidiacono, F. (2011). “But who said that you eat when you want and what you want?” Verbal conflicts at dinnertime and strategic moves among family members. In J. P. Flanagan & A. M. Munos (Eds.), Family conflicts: Psychological, social and medical implications (pp. 27–52). New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  2. Arcidiacono, F., & Bova, A. (2015). Activity-bound and activity-unbound arguments in response to parental eat-directives at mealtimes: Differences and similarities in children of 3–5 and 6–9 years old. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 6, 40–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blum-Kulka, S. (1997). Dinner talk: Cultural patterns of sociability and socialization in family discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Bova, A. (2015). Children’s responses in argumentative discussions relating to parental rules and prescriptions. Ampersand, 2, 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bova, A., & Arcidiacono, F. (2013). Investigating children’s Why-questions: A study comparing argumentative and explanatory function. Discourse Studies, 15(6), 713–734.Google Scholar
  6. Bova, A., & Arcidiacono, F. (2014). “You must eat the salad because it is nutritious”. Argumentative strategies adopted by parents and children in food-related discussions at mealtimes. Appetite, 73, 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bova, A., & Arcidiacono, F. (2015). Beyond conflicts: Origin and types of issues leading to argumentative discussions during family mealtimes. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 3(2), 263–288.Google Scholar
  8. Bova, A., & Arcidiacono, F. (2017). Interpersonal dynamics within argumentative interactions: An introduction. In F. Arcidiacono & A. Bova (Eds.), Interpersonal argumentation in educational and professional contexts (pp. xvii–xxii). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  9. Bova, A., & Arcidiacono, F. (2018). Interplay between parental argumentative strategies, children’s reactions, and topics of disagreement during mealtime conversations. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 19, 124–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Capaldi, E. D., & Powley, T. L. (1990). Taste, experience, and feeding. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chouinard, M. M., Harris, P. L., & Maratsos, M. P. (2007). Children’s questions: A mechanism for cognitive development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 72(1), 1–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Craven, A., & Potter, J. (2010). Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action. Discourse Studies, 12(4), 419–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Delamont, S. (1995). Appetites and identities: An introduction to the social anthropology of Western Europe. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Frazier, B. N., Gelamn, S. A., & Wellman, H. M. (2009). Preschoolers’ search for explanatory information within adult: Child conversation. Child Development, 80(6), 1592–1611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Goodwin, C. (2006). Retrospective and prospective orientation in the construction of argumentative moves. Text & Talk, 26(4–5), 443–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gruber, H. (2001). Questions and strategic orientation in verbal conflict sequences. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(12), 1815–1857.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Isaacs, N. (1930). Children’s “why” questions. In S. Isaacs (Ed.), Intellectual growth in young children (pp. 291–349). London: Routledge & Sons.Google Scholar
  18. Kent, A. (2012). Responding to directives: What can children do when a parent tells them what to do? In S. Danby & M. Theobald (Eds.), Disputes in everyday life: Social and moral orders of children and young people. Sociological studies of children and youth, vol. 15 (pp. 57–84). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Loukusa, S., Ryder, N., & Leinonen, E. (2008). Answering questions and explaining answers: A study of Finnish-speaking children. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 37(3), 219–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ochs, E., Pontecorvo, C., & Fasulo, A. (1996). Socializing taste. Ethnos, 61(1), 7–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Piaget, J. (1929). The child’s conceptions of the world. London: Routledge & Kegan.Google Scholar
  22. Pontecorvo, C., Fasulo, A., & Sterponi, L. (2001). Mutual apprentices: The making of parenthood and childhood in family dinner conversations. Human Development, 44(6), 340–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rigotti, E., & Greco Morasso, S. (2009). Argumentation as an object of interest and as a social and cultural resource. In N. Muller-Mirza & A. N. Perret-Clermont (Eds.), Argumentation and education (pp. 1–61). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (1999). Argument or explanation? Propositional relations as clues for distinguishing arguments from explanations. In F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Proceedings of the IV ISSA Conference (pp. 757–760). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.Google Scholar
  25. Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2001). Argumentation, explanation and causality: An exploration of current linguistic approaches to textual relations. In T. Sanders, J. Schilperoord, & W. Spooren (Eds.), Text representation: Linguistic and psycholinguistic aspects (pp. 231–246). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stern, W. B. (1924). Psychology of early childhood. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar
  27. Valian, V., & Casey, L. (2003). Young children’s acquisition of wh-questions: The role of structured input. Journal of Child Language, 30(1), 117–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2002). Strategic maneuvering with the burden of proof. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Advances in pragma-dialectics (pp. 13–28). Amsterdam and Newport News, VA: Sic Sat and Vale Press.Google Scholar
  30. Walton, D. N. (2004). A new dialectical theory of explanation. Philosophical Exploration, 7(1), 71–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Wiggins, S., & Potter, J. (2003). Attitudes and evaluative practices: Category vs. item and subjective vs. objective constructions in everyday food assessments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42(4), 513–531.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuoreMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations