Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Interdisciplinary Discourse pp 145–189Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

The Collaborative Construction of Knowledge

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 542 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter completes work begun in Chap. 5 on stages in interdisciplinary research. This time attention is directed to the way in which knowledge is constructed collaboratively. The analysis draws on data from a number of interdisciplinary meetings, some from within systems biology involving different projects and others from a specific research project bringing together the social sciences, biology, mathematics and economics. The second part of the chapter identifies a discourse marker that plays an important part in the building of understanding and draws attention to a significant interactional pattern in which it features. In its conclusion the chapter returns to the issue of terminology in interdisciplinary engagement and challenges a widely accepted claim.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aijmer, K. (2013). Understanding pragmatic markers: A variational pragmatic approach. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amey, M. J., & Brown, D. F. (2005). Interdisciplinary collaboration and academic work: A case study of a university partnership. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 102, 23–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, M. (1988). Sub-technical vocabulary and the ESP teacher: An analysis of some rhetorical items in medical journal articles. Reading in a Foreign Language, 4(2), 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakemore, D. (1988). So as a constraint on relevance. In R. M. Kempson (Ed.), Mental representations: The interface between language and reality (pp. 183–195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blakemore, D. (2004). Discourse markers. In L. R. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 222–240). Oxford: Blackwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolden, G. B. (2006). Little words that matter: Discourse markers ‘so’ and ‘oh’ and the doing of other-attentiveness in social interaction. Journal of Communication, 56, 661–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolden, G. B. (2008). ‘So what’s up?’: Using the discourse marker so to launch conversational business. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(3), 302–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolden, G. B. (2009). Implementing incipient actions: The discourse marker ‘so’ in English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(5), 974–998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2006). Paradigm peace and the implications for quality. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 9(2), 111–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buysse, L. (2012). So as a multifunctional discourse marker in native and learner speech. Journal of Pragmatics, 44(13), 1764–1782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creamer, E. G. (2005). Insight from multiple disciplinary angles: A case study of an interdisciplinary research team. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 102, 37–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Díaz, F., Antaki, C., & Collins, A. F. (1996). Using completion to formulate a statement collectively. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(4), 525–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donato, R. (2004). Aspects of collaboration in pedagogic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 284–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, K. (2006). Towards an understanding of the spectrum of approaches to discourse particles: Introduction to the volume. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. (1990). An approach to discourse markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(3), 383–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), 931–952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, M. H., & Goodwin, C. (1987). Children’s arguing. In S. Philips, S. Steele, & C. Tanz (Eds.), Language, gender, and sex in comparative perspective (pp. 240–248). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, C. (2003). Aligning as a team: Forms of conjoined participation in (stepfamily) interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 36(4), 395–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, A., Watson, F., Davies, A. L., & Hanley, N. (2009). Interdisciplinary conversations: The collective model. In S. Sörlin & P. Warde (Eds.), Nature’s end: History and the environment (pp. 162–187). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, M.-B. M. (1997). Alors and donc in spoken French: A reanalysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 28(2), 153–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 299–345). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2012a). Epistemics in action. Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2012b). The epistemic engine: Sequence organization and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 30–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heritage, J. (2013). Turn-initial position and some of its occupants. Journal of Pragmatics, 57, 331–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, G. (1987). On exposed and embedded correction in conversation. In G. Button & J. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 86–100). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jefferson, G. (1989). Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a ‘standard maximum’ silence of approximately one second in conversation. In D. Roger & P. Bull (Eds.), Conversation (pp. 166–196). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, A. (2002). So…?: Pragmatic implications of so-prefaced questions in formal police interviews. In J. Cotterill (Ed.), Language in the legal process (pp. 91–110). New York: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kangasharju, H. (1996). Aligning as a team in multiparty conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(3), 291–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koshik, I. (2002). Designedly incomplete utterances: A pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35(3), 277–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, P. W. Y. (2009). The effect of text type on the use of so as a discourse particle. Discourse Studies, 11(3), 353–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam, P. W. Y. (2010). Toward a functional framework for discourse particles: A comparison of well and so. Text & Talk, 30(6), 657–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, G. H. (1996). On the ‘semi-permeable’ character of grammatical units in conversation: Conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 238–276). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lerner, G. H. (2002). Turn-sharing: The choral co-production of talk-in-interaction. In C. E. Ford, B. A. Fox, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 225–256). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • López-Yáñez, J., & Altopiedi, M. (2015). Evolution and social dynamics of acknowledged research groups. Higher Education, 70, 629–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Redeker, G. (1990). Ideational and pragmatic markers of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(3), 367–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redeker, G. (1991). Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics, 29, 1139–1172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sacks, H. (1992). In G. Jefferson (Ed.), Lectures on conversation (Vol. 1). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1980). Preliminaries to preliminaries: ‘Can I ask you a question?’. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 104–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation’s turn-taking organization. In G. Button & J. R. E. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organization (pp. 70–85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. A. (2005). Presequences and indirection. Applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(1), 55–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7(4), 289–327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sokolova, T. (2012). Achieving integration in interdisciplinary research: Strategy or emergence? A case study of interdisciplinary research in Sweden. Unpublished Masters thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, Nr. 109, 63pp., 30 ECTS/hp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Rees, M. A. (1992). The adequacy of speech act theory for explaining conversational phenomena: A response to some conversation analytical critics. Journal of Pragmatics, 17(1), 31–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Moray House School of Education, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Seongsook Choi

  2. Stratford upon Avon, UK

    Keith Richards

Authors
  1. Seongsook Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith Richards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Choi, S., Richards, K. (2017). The Collaborative Construction of Knowledge. In: Interdisciplinary Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47040-9_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-47040-9_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-47039-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-47040-9

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation