Arguing to Persuade and Arguing to Explore in Preschoolers' Narrative Discourse

• Authors: Jolanta Rytel
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper focuses on argumentation occurring in the process of co-constructing narrative text at the preschool age in the two types of situations: one where disagreernent between the discourse participants occurs, and another where none of the discourse participants has opposed the speaker's position, in undisputed, non-conflict situations. The data come from a study of 162 children between ages four and seven. The children participated in the study as co-narrators (two children in the role of co-narrators), who constructed a text for a peer listener (a third child in the role of a listener). The analyzed material consisted of 93 narrative texts. The findings show that the argumentation refers to both dimensions of children's narration activity: the content introduced by discourse participants, i.e., the semantic dimension of the constructed text, and the process of constructing the text, i.e., the interactive dimension (who, when and how introduces any given information). However, in conflict situations the argumentation more often concerns the interactive dimension. On the other hand, in non-conflict situations, the argumentation more often concerns the semantic dimension of the discourse. Moreover, when the argumentation refers to the rules of interaction in the discourse, it is mostly characterized by a simple structure and is constructed individually. When the argumentation refers to the content which is introduced in the discourse, in the non conflict situations it is still mostly characterized by asimple and individually created structure, but in comparison to the conflict situations it is more often constructed jointly and results in the more compound structures. The analyses of argumentation in the two types of situation - conflict and non conflict ones - reveal that convincing, as the main goal of argumentation, can be realized in narrative discourse in different ways.

Keywords

EN

discourse; children's narratives; discourse interaction; argument structure

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Psychology of Language and Communication
• Year: 2009
• Volume: 13
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 21-38

Dates

published

2009-01-01

online

2009-06-15

Contributors

author

Jolanta Rytel

• Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University, Warsaw

References

• Bearison, D., J. (1986). Transactional cognition in context: New model of social understanding. In D.J. Bearison & H. Zimiles (Eds.), Thought and emotion: Development perspectives (pp. 129-146). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
• Berman, R.A., Katzenberger, I. (2004). Form and function in introducing narrative and expository texts: A developmental perspective. Discourse Processes, 38 (1), 57-94.
• Berman, R.A., Nir-Sagiv, B. (2007). Comparing narrative and expository text construction across adolescence: A developmental paradox. Discourse Processes, 43 (2), 79-120.[WoS]
• Brumark, A. (2008). “Eat your hamburger!” - “No, I don't want to!” Argumentation and argumentative development in the context of dinner conversation in twenty Swedish families. Argumentation, 22, 251-271.[WoS]
• Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Buchs, C., Butera, F., Mugny, G., Darnon, C. (2004). Conflict elaboration and cognitive outcomes. Theory Into Practice, 45, 23-30.[Crossref]
• Darnon, C., Doll, S., Butera, F. (2007). Dealing with a disagreeing partner: Relational and epistemic conflict elaboration. European Journal Of Psychology of Education, 22, 227-242.[Crossref]
• Doise, W., Mugny, G. (1984). The social development of intellect. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
• van Eemeren, F.H., Grootendorst, R. (1984). Speech acts in argumentative disscussion. Dordrecht - Holland: Foris.
• Grzelak, J.L., Nowak, A. (2001). Wplyw spoleczny (Social influence). In J. Strelau (Ed.), Psychologia (Psychology) Vol. 3: Jednostka w spoleczeństwie i elementy psychologii stosowanej (Individual in the society and elements of applied psychology) (pp. 197-204). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
• Kofta, M. (1989). Orientacja podmiotowa: Zarys modelu (Subjective orientation: The outline of a model). In A. Gurycka (Ed.), Podmiotowość w wychowawczych doświadczeniach dzieci i mlodzieży (Subjectivity in educational experiences of children and adolescents), Vol. 1: M. Kofta (Ed.), Wychowanek jako podmiot dzialań (Pupil as agent of actions) (pp. 65-93). Warszawa: Wydawnictwa UW.
• Kurcz, I. (2000/2005). Psychoiogia języka i komunikacji (Psychology of language and communication). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe “Scholar”.
• McCabe, A. (2005). Zdania w polaczeniach - tekst i dyskurs (Sentences in connections - Text and discourse). In J. Berko Gleason & N. Bernstein Ratner (Ed.), Psycholingwistyka (Psycholinguistics) (pp. 299-332). Gdańsk: Gdańskie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
• Mercer, N. (1996). The quality of talk in children's collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6 (4), 359-377.
• Mugny, G., De Paolis, P., Carugati, F. (1984). Social regulations in cognitive development. In W. Doise & A. Palmonari (Eds.), Social interaction in individual development (pp. 127-146). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Rytel, J. (2005). Is disagreement necessary? Argumentation in preschoolers' narrative discourse. In B. Bokus (Ed.), Studies in the psychology of child language. In honor of Grace Wales Shugar (pp. 313-327). Warszawa: Matrix.
• Rytel, J. (2006). Disagreement in preschoolers' narrative discourse. Psychology of Languageand Communication, 10 (1), 21-44.
• Rytel, J. (fothcoming). Monolog, dialog, polifonia - pragmatyka narracji dziecięcej (Monologue, dialog, polyphony - pragmatics of childrens' narration). In: B. Janusz, K. Gdowska & B. de Barbara (Eds.), Narracja: teoria i praktyka (Narration: theory and practice) (pp. 267-286). Kraków: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego.
• Shugar, G.W. (1989). Male dziecko w sytuacji dwupodmiotowej: Jak powstaje i na czym polega struktura Wspólne Dzialanie? (Young child in a dual-agentive situation. What is the joint action structure and how does it emerge?). In A. Gurycka (Ed.), Podmiotowość w wychowawczych doświadczeniach dzieci i mlodzieży, (Subjectivity in educational experiences of children and adolescents) Vol. 1: M. Kofta (Ed.), Wychowanek jako podmiot dzialań (Pupil as agent of actions) (pp. 65-93). Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
• Voss, J.F., Van Dyke, J.A. (2001). Narrative structure, information certainty, emotional content, and gender as factors in a pseudo jury decision-making task. Discourse Processes, 32 (2/3), 215-243.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/v10057-009-0002-9