This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tracy, K. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Action-Implicative Discourse Analysis

University of Colorado, Boulder

Action-implicative discourse analysis is the name for a new type of discourse analysis, developed to be useful in the critique and cultivation of communicative practices in society. Developed within the metatheoretical framework of grounded practical theory, an extension and formalization of Craig's earlier ideas about communication as a practical discipline, action-implicative discourse analysis seeks to characterize the communicative problems, conversational techniques, and situated ideals of communicative practices. After overviewing the method's metatheoretical framework, the article proceeds to highlight what is distinctive about this new method. By comparing and contrasting action-implicative discourse analysis with four markedly different discourse analytic approaches-conversation analysis, interactional sociolinguistics, critical discourse analysis, and discursive psychology-the article seeks to make the methodological approach's distinctive character visible. The article's final section explicates criteria that could be used in assessing interpretive discourse approaches generally, and action-implicative discourse analysis in particular.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Mirivel Managing poor surgical candidacy: communication problems for plastic surgeons Discourse & Communication, August 1, 2007; 1(3): 309 - 336. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Castor Language Use During School Board Meetings: Understanding Controversies of and About Communication Journal of Business Communication, April 1, 2007; 44(2): 111 - 136. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Castor and F. Cooren Organizationsas Hybrid forms of Life: The Implications of the Selection of Agency in Problem Formulation Management Communication Quarterly, May 1, 2006; 19(4): 570 - 600. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Y. Neuman and M. Levi Blood And Chocolate: A Rhetorical Approach to Fear Appeal Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 2003; 22(1): 29 - 46. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. R. AGNE and K. TRACY `Bible Babble': Naming the Interactional Trouble at Waco Discourse Studies, August 1, 2001; 3(3): 269 - 294. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Pudlinski Book Reviews Discourse Studies, February 1, 2000; 2(1): 116 - 118. [PDF]

				K. TRACY and D. L. ANDERSON Relational Positioning Strategies in Police Calls: A Dilemma Discourse Studies, May 1, 1999; 1(2): 201 - 225. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Gallois and J. Pittam Social Psychological Approaches to Using Natural Language Texts Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 1995; 14(1-2): 5 - 17. [Abstract]

				J. Potter and M. Wetherell Natural Order: Why Social Psychologists should Study (a Constructed Version of) Natural Language, and Why they Have Not Done So Journal of Language and Social Psychology, March 1, 1995; 14(1-2): 216 - 222. [Abstract]