Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T12:03:21.727Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14 - Relationships and Relating

from Part II - Topics and Settings in Sociopragmatics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2021

By
Robert B. Arundale
Edited by
Michael Haugh ,
Dániel Z. Kádár  and
Marina Terkourafi
Michael Haugh
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Dániel Z. Kádár
Affiliation:
Hungarian Research Institute for Linguistics, and Dalian University of Foreign Languages
Marina Terkourafi
Affiliation:
Leiden University
Get access

Summary

Sociologist Georg Simmel (1950) argued that human relationships are “inseparable from the immediacy of interaction.” That is, regardless of much one may cogitate about them, relationships happen between persons, forming, thriving, surviving, and dying as those persons communicate with one another. A relationship is a dynamic, on-going process of relating. Relationships and relating are thus key sociopragmatic phenomena. This chapter characterizes current conceptualizations of, and research on, relationships and relating in the sociopragmatic literature, but does so in view of a wide range of metaphors for and sociopsychological theories of relationships, and against the backdrop of the broader research literature on relating in interpersonal communication. Many of these metaphors, theories, and studies treat relationships as relatively static phenomena, existing apart from interaction, perhaps as a mental template for behavior, as a mini-culture of norms and patterns of action, or as rooted in individual identity. The chapter poses an alternative conceptualization of relating as endogenous to and as emerging in the dynamics of everyday interacting with one another.

Keywords

relationshipsinterpersonal communicationinteractionmetaphors
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics , pp. 272 - 292
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agha, A. (2007). Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S. (1998). Identity as an achievement and as a tool. In Antaki, C. and Widdicombe, S., eds., Identities in Talk. London: Sage, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
Antos, G., Ventola, E. and Weber, T. (2008). Introduction: Interpersonal communication – Linguistic points of view. In Antos, G. and Ventola, E., eds., Handbook of Interpersonal Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2006). Face as relational and interactional: A communication framework for research on face, facework, and politeness. Journal of Politeness Research, 2(2), 193–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2010a). Constituting face in conversation: Face, facework, and interactional achievement. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(8), 2078–2105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2010b). Relating. In Locher, M. A. and Graham, S. L., eds., Interpersonal Pragmatics, Vol. 6, Handbooks of Pragmatics. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 137–65.Google Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2013a). Conceptualizing “interaction” in interpersonal pragmatics: Implications for understanding and research. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 12–26.Google Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2013b). Face, relating, and dialectics: A response to Spencer-Oatey. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 138–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2020). Communicating & Relating. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arundale, R. B. (2015). Review of Relationship Thinking: Agency, Enchrony, and Human Sociality, by N. J. Enfield. Language in Society, 44(4), 584–7.Google Scholar
Bavelas, J. B. (2003). Relationship metaphors. In International Encyclopedia of Marriage and Family. www.encyclopedia.com/reference/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/relationship-metaphors.Google Scholar
Baxter, L. A. (2004). Relationships as dialogues. Personal Relationships, 11(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, L. A. and Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and Dialectics. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Braithwaite, D. O. and Schrodt, P. (eds.). (2015). Engaging Theories of Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M. and Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4–5), 585–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burleson, B. L., Metts, S. and Kirch, M. W. (2000). Communication in close relationships. In Hendrick, C. and Hendrick, S. S., eds., Close Relationships: A Sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 245–58.Google Scholar
Carbaugh, D. and Boromisza-Habashi, D. (2015). Ethnography of communication. In Tracy, K., Ilie, C. and Sandell, T., eds., The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Boston, MA: Wiley, pp. 537–52.Google Scholar
Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–61.Google Scholar
Craig, R. T. (2015). The constitutive metamodel: A Sixteen-year review. Communication Theory, 25(4), 356–74.Google Scholar
Duck, S. and McMahan, D. T. (2009). The Basics of Communication: A Relational Perspective. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J. (2009). Relationship thinking and human pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(1), 60–78.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J. (2013). Relationship Thinking: Agency, Enchrony, and Human Sociality. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitch, K. L. 1994. Culture, ideology, and interpersonal communication research. In Deetz, S. A., ed., Communication Yearbook 17. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 104–35.Google Scholar
Fitch, K. L. (1998). Speaking Relationally: Culture, Communication, and Interpersonal Connection. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Gergen, K. J. (2009.) Relational Being: Beyond Self and Community. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1986). Audience diversity, participation and interpretation. Text, 6(3), 283–316.Google Scholar
Hall, J. A. and Davis, D. C. (2017). Proposing the communicate bond belong theory: Evolutionary intersections with episodic interpersonal communication. Communication Theory, 27(1), 21–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugh, M., Kádár, D. Z. and Mills, S. (2013). Interpersonal pragmatics: Issues and debates. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kádár, D. Z. (2012). Relational ritual. In Östman, J. and Verschueren, J., eds., Handbook of Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 1–40.Google Scholar
Kádár, D. Z. (2013). Relational Rituals and Communication: Ritual Interaction in Groups. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Kádár, D. Z. and Bax, M. M. H. (2013). In-group ritual and relational work. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 73–86.Google Scholar
Kádár, D. Z. and Haugh, M. (2013). Understanding Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, A. (1964). The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco, CA: Chandler.Google Scholar
Krippendorff, K. (1970). On generating data in communication research. Journal of Communication, 20(3), 241–69.Google Scholar
Krippendorff, K. (2009). On Communicating: Otherness, Meaning, and Information. Edited by Bermejo, F.. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langlotz, A. and Locher, M. A. (2013). The role of emotions in relational work. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 87–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locher, M. A. (2008). Relational work, politeness, and identity construction. In Antos, G. and Ventola, E., eds., Handbook of Interpersonal Communication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 509–40.Google Scholar
Locher, M. and Graham, S. L. (2010). Introduction to interpersonal pragmatics. In Locher, M. and Graham, S. L., eds., Interpersonal Pragmatics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Locher, M. A. (2013). Relational work and interpersonal pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 145–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, W. F. (1990). Delimiting relational metaphors. Communication Studies, 41(1), 35–53.Google Scholar
Peräkylä, A., Ruusuvuori, J. and Vehviläinen, S. (2005). Introduction: Professional theories and institutional interaction. Communication and Medicine, 2(2), 105–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Sawyer, R. K. (2005). Social Emergence: Societies as Complex Systems. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sigman, S. J. (1991). Handling the discontinuous aspects of continuous social relationships: Toward research on the persistence of social forms. Communication Theory, 1(2), 106–27.Google Scholar
Simmel, G. (1950). The Sociology of Georg Simmel. Translated by Wolff, K. H.. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2000). Rapport management: A framework for analysis. In Spencer-Oatey, H., ed., Culturally Speaking: Managing Rapport through Talk across Cultures. London: Continuum, pp. 11–46.Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2007). Theories of identity and the analysis of face. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(4), 639–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2011). Conceptualizing “the relational” in pragmatics: Insights from metapragmatic emotion and (im)politeness comments. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(14), 3565–78.Google Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2013). Relating at work: Facets, dialectics, and face. Journal of Pragmatics, 58, 121–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spencer-Oatey, H. (2015). Rapport management model. In Tracy, K., Ilie, C. and Sandell, T., eds., The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Boston: John Wiley, pp. 1286–91.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. (2011). A contribution to ethical theory and praxis. In Cheney, G., May, S. and Munshi, D., eds., The Handbook of Communication Ethics. New York: Routledge, pp. 15–30.Google Scholar
Stewart, J. (2014). U and Me: Communicating in Moments That Matter. Chagrin Falls, OH: Taos Institute.Google Scholar
Stewart, J., Zediker, K. E. and Witteborn, S. (2005). Together: Communicating Interpersonally, a Social Construction Approach. 6th ed. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watzlawick, P., Beavin, J. H. and Jackson, D. D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×