Disagreement

 Uit artikel in JoP over disagreement:

 What is relevant in the context of this paper are disagreeing verbal actions

such as Moratti's reply in example 1, i.e. utterances u2 that express a disagreement regarding a preceding utterance u1.

Disagreeing actions have a semantic, textual and sequential relation with u1. Semantically, u2 or some content implied by it is

incompatible with u1. On the textual level, u2 usually establishes cohesive links with u1, for example via simple negation (no),

a subset of corrective and contrastive discourse markers (rather u2, but u2),1,2 different kinds of anaphora referring back to u1 (I

don't think [so]u1, I don't agree with [what X said]u1), repetition of u1 (A: She lives in Munich e B: She doesn't live in Munich),

metadiscursive verbs (You're lying [by uttering u1]), downgraded or ironic epistemic evaluations of u1 (maybe, sure...), etc.

Sequentially, the refusal of sharing the commitment conveyed by u1 blocks or suspends certain courses of action projected by

u1. Given the general preference for agreement in conversations, disagreeing actions are often dispreferred responses and/or

open sequences of repair. However, in some contexts e e.g. when responding to compliments (Pomerantz, 1978) or in certain

phases of disputes (Kotthoff, 1993) e disagreeing is the unmarked response and should not therefore be considered a dis-

preferred option. All in all, the sequential implications of disagreeing actions seem to be dependent on various contextual

factors such as the specific subtype of action performed by the asserted u1 (informing, assessing, complimenting, explaining,

giving a subjective opinion, hypothesizing etc.), the activity type, or the distribution of roles among the participants.

Disagreement is of special importance in argumentation, which is often defined as an activity aimed at dealing with a

difference of opinion (e.g. Van Eemeren and Houtlosser, 2015:154e156) that concerns an issue (e.g. Sch€ar and Greco, 2018;

Rigotti and Greco, 2019:65e71), also called quaestio (‘question’, ‘problem’) or, in German, Streitfrage (‘question that is the

object of a dispute’) (e.g. Deppermann, 2003:14, Hannken-Illjes, 2018:116e120).

Caffi, 2007Heritage and Raymond,2005Rocci,2017Miecznikowski, 2020Kendrick, 2019Jakubícek et al., 2013Kraif and Tutin, 2017Kitzinger, 2013Giacalone Ramat and De Mauri, 2012Cuenca et al. (2019)Fedriani and Molinelli (2019)Rocci et al. (2020)