Affordances and Actions: Requests for Confirmation as Devices for Implementing Challenging and Other Disagreement- Implicative Actions

Abstract

Abstract This article examines how requests for confirmation (RfCs) can be used as devices for challenging or disagreeing with another participant, their talk, or their action(s) in informal interaction. Based on their defining pragmatic characteristics, we identify two generic interactional affordances RfCs offer their speakers: (1) a capacity to do questioning and (2) a capacity to forward propositional content. While these two affordances are generally utilized together, one or the other may be mobilized more strongly when bringing off challenging or disagreement-implicative actions. Drawing on interactional data in (Peninsular) Spanish and (American) English, and using conversation analytic methods, we illustrate how participants may differentially draw on these two basic affordances with respect to two major classes of “challengeables”: (1) a co-participant’s claims and assertions (or the stances with which they are delivered), and (2) a co-participant’s plans or decisions. We end with a discussion of the usefulness of an affordance-based approach.