Interdisciplinary Work Between Linguists and Social Work Professionals: Using Discourse Analysis Data to Inform Family Counselors

Background:

The family is an important cultural institution for interaction and socialization and remains integral throughout the life cycle; thus family discourse is a critical component. In addition, family therapists are becoming more interested in “evidence-based practice” (Ali & Bachicha, 2012) which discourse analysis can provide, building upon past psychology studies that have examined interaction like gossiping (Parker & O’Reilly, 2012) or treatments like narrative therapy (e.g., Miller & Forrest, 2009).

Though there is a relatively large body of studies of family interaction examining how socialization of morality, gender, political views, and general social practices is accomplished through family talk (e.g., Gordon, 2004; and Tannen, 2003), there is a lack of discourse studies of families comprised of older adults and their adult children.

Furthermore, many discourse analysis studies have described interesting phenomena and have detailed the discursive practices people use to accomplish particular goals, but discourse analysts have generally not taken the next step to collaborate with professionals in related fields to pursue real-life application and praxis. Candlin and Sarangi (2004) suggest that applied linguistics studies must show relevance and consider “how this relevance may be characterized, how it can be appraised, how it can be disseminated” (p. 2). It is with an eye on collaboration with family counselors or social work practitioners working with families that I present this data and the potential collaborative work that can be done to disseminate the results.

Methods:

This study examined the discourse of one Midwestern American family (two adult children, two parents) during multiple instances of family holiday dinnertable conversation, analyzing the contributions of both parents and the adult children, and the discursive practices they use to collaboratively construct identity.

Data was examined through the framework of Interactional Sociolinguistics using the tools of Conversation Analysis.

Results:

Analysis of the interactional data shows that the adult child identity is constructed through shifting between both the child identity and the adult identity and sometimes the simultaneous demonstration of both the child and the adult identities. The researcher identifies interesting tensions between the expectations the parents have versus the identity work performed by the adult children and the negotiation of multiple simultaneous identities. Selected data will show how family members implicitly demonstrate expectations and opinions and attempt to navigate complex and potentially controversial topics fraught with tension, such as critiquing a person’s relationship status.

The researcher identifies discursive practices used by the parents such as posing a loaded question/problematizing choices and showing appreciation/evaluation that may not seem problematic to the parents/speaker but cause consternation, apparent in the responses of the adult children/listeners. Ways of coping with tensions by the adult children include justifying choices and using humor/deflecting.

Implications:

Applications for the findings will be discussed, particularly the way family identity construction and awareness of the use of the identified discursive practices can contribute to professions such as family counseling and therapy or social work.  Ways counselors and discourse analysts can collaborate in the future for more interdisciplinary praxis will be discussed.