KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Dilbilim / 2026 / Sayı: 46

La Négociation Conversationnelle Comme Mécanisme de Gestion des Incompréhensions en Contexte Médiatique Marocain

Conversational Negotiation as a Mechanism for Managing Misunderstandings in a Media Context

Azouzi Hassan(Chouaib Doukkali University)0009-0000-7409-6779
Sayfa
26–44
Yayın Tarihi
2026-05-08
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Micro-analysis of the co-construction of exchanges shows that negotiation, despite slowing down the pace of interactions, is an effective mechanism for regulating speech among participants, even though its prolongation sometimes risks undermining the program's script.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This contribution aims to trace the functioning of conversational negotiation as the predominant discursive strategy in Moroccan television debates, through a contrastive study of two programs: Questions d'actu and En direct avec vous.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Our main objective is to describe, as accurately as possible and based on a corpus of authentic data, the hierarchical structure of exchanges according to three variables: their nature (main or subordinate), their frequency of occurrence, and their interactional function.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Micro-analysis of the co-construction of exchanges shows that negotiation, despite slowing down the pace of interactions, is an effective mechanism for regulating speech among participants, even though its prolongation sometimes risks undermining the program's script.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Négociation · débat télévisé · échange subordonné

Abstract

This contribution aims to trace the functioning of conversational negotiation as the predominant discursive strategy in Moroccan television debates, through a contrastive study of two programs: Questions d'actu and En direct avec vous. Our main objective is to describe, as accurately as possible and based on a corpus of authentic data, the hierarchical structure of exchanges according to three variables: their nature (main or subordinate), their frequency of occurrence, and their interactional function. To do this, we adopt the conceptual apparatus of interactional linguistics and ethnomethodological conversation analysis. The study indicates that the two programs converge on the same observation: the predominance of subordinate exchanges throughout the interaction. The epidemiological context, the diversity of profiles, the divergence of opinions, and many other factors mean that the interactive process struggles to move forward, despite the presence of facilitators, whose role is sometimes greatly exceeded. The complexity of the topics under discussion is systematically reflected in the tangled nature of the exchanges (main, secondary, intertwined, even truncated). Micro-analysis of the co-construction of exchanges shows that negotiation, despite slowing down the pace of interactions, is an effective mechanism for regulating speech among participants, even though its prolongation sometimes risks undermining the program's script.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

Hassan, A. (2026). La Négociation Conversationnelle Comme Mécanisme de Gestion des Incompréhensions en Contexte Médiatique Marocain. Dilbilim, Sayı: 46, 26–44. https://doi.org/10.26650/jol.2026.1861740

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (29)

  1. AUCHLIN, A., & ZENONE, A. (1980). Conversations, actions, actes de langage: Éléments d’un système d’analyse in Actes de langage et structure de la conversation. Conversations, actions, actes de langage: éléments d’un système d’analyse in Actes de langage et structure de la conversation, 1, 6‑41. google scholar
  2. Castro, D. (2020). Negotiation as a disagreement management tool. OSSA Conference Archiv, Evidence, Persuasion&Diversity(8). google scholar
  3. Chernyshova, E., & Traverso, V. (2017). Inférences et processus d’intercompréhension dans les interactions quotidiennes: Quelques questions méthodologiques. Cahiers de praxématique, 68, Article 68. https://doi.org/10.4000/praxematique.4536 google scholar
  4. Erving Goffman. (1973). La mise en scène de la vie quotdiènne. Les relations en public (Minuit). google scholar
  5. Kerbrat-Orecchioni C. (1998). Les interactions verbales Tome1 (Armand Colin). google scholar
  6. Kerbrat-Orecchioni C. (2005). Le discours-en-interaction (Armand Colin). google scholar
  7. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2012). Négocier la notion de négociation. Négociations, 17(1), 87‑99. https://doi.org/10.3917/neg.017.0087 google scholar
  8. Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. (2014). Les actes de langage dans le discours Théorie et fonctionnement. Armand Colin. google scholar
  9. Liana, S. (2025). Exploring Semantic Relationships in Online Negotiations: A Computational Analysis of Post-pandemic Linguistic Trends and Perceptions. Proceedings of the … International Conference on Business Excellence, 19(1), 3959‑3977. https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2025-0303 google scholar
  10. Martel, G. (2010). La performance communicationnelle en contexte médiatique. L’exemple du débat politique télévisé. Mots, 92, 83‑102. https://doi.org/10.4000/mots.19532 google scholar
  11. Moeschler, J. (1985). Théorie pragmatique, acte de langage et conversation. Cahiers de Linguistique Française, 6, 80‑92. google scholar
  12. Mondada, L., & Traverso, V. (2005). (Dés)alignements en clôture. Lidil. Revue de linguistique et de didactique des langues, 31, Article 31. https://doi.org/10.4000/lidil.128 google scholar
  13. Priego-Valverde, B. (2021). Failed humor in conversation: Disalignment and (dis)affiliation as a type of interactional failure. HUMOR, 34(4), 613‑636. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2021-0025 google scholar
  14. Robert Vion. (1992). La communication verbale. Analyse des interactions (Hachette Livre). google scholar
  15. Roulet, E. (1981). Échange, interventions et actes de langage dans la structure de la conversation. Etudes de Linguistique Appliquée, 44, 7‑39. google scholar
  16. Roulet, E. (1990). Et si, après tout, ce connecteur pragmatique n’était pas un marqueur d’argument ou de prémisse impliquée ? Cahiers de Linguistique Française, Marquage linguistique, inférence et interprétation dans le discours(11). google scholar
  17. Roulet, E. (1999). Description de l’organisation du discours (Didier). google scholar
  18. Roulet, E., Grobet, A., & FILLIETTAZ, L. (2001). Un modèle et un instrument d’analyse de l’organisation du discours (Berne: P. Lang). google scholar
  19. Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (2012). The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. John Wiley & Sons. google scholar
  20. Tabassum, A., & Hafeez, M. R. (2023). Turn Taking Strategies and Gender: A Conversational Analysis of Pakistani Politicians in TV Shows. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review. https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2023(7-i)36 google scholar
  21. Traverso, V. (2013). L’analyse des conversations (Armond Colin). google scholar
  22. Vion, R. (2000). La Communication Verbale. Hachette Education. https://shs.cairn.info/la-communication-verbale–9782011453563 google scholar
  23. Witek, M. (2023). Interactional Negotiation. In L. Caponetto & P. Labinaz (Éds.), Sbisà on Speech as Action (p. 97‑119). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-22528-4_5 google scholar
  24. AUCHLIN, A., & ZENONE, A. (1980). Conversations, actions, actes de langage: Éléments d’un système d’analyse in Actes de langage et structure de la conversation. Conversations, actions, actes de langage: éléments d’un système d’analyse in Actes de langage et structure de la conversation, 1, 6‑41. google scholar
  25. Chernyshova, E., & Traverso, V. (2017). Inférences et processus d’intercompréhension dans les interactions quotidiennes: Quelques questions méthodologiques. Cahiers de praxématique, 68, Article 68. https://doi.org/10.4000/praxematique.4536 google scholar
  26. Liana, S. (2025). Exploring Semantic Relationships in Online Negotiations: A Computational Analysis of Post-pandemic Linguistic Trends and Perceptions. Proceedings of the … International Conference on Business Excellence, 19(1), 3959‑3977. https://doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2025-0303 google scholar
  27. Priego-Valverde, B. (2021). Failed humor in conversation: Disalignment and (dis)affiliation as a type of interactional failure. HUMOR, 34(4), 613‑636. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2021-0025 google scholar
  28. Roulet, E., Grobet, A., & FILLIETTAZ, L. (2001). Un modèle et un instrument d’analyse de l’organisation du discours (Berne: P. Lang). google scholar
  29. Tabassum, A., & Hafeez, M. R. (2023). Turn Taking Strategies and Gender: A Conversational Analysis of Pakistani Politicians in TV Shows. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review. https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2023(7-i)36 google scholar