1.2 Aims of the Study
This book attempts to provide a detailed description and interpretation of identity construction in academic advising interaction in a Chinese context.I intend to achieve the following three goals.
Firstly, this book aims to investigate the various identities constructed by expert advice-givers and the linguistic choices made for their identity construction in advising sequences in Chinese PhD dissertation proposal presentation meetings[2]. This is the first step to explore the basic characteristics of identity construction in this type of institutional context. As many studies have shown, the participant’s identity is one of the intrinsic characteristics of institutional interaction (Drew & Heritage, 1992; Drew &Sorjonen, 1997; Heritage, 1997; Heritage & Clayman, 2010; Thornborrow,2002) and is thus often used as a pre-existing variable to interpret discourse production. According to Zimmerman (1998, p. 87), identity can be specified“as an independent variable accounting for participants’ use of particular linguistic or discourse devices.” However, this is just a partial picture of identity construction in institutional interactions. It is observed from Ex.(1-1)above that deviational identities can also be constructed in a dynamic process of interaction, which temporarily deviate from the expected one. Therefore,this study intends to provide a detailed description of both default and deviational identities constructed by advice-givers in academic advising interaction and the linguistic choices made for constructing them.
Secondly, this book aims to reveal properties of the dynamics of identity construction in advising sequences in Chinese PhD dissertation proposal presentation meetings. Many studies have shown that identity construction is a dynamic process (e.g., Bucholtz & Hall, 2005; Butler & Fitzgerald, 2010;Clifton & Van De Mieroop, 2010; De Fina et al., 2006; Graham, 2007; Hall, 1996;Kroskrity, 2000; Omoniyi & White, 2006). This is particularly true of the institutional interaction in question, in which advice-givers do not always maintain the same identity throughout their advising sequences. Instead, they may constantly adjust their identities throughout the dynamic process of the interaction. This study will therefore carefully describe the dynamics of identity construction in academic advising interaction.
The final aim of this book is to provide an adequate interpretation for the dynamic construction of identity in advising sequences in Chinese PhD dissertation proposal presentation meetings. Previous studies on identity and its construction have mainly focus on the description of categories of identity,strategies for identity construction and dynamic construction of identities, but less discussion has been devoted to providing a systematic exploration of why interlocutors dynamically construct identities. Without an adequate interpretation, a full picture of identity construction cannot be obtained. This study therefore attempts to provide an adequate interpretation for identity construction in advising sequences by examining various communicative needs to be satisfied and contextual correlates to be adapted to.
To achieve these aims, the following three specific questions are addressed:
1. What identities do advice-givers construct in their advising sequences and what linguistic choices are made for constructing them?
(1) What default identity do advice-givers construct in their advising sequences and what linguistic choices are made for constructing it?
(2) What deviational identities do advice-givers construct in their advising sequences and what linguistic choices are made for constructing them?
2. How do advice-givers choose and construct their identities dynamically in their advising sequences?
(1) How is the advice-givers’ dynamic construction of identity displayed through modifying the default identity in an advising sequence?
(2) How is the advice-givers’ dynamic construction of identity displayed through making identity shift in an advising sequence?
3. Why do advice-givers dynamically construct their identities in the context of academic advising interaction?
(1) What communicative needs are satisfied in the course of the advice-givers’dynamic construction of identity in academic advising interaction?
(2) How does the advice-givers’ dynamic construction of identity adapt to various contextual correlates in academic advising interaction?
The three research questions correspond to identities constructed as a result of making choices, identity construction as a dynamic process and identity construction as a means of satisfying communicative needs in the current context of academic advising interaction. Each will be dealt with in detail in Chapter Five, Chapter Six and Chapter Seven respectively.