A dispute

setting and pirate
Originally uploaded by angie cat

I have been invited to be a part of a symposium for the EM/CA conference in Fribourg. This means that I will need to develop an abstract by 1 November. I've started with some reading about disputes (because the symposium focuses on disputes in children's everyday activity). So I have disputes in the recordings of children's use of computers. Disputes are not surprising, in a sense, since the young children were usually sharing the computer (always potentially tricky).

This morning I've been reading Maynard's (1985) paper on the ways that children start arguments. That was a good starting point. It suggested to me, for example, that a non-verbal action such as making a move with the mouse, can be considered as an "antecedent event"
and the next turn after as the opposing action in the following:

H: =do you wanna start with all these crocodiles?
(1.0)
H: yep
K: yes
→ (6.0)↔((H clicking the mouse at intervals))ANTECEDENT EVENT
K:→ >no Hannah don’t< OPPOSITION
(1.0)↔((H still clicking the mouse))LETS OPPOSITION PASS
K:→ don’t SECOND OPPOSITION
(1.0)↔((H continues to move the mouse))LETS OPPOSITION PASS
K:→ o:::wh oh no:::: I said do:::::n’t
(2.0)
H:→ why?
(1.0)
K:→ because I wanted to ( ) the crocodiles
H:→ I did!
K:→ I::: want to
C: one of the animal tiles has fallen sick you need
to use this tile when you can to make sure the
sickness does not spread the sickness spreads
every few moves you make these score zero points
when you ( ) with a sick tile
(7.0)↔((H clicking on various tiles at intervals))
K:→ Hannah I know=
H: =whoops
K:→ Hannah I know how to do it
H:→ >do it< then
(0.4)
H: just call me when you’re ready

As you can see, I've only begun a rough analysis but it is more than I had done when this day started! More to come.