4
Department of Social Communication, University of São Paulo, Brazil
4
Department of Social Communication, University of São Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
Elder-involved family conflicts present unique communicative and relational challenges that require nuanced strategies for effective resolution. This study examines the role of pragmatic competence—the ability to use language appropriately in social contexts—in shaping conflict resolution practices within multigenerational family settings. Drawing on qualitative interviews and discourse analysis, the research explores how family members navigate politeness, indirectness, face-saving, and empathy when addressing disagreements involving older relatives. The findings reveal that higher levels of pragmatic competence facilitate more constructive dialogue, reduce escalation, and promote mutual understanding. Conversely, pragmatic failures often contribute to misunderstandings, resentment, and relational strain. The study highlights cultural and contextual factors influencing communicative choices and underscores the importance of pragmatic awareness in family mediation and counseling. By elucidating the intersection of language use and conflict resolution, this work contributes to the development of effective interventions that support healthier intergenerational relationships.
How to Cite
Dr. Lucas A. Moreira, & Rafael Barbosa. (2025). Pragmatic Competence and Conflict Resolution Strategies in Elder-Involved Family Conflicts. Frontiers in Social Thoughts and Humanity, 2(06), 11–15. Retrieved from https://irjernet.com/index.php/fsth/article/view/130
📄Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
📄Dragojevic, M., Gasiorek, J., & Giles, H. (2015). Communication Accommodation Theory. In R. B. Charles & E. R. Michael (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication. Medford, MA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
📄Muntigl, P., & Turnbull, M. (1998). Conversational structure and facework in arguing. Journal of Pragmatics, 3, 245-256.
📄Giora, R. (2003). On Our Mind: Salience, Context and Figurative Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
📄Grimshaw, A. D. (1990). Conflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Investigations of Arguments in Conversations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
📄Kakava, C. (2001). Discourse conflict. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
📄Planken, B. (2005). Managing rapport in lingua franca sales negotiations: a comparison of professional and aspiring negotiators. English for Specific Purposes, 4, 381-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.002
📄Bao, G, & W, Jie. (2007). Review of research on interpersonal conflict theory. Technology Economics, 11, 12-16.
📄Cai, C, & Wang, Y. (2015). A study on pragmatic awareness of English thanking expressions in English majors: Gender roles and social contexts. Contemporary Foreign Languages Studies, 12, 46-52.
📄He, Z. (2018). Interpersonal Pragmatics: The Art of Using Language to Manage Interpersonal Relationships. Foreign Language Teaching, 6, 1-6.
📄Hu, M. (2007). Implementation of pragmatic awareness cultivation in spoken discourse in comprehensive English textbooks. Foreign Language Research, 4, 65-69.
📄Lai, X. (2011). A study on the adaptability of conflict discourse between spouses in the context of Chinese. Journal of Foreign Languages, 4, 59-63.
📄Lai, X. (2016). Pragmatic effects of conflict discourse in the mode of interpersonal harmony management: A case study of family conflict discourse. Foreign Languages and Literature, 3, 2-9.
📄Li, D. & Laviosa. (2011). Corpus-based translation teaching in a cross-cultural theoretical framework. Foreign Language Teaching Theory and Practice, 1, 16-24.
📄Ma, C. (2007). Research on Changes in Intergenerational Relationships in Chinese Families. Jilin University.
📄Ran. Y. (2010). Overview of pragmatic research on conflict discourse. Foreign Language Teaching, 1, 1-6.
📄Shen, Y. (2010). Individualization and the reconstruction of family relationships: A case study in Shanghai. Fudan University.
📄Shen. Z, & He, Z. (2004). Deliberate misinterpretation in pragmatic research. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 3, 163-170.
📄Wang, G. (2015). Language representation of conflict discourse and its interpersonal pragmatic effects. Journal of Liaoning Technical University, 2, 205-208.
📄Wang, C, & Yan, W. (2019). Iteration and myth: Discourse changes in news reports on parent-child conflicts. Journalists, 21, 118-121.
📄Wang, Y. (2008). Theoretical analysis of intergenerational relationships in Chinese families. Population Research, 4, 13-21.
📄Wu, L, & Sun, Y. (2003). Influence of changes in intergenerational exchange patterns on the psychological health exchange of the elderly. Chinese Journal of Gerontology, 12, 803-804.
📄Xiao, H. (2015). On the Dialectical Thinking of Research on Linguistic Context Theory. Foreign Literature Studies, 3, 31-39.
📄Yang, X. (2013). Pragmatic analysis of interpersonal conflict discourse and mitigation strategies. Foreign Language Teaching, 2, 39-43.
📄Zhao, Z, & Zhang, L. (2005). Analysis of discourse conflict from the perspective of relevance theory. Foreign Language Teaching, 1, 17-21.
📄Zhang, J. (2020). Analysis of conflict discourse from the ideal perspective. Modern Foreign Languages, 1, 25-36.
📄Zhao, Y. (2004). Discourse analysis of conflict discourse. Journal of Foreign Languages, 5, 37-42.
📄Zheng, H, & Chen, F. (2019). Pragmatic characteristics and mechanisms of parent-child conflict discourse from the perspective of interpersonal pragmatics. Foreign Languages and Literature Research, 3, 262-274.
