34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark 1 Matters of uncertainty Negotiating public opinion

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark2 Introduction The biotechnology debate in Europe Public opinion research (Bauer & Gaskell; Bonfadelli; Horst; Meilgaard; Scholderer; Cook; Myers). (Special issue of Journal of Discourse Studies based on papers from conference in New Zealand).

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark3 Research questions and field of exploration How and why do focus group participants use commonplaces in discourses in which uncertainty is a characteristic feature?

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark4 Uncertainties were expressed concerning: The process of genetic engineering Products that are genetically modified Potential dangers of genetic modification Potential dangers of consuming GM-food The need for GM-food Manipulation of nature and plant genomes Whom to trust The media The experts What to believe Own attitudes Own understanding of concepts Own feelings Carrying out the tasks the participants were prompted to do

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark5 A brief note on theories used Expressions of uncertainty Speech functions – beyond the clause (Halliday et al) Appraisal (Martin, White and colleagues) Commonplaces (Aristotle; Barton; Macnaghten; Myers)

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark6 Definitions Commonplace (konoi topoi; loci communes; lieux communs) Myers & Macnaghten 1998 (cited in Myers 2005): ‘Commonplaces are short evocations of standard arguments that will work in many situations’. Myers 2007: ‘Commonplaces are textual instances of shared identities’

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark7 Commonplaces are used: For informational and interactional purposes (Barton 1999) For purposes of agreeing, mitigating disagreement or for closing a topic (Myers 2007) For saving face in problematic talk (Myers 2007)

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark8 Uncertainties and commonplaces Overview uncertainties Overview commonplaces

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark9 Example 1 Because we do not know….em….when we eat a genetically modified apple, and we do not know what happens when it enters the body and later leaves the body to end up in nature somewhere …. Then I think …. Em…. We should stay away from it. It is just far too dangerous to play around with it. Cause we do not know what we put into our mouths, and when we do not know ….I think we know far too little about it.

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark10 Example 2 Looking at an extract from NovoZymes’ website: C10: Something I thought about – that was also what you mentioned, Jane – that if we could save water when washing and so on – that seemed a bit strange to me for somehow I do not really understand that enzymes can do it somehow. I do not really understand how. Question: Are you able to deduce from the extract that the enzymes are genetically modified? C8: I thought they were bacteria – OK, but it is genetic modification when they go in and take something out? – But do we know if it is dangerous? C10: Is it dangerous? C8: But what if it is not dangerous after all? What if it is good for people and then somebody has just spread a rumour that it is bad. C10: Then it is really frightening that I find it so scary, isn’t it?

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark11 Example 3 Prompt: What are your sources of knowledge about GMO? What I know about it, I think, is mostly from the printed media, the newspaper and the news on TV and radio. And I do not think the media has been particularly informative when we know how difficult it is to find out what to think about it all. One week, a study is published to show certain results, and the next week a new study is published to show results that are exactly the opposite of what we learned last week. It is like that with many things, but it is sometimes difficult to form an attitude, and we would have to spend years trying to understand.

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark12 Example 4: managing uncertainty Commonplaces of futurity and fatalism [THERE WILL ALWAYS BE A RISK] Expert 7 [….] The other disadvantage I know about is that in Argentine they have big problems with large multinational companies owning the manufacturing of transgenic soy; this means that all the small-scale farmers – they have been removed because they go for large-scale farming there; but genetic modification should not be blamed for that; it is more a matter of how the multinationals control everything, crops, where they are grown, etc. So among disadvantages that is the one I believe we should focus on. But of course we need to be careful about what we introduce and how we modify things, but I believe that will always be the case.

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark13 Example 5: managing uncertainty Quality of life and the human factor ’CHOICE IS GOOD’ C8: But if it is dangerous (GMO), then we do not want it. C10: No, of course. C9: As long as it is an issue, shouldn’t we still be allowed a choice? C10: Yes, this is also what I am saying because then we have the choice, don’t we? Everybody: Yes

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark14 Example 6: managing uncertainty Trust [WHOM CAN WE TRUST?] E3: […..] What I mean is when we get it into our own bodies, you know, then it is not too difficult to form an attitude, but as long as we hear all sorts of strange things – then we do not have any idea of what to think. C14: Then there are certain things we remember – just a few – and then we cannot place it in its wider context. E3: Exactly. C14: It is just some kind of gut-feeling E3: Whom can we trust?

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark15 Example 7: managing uncertainty Morality Prompt: Would you buy genetically modified food if you knew? [WE ARE ALL SINNERS] C7: You know, that was also what I mentioned for if the kids can decide, well then the families will buy it (GMO), that’s for sure. C6: But don’t we all do that [buy chips] for barbeques? C8: Well, yes we certainly do. C10: And that is OK – just once in a while. C8: I mean the ‘Pringles’ there …. they are just delicious …. in these tubes. C10: They are damn good …. but they are not healthy either…. C7: And it is like that once in a while. C8: Once in a while we may have them – but not every day. I mean – we should not feed on them. I don’t think it is healthy to feed on genetically modified things.

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark16 Example 8: managing uncertainty Morality Prompt: Please rank a list of 11 applications of genetically modified products with the most acceptable as your top priority. [HELPING PEOPLE WHO ARE ILL IS GOOD] C16: I also put no. 4 about insulin as my top priority. I mean – if we have a possibility to help people with a disease, then we must do it – even if we use genetically modified products – so – yes – I find that acceptable

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark17 Summing up The focus group without biotechnology experts had more uncertainty markers than the other groups in which there were experts, but in all the focus groups observed, uncertainty was a salient feature. Predominant uncertainty markers were cognitive mental processes (probability, perception and emotion), modal adjuncts, modal auxiliaries, attitudinal disjuncts, questions, conditional clauses and incoherent syntax. Uncertainty was negatively framed through negative Affect, negative Judgement and negative Appreciation, some of which were graduated.

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark18 Summing up The use of commonplaces was more pronounced in the group consisting of non-experts than in the other groups. Expressions of uncertainty in all groups were often followed up by a commonplace, which may suggest that commonplaces were used to manage uncertainty. My data has confirmed earlier findings that commonplaces are used for interactional purposes such as bonding and establishing consensus. But in addition my analyses suggest that commonplaces may also be used for managing uncertainty, for furthering arguments and for negotiating new codes of accptance when discussing GMO applications.

34th ISF Congress, Odense, Denmark, July 2007Inger Lassen, Aalborg University, Denmark19 Acknowledgements Systemic functional linguists: Halliday, Hasan, Matthiessen, Martin, White.. Public opinion research: Barton, Myers, Macnaghten, Bauer & Gaskell The Danish Research Councils Colleagues at Aalborg University: Lise-Lotte Holmgreen, Anders Horsbøl, Torben Vestergaard Colleagues at Life Sciences, Aalborg University: Karen Welinder, Kaare Lehmann Nielsen et al