The paper examines the discursive construction of dream reports. Based on a discursive constructionist approach, the study reviews problematic aspects of constructing dream narratives. Particularly, dream-tellers need to display the external character of their reports and to demonstrate that – although in their dreams they saw and did strange things – they are normal and reliable agents. Subsequently, particular ways in which people report on unrealistic content of their dreams are explored. For this purpose, the use of normalizing devices in dream reports published on dream-sharing websites is analyzed. The study demonstrates that several normalizing devices, including contrast structures and two-part structures – such as ‘At first I thought X. . . but then I realized Y’ and ‘I was just doing X… when Y’ – are employed in dream reports. The study also suggests that the proper use of these devices might possibly contribute to the trustworthiness of dream reports in everyday interaction.
AlderML (2016) Dream-telling differences in psychotherapy: The dream as an allusion. Language and Psychoanalysis5(2): 19–26.
2.
BardinaS (2020) Rhetorical strategies of normalization in dream narratives [Ritorich-eskiestrategiinormalizatsii v rasskazakh o snovideniyakh]. Shagi/Steps6(4): 127–140.
3.
BarnesRMossD (2007) Communicating and feeling: The social organization of ‘private thoughts.’Discourse Studies9(2): 123–148.
4.
CasagrandeMCortiniP (2008) Spoken and written dream communication: Differences and methodological aspects. Consciousness and Cognition17(1): 145–158.
5.
CoulterJ (1973) Approaches to Insanity: A Philosophical and Sociological Study. London: Martin Robertson.
6.
CurleyEM (1975) Dreaming and conceptual revision. Australasian Journal of Philosophy53(2): 119–141.
7.
EdwardsD (1991) Categories are for talking: On the cognitive and discursive bases of categorization. Theory and Psychology1(4): 515–542.
8.
EdwardsD (1999) Shared knowledge as a performative and rhetorical category. In: Pragmatics in 1998: Selected papers from the 6th international pragmatics conference (ed VerschuerenJ), vol. 2, pp.130–141. Antwerp, Belgium: International Pragmatics Association.
9.
EdwardsDPotterJ (1992) Discursive Psychology. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
10.
FreibergJFreebodyP (2009) Applying membership categorisation analysis to discourse: When the ‘tripwire critique’ is not enough. In: LeThLêQShortM (eds) Critical Discourse Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, pp.141–162.
11.
GeorgacaE (2000) Reality and discourse: A critical analysis of the category of ‘delusions’. British Journal of Medical Psychology73(2): 227–242.
12.
GeorgacaE (2004) Factualization and plausibility in delusional discourse. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology11(1): 13–23.
13.
HaakanaM (2007) Reported thought in complaint stories. In: HoltECliftR (eds) Reporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp.150–178.
14.
HakT (1998) ‘There are clear delusions.’ The production of a factual account. Human Studies21(4): 419–436.
15.
HilbertRA (2010) The anomalous foundations of dream telling: Objective solipsism and the problem of meaning. Human Studies33(1): 41–64.
16.
JayyusiL (1984) Categorisation and the Moral Order. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
17.
JeffersonG (2004) ‘At first I thought’: A normalizing device for extraordinary events. In: LernerGH (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp.131–167.
18.
JiménezJ (2012) The manifest dream is the real dream: The changing relationship between theory and practice in the interpretation of dreams. In: FonagyPKächeleHLeuzinger-BohleberM, et al (eds) The Significance of Dreams: Bridging Clinical and Extraclinical Research in Psychoanalysis. London: Karnac, pp.31–48.
19.
KimM (2014) Reported thought as a stance-taking device in Korean conversation. Discourse Processes51(3): 230–263.
20.
LamontPCoelhoCMcKinlayA (2009) Explaining the unexplained: Warranting disbelief in the paranormal. Discourse Studies11(5): 543–559.
21.
LynchM (1998) The discursive production of uncertainty: The OJ Simpson ‘dream team’ and the sociology of knowledge machine. Social Studies of Science28(5/6): 829–868.
22.
MalcolmN (1959) Dreaming. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
23.
OhashiYWooffittRJacksonC, et al. (2013) Discourse, culture and extraordinary experiences: Observations from a comparative, qualitative analysis of Japanese and UK English accounts of paranormal phenomena. Western Journal of Communication77(4): 466–488.
24.
PalmerD (2000) Identifying delusional discourse: Issues of rationality, reality and power. Sociology of Health and Illness22(5): 661–678.
25.
PeräkyläA (2008) Psychoanalysis and conversation analysis: Interpretation, affect and intersubjectivity. In: PeräkyläAAntakiCVehviläinenC, et al. (eds) Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp.100–119.
26.
PeräkyläABergmannJ (2020) Practices of joint meaning creation: Dreams in psychoanalytic discussion. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis101(2): 1–28.
27.
PollnerM (1987) Mundane Reasoning: Reality in Everyday and Sociological Discourse. New York: Cambridge University Press.
28.
PotterJ (1996) Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction. London: SAGE.
29.
PotterJ (2019) Action and representation: A comment on Batel and Castro ‘Re-opening the dialogue between the theory of social representations and discursive psychology’. British Journal of Social Psychology58(4): 410–414.
30.
PotterJHepburnA (2007) Discursive constructionism. In: HolsteinJAGubriumJF (eds) Handbook of Constructionist Research. New York, London: The Guilford Press, pp.275–293.
31.
PotterJWetherellM (1995) Discourse analysis. In: SmithJSHarréRVan LangenhoveL (eds) Rethinking Methods in Psychology. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp.80–92.
32.
RosenMSuttonH (2013) Self-representation and perspectives in dreams. Philosophy Compass11(8): 1041–1053.
33.
SacksH (1984) On doing “being ordinary”. In:AtkinsonJMHeritageJ (eds) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, pp.413–429.
34.
SacksH (1992) Lectures on Conversation, vols. I and II (eds JeffersonGSchegloffEA). Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
35.
SchredlMDreerJMösleA, et al. (2019) Voice-recorded vs. written dream reports: A research note. International Journal of Dream Research12(1): 138–140.
36.
SmithD (1978) ‘K is mentally ill.’ The anatomy of a factual account. Sociology12(1): 23–53.
37.
StockbridgeGWooffittR (2019) Coincidence by design. Qualitative Research19(4): 437–454.
38.
SulerJ (2004) The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology & Behavior7(3): 321–326.
39.
SuttonJ (2009) Dreaming. In: SymonsJCalvoP (eds) The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Psychology. London: Routledge, pp.522–542.
40.
VásquezCUrzúaA (2009) Reported speech and reported mental state in mentoring meetings: Exploring novice teacher identities. Research on Language and Social Interaction42(1): 1–19.
41.
WatsonDR (1978) Categorization, authorization and blame-negotiation in conversation. Sociology12(1): 105–113.
42.
WindtJM (2015) Dreaming: A Conceptual Framework for Philosophy of Mind and Empirical Research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
43.
WoodsCWooffittR (2014) Telling the moment: Seeing a UFO. Narrative Inquiry24(2): 239–258.
44.
WooffittR (1989) (Telling) tales of the unexpected: A sociological analysis of accounts of paranormal experiences. Doctoral Dissertation, University of York, UK.
45.
WooffittR (1992) Telling Tales of the Unexpected: The Organization of Factual Discourse. Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
46.
WooffittR (2005) Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: A Comparative and Critical Introduction. London: SAGE.
47.
WoolgarS (1988) Science: The Very Idea. Chichester: Ellis Horwood; London: Tavistock.
48.
WorthamS (2000) Interactional positioning and narrative self-construction. Narrative Inquiry10(1): 157–184.
