Intellectual discussion in the academy as situated discourse

Intellectual discussion is a form of talk hailed as important but not much studied. After suggesting why it should be given scholarly attention, the paper reports on interviews conducted with graduate students and faculty who attended a weekly colloquium in an academic department. Drawing upon the interviews the first part of the paper provides an in‐depth examination of the multiple, often conflicting concerns, which arose as this academic group “did” intellectual discussion. In the second part of the paper the interview data are extended to offer a model of how intellectual discussants generally make attributions about each other. In the third section, results from the case study are used to critique context‐general communicative theories (attribution, politeness, multiple goals). Finally, the conclusions draw out implications for future study of intellectual discussion as well as academic institutional practices.