Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T11:21:47.095Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pre-empting reference problems in conversation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2010

Jan Svennevig
Jan Svennevig
Affiliation:
University of Oslo, Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies, P.O.Box 1102 Blindern, 0317 Oslo, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The topic of this article is how conversationalists deal with emergent problems of reference in the construction of a turn at talk. It analyzes practices for modifying and expanding a turn-constructional unit in progress to accommodate information that will introduce a referent to the interlocutor or check his or her familiarity with it. One set of practices expands the turn after the referring expression has been produced: apokoinou constructions and appositions. A second, and previously undescribed, practice is identified by which speakers insert referent identification before the referring expression has been produced. In this practice, speakers initiate two separate sentence structures and complete them both by merging them in a common complement. This practice has the advantage of embedding the subordinate activity of establishing reference within the main sentence frame, and furthermore minimizes the disruption of sequential progressivity of the talk. (Turn construction, reference, expansions, apokoinou, apposition, progressivity)*

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 173 - 202
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Auer, Peter (1984). Referential problems in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 8:627–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter (1996). On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Selting, Margret (eds.), Prosody in conversation, 57–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter (2005). Delayed self-repairs as a structuring device for complex turns in conversation. In Hakulinen, Auli & Selting, Margret (eds.), Syntax and lexis in conversation: Studies on the use of linguistic resources in talk-in-interaction, 75–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. (1992). Arenas of language use. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. (1994). Managing problems in speaking. Speech Communication 15:243–50.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. (1998). Communal lexicons. In Malmkjaer, Kirsten & Williams, John (eds.), Context in language learning and language understanding, 63–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., & Marshall, Catherine (1992 [1981]). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In Clark, Herbert H., Arenas of language use, 9–59. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, Deanna (1992 [1986]). Referring as a collaborative process. In Clark, Herbert H., Arenas of language use, 107–43. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ford, Cecilia, & Fox, Barbara (1996). Interactional motivations for reference formulation: He had. This guy had, a beautiful, thirty-two O:lds. In Fox, Barbara (ed.), Studies in anaphora, 146–66. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Goodwin, Charles, & Goodwin, Marjorie H. (1986). Gesture and coparticipation in the activity of searching for a word. Semiotica 62:51–75.Google Scholar
Gundel, Jeanette K.; Hedberg, Nancy; & Zacharsky, Ron (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language 69:274–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hakulinen, Auli, & Selting, Margret (eds.) (2005). Syntax and lexis in conversation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. (1987). Spoken and written modes of meaning. In Horowitz, Rosalind & Samuels, S. Jay (eds.), Comprehending oral and written language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. (1991). On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27:405–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hayashi, Makoto (2005). Referential problems and turn construction: An exploration of an intersection between grammar and interaction. Text 25:437–68.Google Scholar
Heritage, John (1984). A change-of-state token and aspects of its deployment. In Atkinson, J. Maxwell & Heritage, John (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, John (2007). Intersubjectivity and progressivity in person (and place) reference. In Enfield, Nick J. & Stivers, Tanya (eds.), Person reference in interaction, 255–80. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail (1972). Side sequences. In Sudnow, David (ed.), Studies in social interaction, 295–331. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William (1972). The study of language in its social context. In Giglioli, Pier Paolo (ed.), Language and social context, 283–308. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lie, Svein (2008). Veldig sånn festejente. In Johannessen, Janne Bondi & Hagen, Kristin (eds.), Språk i Oslo: Ny forskning omkring talespråk, 78–95. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar
Lindström, Anna (1999). Language as social action. Grammar, prosody, and interaction in Swedish conversation. Uppsala: Uppsala University.Google Scholar
Linell, Per (2005). En dialogisk grammatik? In Anward, Jan & Nordberg, Bengt (eds.), Samtal och grammatik: Studier i svenskt samtalsspråk, 231–328. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Mazeland, Harrie (2007). Parenthetical sequences. Journal of Pragmatics 39:1816–69.Google Scholar
Norén, Niklas (2007). Apokoinou in Swedish talk-in-interaction: A family of methods for grammatical construction and the resolving of local communicative projects. Linköping: Linköping University, Department of Culture and Communication.Google Scholar
Nota Oslo: Norwegian corpus of spoken language, the Oslo part. Text laboratory, Department of Linguistics and Scandinavian Studies, University of Oslo. http://www.tekstlab.uio.no/nota/oslo/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor; Schegloff, Emanuel A.; & Thompson, Sandra (eds.) (1996). Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prince, Ellen F. (1981). Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In Cole, Peter (ed.), Radical pragmatics, 223–55. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1979). The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In Givon, Talmy (ed.), Discourse and syntax, 261–86. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1996a). Some practices for referring to persons in talk-in-interaction: A partial sketch of a systematics. In Fox, Barbara (ed.), Studies in anaphora, 437–85. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1996b). Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Ochs, Elinor, Schegloff, Emanuel A. & Thompson, Sandra (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah (1994). Approaches to discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah (2006). In other words: Variation in reference and narrative. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selting, Margret, & Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth (eds.) (2001). Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Stoltenburg, Benjamin (2003). Parenthesen im gesprochenen Deutsch. InLiSt (Interaction and Linguistic Structure) 34:1–40.Google Scholar
Svennevig, Jan (1999). Getting acquainted in conversation: A study of initial interactions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Svennevig, Jan (2004). Other-repetition as display of hearing, understanding and emotional stance. Discourse Studies 6:489–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Svennevig, Jan (2008). Trying the easiest solution first in other-initiation of repair. Journal of Pragmatics 40:333–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, Gareth (2007). On the design and use of pivots in everyday English conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 39:2217–43.Google Scholar