LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
On occasions, speakers do not complete their turns in conversation. Such syntactically-incomplete turns are not treated with repair or misunderstanding. The responses that they receive display a clear understanding of the actions that the unfinished turns embodied. In this article, using conversation analysis (CA), I describe the systematic occurrence of unfinished turns in French conversation. I show that context is necessary to the understanding of this type of turn and I describe the nature of that context. Data analysis reveals that unfinished turns are understandable primarily by reference to their sequential position. I conclude that unfinished turns are a locally- managed resource fitted to the particulars of the talk in progress and built upon the context that the sequences that house them have so far provided.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Arnold, J. E., Fagnano M., & Tanenhaus, M.K. (2003). Disfluencies signal theee, um, new information. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32(1), 25-36.
    • Bailey, K. G. D. & Ferreira, F. (2003). Disfluencies affect the parsing of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 49(2), 183-200.
    • Bergmann, J.R. (1992). Veiled morality: notes on discretion in psychiatry. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp.137-162). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Billig, M. & Schegloff, E.A. (1999). Critical discourse analysis and conversation analysis: An exchange between Michael Billig and Emanuel A. Schegloff. Discourse and Society, 10(4), 543-582.
    • Blommaert, J. (2001). Context is/as critique. Critique of Anthropology, 21(1), 13-32.
    • Brennan, S. E. & Schober, M.E. (2001). How listeners compensate for disfluencies in spontaneous speech. Journal of Memory and Language, 44(2), 274-296.
    • Bruxelles, S. & Traverso, V. (2001). Ben: Apport de la description d'un 'petit mot' du discours à l'étude des polylogues. Marges Linguistiques, 2, 38-55.
    • Chevalier, F. H.G. (2005). To complete or not to complete: A conversation-analytic study of unfinished turns in French conversation. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Essex, UK.
    • Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
    • Chomsky, N. (1972). Syntactic structures. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
    • Clark, H. H. & Fox Tree, J.E. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84(1), 73-111.
    • Cooren, F. (2005). The contribution of speech act theory to the analysis of conversation: how pre-sequences work. In K. Fitch & R. E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 21-40). Mahwah, NJ/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • Díaz, F., Antaki, C. & Collins, A.F. (1996). Using completion to formulate a statement collectively. Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 525-542.
    • Drew, P. (1984). Speakers' reportings in invitation sequences. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 3129-3151). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
    • Drew, P. (1995). Interaction sequences and anticipatory interactive planning. In E. Goody (Ed.), Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 111-138). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
    • Garfinkel, H. (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
    • Heritage, J. (1990/91). Intention, meaning and strategy: observations on constraints on interaction analysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 24, 311-332.
    • Jefferson, G. (1983). Preliminary notes on a possible metric which provides for a “standard maximum silence” of approximately one second in conversation. Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature, 42, 1-83.
    • Jefferson, G. (1984). On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 346-69). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Koshik, I. (2002). Designedly incomplete utterances: a pedagogical practice for eliciting knowledge displays in error correction sequences. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35(3), 277-309.
    • Lerner, G. H. (1991). On the Syntax of Sentences in Progress. Language in Society, 20 (3), 441-458.
    • Lerner, G. H. (1995). Turn design and the organization of participation in instructional activities. Discourse Processes, 19(1), 111-131.
    • Lerner, G. H. (1996). On the 'semi-permeable' character of grammatical units in conversation: conditional entry into the turn space of another speaker. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 238-276). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Levinson, S.C. (1995). Interactional biases in human thinking. In E. Goody (Ed.), Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 221-260). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Mandelbaum, J. (1990/91). Beyond mundane reason: conversation analysis and context. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 24, 330-50.
    • Merlo, S. & Mansur, L.L. (2004). Descriptive discourse: topic familiarity and disfluencies. Journal of Communication Disorders, 37, 489-503.
    • Pomerantz, A. (1980). Telling 'my side': 'Limited access' as a 'fishing' device. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 186-198.
    • Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (Eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis (pp. 56-101). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures in conversation. Oxford, UK: Blackwell (edited by G. Jefferson)
    • Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation, Language, 50(4), 696-735.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1968). Sequencing in conversational openings. The American Anthropologist, 70(6) 1075-1095.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1979). Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language studies in Ethnomethodology (pp. 23-78). New York: Irvington Publishers.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1980). Preliminaries to preliminaries: can I ask you a question?'. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 104-52.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1987a) Practices and action: boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes, 23, pp499-545.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1987b). Recycled turn beginnings: a precise repair mechanism in conversation's turn-taking organisation'. In G. Button & J.R. Lee (Eds.), Talk and social organisation (pp. 70-85). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1988). Pre-sequences and indirection: applying speech act theory to ordinary conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 55-62.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1990). On the organization of sequences as a source of 'coherence' in talk-in-interaction. In B. Dorval (Ed.), Conversational organization and its development (pp. 51-77). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1991a). Reflections on talk and social structure. In D. Boden & D. Zimmerman (Eds.), Talk and social structure (pp. 44-70). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1991b). Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. In L. Resnick, J.M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially-shared cognition, (pp. 150-171). Washington: American Psychological Association.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1992). Repair after next turn: the last structurally provided for place for the defence of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 95(5), 1295-1345.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1996a). Turn organization: one intersection of grammar and interaction. In E. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, & S. Thompson (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 52-133). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1996b). Confirming allusions: toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology, 102(1), 161-216.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (1997). Third turn repair. In G.R. Guy, C. Feagin, D. Schiffrin, & J. Baugh (Eds.), Towards a social science of language 2 (pp. 31-40). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (2000). When 'others' initiate repair. Applied Linguistics, 2(1-2), 205- 243.
    • Schegloff, E.A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis, Vol 1. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Schegloff, E.A. & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 7, 289-327.
    • Schegloff, E.A., Jefferson, G. & Sacks, H. (1977). The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language, 53, 361-382.
    • Silverman, D. (1994). Describing sexual activities in HIV counselling: The cooperative management of the moral order. Text, 14(3), 427-453.
    • Stainton, R. J. (1994). Using non-sentences: an application of relevance theory. Pragmatics and Cognition, 2(2), 269-284.
    • Stainton, R. J. (1997). Utterance meaning and syntactic ellipsis. Pragmatics and Cognition, 5(1), 51-78.
    • Stainton, R. J. (2000). The meaning of sentences. Noûs, 34(3), 441-454.
    • Streeck, J. (1995). On projection. In E. Goody (Ed.), Social intelligence and interaction (pp. 87-110). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    • Terasaki, A.K. (2004 [1976]). Pre-announcement sequences in conversation. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 171- 223). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    • Wetherell, M. (1998). Positioning and interpretative repertoires: conversation analysis and post-structuralism in dialogue. Discourse and Society, 9(3), 387-412.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article