Volume 13, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1874-8767
  • E-ISSN: 1874-8775
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper is concerned with constructed dialog in conversational storytelling. Based on Clark & Gerrig’s (1990) demonstration theory, its focus is on what is absent from constructed dialog. To determine what is absent, a comparison is made between constructed dialog tokens and utterances in conversation. The inquiry uses both quantitative and qualitative methods. It is based on the Narrative Corpus (NC; Rühlemann & O’Donnell 2012), a corpus of conversational narratives extracted from the conversational component of the British National Corpus (BNC), and its systematic annotation of constructed dialog (that is, direct speech introduced by a quotative and free direct speech without any introducer). The quantitative comparison of verbalizations used in constructed dialog as opposed to verbalizations used in conversational utterances demonstrates that a particular utterance type is significantly missing from constructed dialog: the continuer utterance, whose basic function is to exhibit an understanding that a form of ‘telling’ by another speaker is going on. The qualitative analysis, based on a subset of storytellings from the NC that were re-analyzed acoustically and re-transcribed using Jeffersonian conventions based on the Audio BNC (Coleman et al. 2012), reveals a stark mismatch between the commonness of tellings in talk-in-interaction and their uncommonness in constructed dialog. The absence of continuers from constructed dialog is discussed against the backdrop of indexicality. I argue that continuers share the key properties of indexicals – semantic vacuity and an existential relationship with the ‘thing’ indicated – and can therefore be seen as indexicals themselves. As indexicals, intrinsically connected to the speech situation of their utterance, continuers cannot be included in constructed dialog, which typically occurs in a different speech situation with different interactional parameters. Finally, I offer initial thoughts on the underrepresentation of telling sequences in constructed dialog.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Barthes, Roland
    1975 An introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. New Literary History6 (2): 237–272. 10.2307/468419
    https://doi.org/10.2307/468419 [Google Scholar]
  2. Bavelas, Janet Beavin , Linda Coates & Trudy Johnson
    2000 Listeners as co-narrators. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology79: 941–952. 10.1037/0022‑3514.79.6.941
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.6.941 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blackwell, Natalia L. , Marcus Perlman & Jean E. Fox Tree
    2015 Quotation as multi-modal construction. Journal of Pragmatics81: 1–7. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bühler, Karl
    1990 [1934]Theory of Language. The Representational Function of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/fos.25
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fos.25 [Google Scholar]
  5. Carter, Ronald & Michael McCarthy
    1997Exploring spoken English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chatman, Seymour
    1975 Towards a theory of narrative. New Literary History6 (2): 295–318. 10.2307/468421
    https://doi.org/10.2307/468421 [Google Scholar]
  7. Clark, Herbert H.
    2016 Depicting as a method of communication. Psychological Review123 (3): 324–347. 10.1037/rev0000026
    https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000026 [Google Scholar]
  8. Clark, Herbert H. & Richard J. Gerrig
    1990 Quotations as demonstrations. Language66(4): 764–805. 10.2307/414729
    https://doi.org/10.2307/414729 [Google Scholar]
  9. Clift, Rebecca & Elizabeth Holt
    2007 Introduction. InReporting talk: Reported Speech in Interaction, Elizabeth Holt & Rebecca Clift (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Coleman, John , Ladan Baghai-Ravary , John Pybus & Sergio Grau
    2012Audio BNC: The Audio Edition of the Spoken British National Corpus. Phonetics Laboratory, University of Oxford. www.phon.ox.ac.uk/AudioBNC (7October 2020).
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Coulmas, F.
    1986 Reported speech: Some general issues. In F. Coulmas (ed.) Direct and indirect speech. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp.1–28. 10.1515/9783110871968.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871968.1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Drew, Paul
    1998 Complaints about transgressions and misconduct. Research on Language and Social Interaction31: 295–325. 10.1080/08351813.1998.9683595
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.1998.9683595 [Google Scholar]
  13. Gardner, R.
    1998 Between speaking and listening: The vocalisation of understandings. Applied Linguistics19(2): 204–224. 10.1093/applin/19.2.204
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.2.204 [Google Scholar]
  14. Goffman, Ervin
    1981Forms of talk. Philadelphia PA: Philadelphia University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Goodwin, Charles
    1986 Between and within alternative sequential treatments of continuers and assessments. Human Studies9: 205–217. 10.1007/BF00148127
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148127 [Google Scholar]
  16. Goodwin, Charles & Marjorie Goodwin
    1992 Assessments and the construction of context. InRethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon, Allesandro Duranti (ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 147–190.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Goodwin, Charles & John Heritage
    1990 Conversation analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology19: 283–307. 10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.001435 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hoffmann, Sebastian , Stefan Evert , Nicholas Smith , David Lee & Ylva Berglund Prytz
    2008Corpus Linguistics with BNCweb – A Practical Guide. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hepburn, Alexa & Galina Bolden
    2017Transcribing for Social Research. Los Angeles CA: Sage. 10.4135/9781473920460
    https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473920460 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hömke, Paul , Judith Holler & Stephen C. Levinson
    2017 Eye blinking as addressee feedback in face-to-face conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction50 (1): 54–70. 10.1080/08351813.2017.1262143
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1262143 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hoey, Elliot Michael
    2017 Sequence recompletion: A practice for managing lapses in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics109: 47–63. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.12.008 [Google Scholar]
  22. Holt, Elizabeth
    1996 Reporting talk: The use of direct reported speech in conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction29 (3): 219–245. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi2903_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi2903_2 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2000 Reporting and reacting: Concurrent responses to reported speech. Research on language and social interaction33 (4): 425–454. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_04
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3304_04 [Google Scholar]
  24. 2007 ‘I’m eying your chop up mind’: Reporting and enacting. InReporting Talk: Reported Speech in Interaction, Elizabeth Holt & Rebecca Clift (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 47–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Jefferson, Gail
    2004 Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. InConversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, Gene H. Lerner (ed.). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 13–31. 10.1075/pbns.125.02jef
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.02jef [Google Scholar]
  26. Jespersen, O.
    1924The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen and Unwin.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Koester, Almut & Michael Handford
    2018 It’s not good saying “Well it it might do that or it might not”’: Hypothetical reported speech in business meetings. Journal of Pragmatics130: 67–80. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.03.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  28. Labov, William
    1972Language in the Inner City. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Labov, William & Joshua Waletzky
    1967/1997 Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. InEssays on the Verbal and Visual Arts, June Helms (ed.). Seattle: University of Washington Press, 12–44, reprinted inJournal of Narrative Inquiry and Life History7 (1–4): 3–38.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Leech, Geoffrey & Mick Short
    1981Style in Fiction. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Levinson, Stephen C.
    1983Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813313
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813313 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2004 Deixis. InThe handbook of pragmatics, Lawrence R. Horn & Gregory Ward (eds). Malden, MA: Blackwell, 97–121.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 2006 On the human interactional engine. InRoots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction, Nicholas Enfield & Stephen C. Levinson (eds). Oxford: Berg, 39–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. 2016 Turn-taking in human communication: Origins and implications for language processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences20 (1): 6–14. 10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2015.10.010 [Google Scholar]
  35. Levinson, Stephen C. & Judith Holler
    2014 The origin of human multi-modal communication. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B369 (1651): 20130302. doi:  10.1098/rstb.2013.0302
    https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0302 [Google Scholar]
  36. Levinson, Stephen C. & Francisco Torreira
    2015 Timing in turn-taking and its implications for processing models of language. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 (731). doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00731 [Google Scholar]
  37. Longacre, Robert E.
    1983The grammar of Discourse. New York NY: Plenum Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Mathis, Terrie & George Yule
    1994 Zero quotatives. Discourse Processes18 (1): 63–76. 10.1080/01638539409544884
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539409544884 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mayes, Patricia
    1990 Quotation in spoken English. Studies in Language14: 325–363. 10.1075/sl.14.2.04may
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.14.2.04may [Google Scholar]
  40. McCarthy, Michael
    2003 Talking back: ‘Small’ interactional response tokens in everyday conversation. Research on Language and Social Interaction36 (1): 33–63. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3601_3 [Google Scholar]
  41. McIntyre, Daniel , Carol Bellard Thomson , John Heywood , Tony McEnery , Elena Semino & Mick Short
    2004 Investigating the presentation of speech, writing and thought in spoken British English: A corpus-based approach. ICAME Journal28: 49–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Mindt, Dieter
    2000An Empirical Grammar of the English Verb System. Berlin: Cornelsen.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Nichols, Thomas E. & Andrew P. Holmes
    2001 Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: A primer with examples. Human Brain Mapping15 (1): 1–25. 10.1002/hbm.1058
    https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.1058 [Google Scholar]
  44. O’Keeffe, A. and S. Adolphs
    2008 ‘Response tokens in British and Irish discourse. Corpus, context and variational pragmatics‘. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (eds) Variational pragmatics) Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp.69–98. 10.1075/pbns.178.05ok
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.178.05ok [Google Scholar]
  45. Peters, Pam & Deanna Wong
    2015 Turn management and backchannels. InCorpus Pragmatics: A handbook, Karin Aijmer & Christophe Rühlemann (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 408–429. 10.1017/CBO9781139057493.022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493.022 [Google Scholar]
  46. Rühlemann, Cristophe
    2013Narrative in English Conversation: A Corpus Analysis of Storytelling. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139026987
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139026987 [Google Scholar]
  47. 2017 Integrating corpus-linguistic and conversation-analytic transcription in XML. The case of backchannels and overlap in storytelling interaction. Corpus Pragmatics1 (3): 201–232. 10.1007/s41701‑017‑0018‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-017-0018-7 [Google Scholar]
  48. Rühlemann, Cristophe and Matthew B. O’Donnell
    2012 Towards a corpus of conversational narrative. Construction and annotation of the Narrative Corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory8 (2): 313–350. 10.1515/cllt‑2012‑0015
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2012-0015 [Google Scholar]
  49. Rühlemann, Cristophe and Stefan T. Gries
    2015 Turn order and turn distribution in multi-party storytelling. Journal of Pragmatics87: 171–191. 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rühlemann, C. and M. Gee
    2017 Conversation Analysis and the XML method. Gesprächsforschung18: 274–296.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Rühlemann, Cristophe & Martin Hilpert
    2017 Colloquialization in journalistic writing: Investigating inserts in TIME magazine with a focus on well . Journal of Historical Pragmatics18 (1): 102–135. 10.1075/jhp.18.1.05ruh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.18.1.05ruh [Google Scholar]
  52. Rühlemann, Cristophe
    2018 TCU-initial backchannel overlap in storytelling. Narrative Inquiry28 (2): 257–279. 10.1075/ni.17060.ruh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.17060.ruh [Google Scholar]
  53. Rühlemann, C , A. Bagoutdinov and M. B. O’Donnell
    2015 Modest XPath and XQuery for corpora: Exploiting deep XML annotation. ICAME Journal39: 47–84. 10.1515/icame‑2015‑0003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/icame-2015-0003 [Google Scholar]
  54. Sacks, Harvey
    1992Lectures on Conversation. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Sacks, Harvey , Emanuel A. Schegloff & Gail Jefferson
    1974 A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language50 (4): 696–735. 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  56. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1982 Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. InAnalyzing Discourse: Text and Talk, Deborah Tannen (ed). Washington DC: Georgetown University Press, 71–93.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  58. Semino, Elena & Mick Short
    2004Corpus Stylistics: Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation in a Corpus of English Writing. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203494073
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203494073 [Google Scholar]
  59. Sidnell, Jack
    2006 Coordinating gesture, talk, and gaze in reenactments. Research on Language in Social Interaction39 (4): 377–409. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3904_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3904_2 [Google Scholar]
  60. Short, Mick , Elena Semino & Jonathan Culpeper
    1996 Using a corpus for stylistics research: Speech and thought presentation. InUsing corpora for Language Research: Studies in Honour of Geoffrey Leech, Jenny Thomas & Mick Short (eds). London: Longman, 110–131.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Soulaimani, Dris
    2018 Talk, voice and gestures in reported speech: Toward an integrated approach. Discourse Studies20 (3): 361–376. 10.1177/1461445618754419
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445618754419 [Google Scholar]
  62. Stec, Kashmiri , Mike Huiskes & Gisela Redeker
    2016 Multimodal quotation: Role shift practices in spoken narratives. Journal of Pragmatics104: 1–17. 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.07.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.07.008 [Google Scholar]
  63. Stivers, Tanya
    2008 Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction41 (1): 31–57. 10.1080/08351810701691123
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351810701691123 [Google Scholar]
  64. 2013 Sequence organization. InThe Handbook of Conversation Analysis, Jack Sidnell & Tanya Stivers (eds). Malden MA: Wiley Blackwell, 191–209.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Stivers, Tanya , Nicholas J. Enfield , Penelope Brown , Christina Englert , Makato Hayashi , Trine Heinemann , Gertie Hoymann , Federico Rossano , Jan Peter de Ruiter , Kyung-Eun Yoon & Stephen C. Levinson
    2009 Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences. U.S.A.106 (26): 10587–10592. 10.1073/pnas.0903616106
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0903616106 [Google Scholar]
  66. Tannen, Deborah
    1986 Introducing constructed dialog in Greek and American conversational and literary narrative. InDirect and Indirect Speech, Florian Coulmas (ed.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 311–332. 10.1515/9783110871968.311
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871968.311 [Google Scholar]
  67. 1989Talking Voices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. ten Bosch, Louis , Nelleke Oostdijk & Lou Boves
    2005 On temporal aspects of turn taking in conversational dialogues. Speech Communication47: 80–86. 10.1016/j.specom.2005.05.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.specom.2005.05.009 [Google Scholar]
  69. Tolins, Jackson & Jean E. Fox Tree
    2014 Addressee backchannels steer narrative development. Journal of Pragmatics70: 152–164. 10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  70. Van Dijk, Teun
    1975 Action, action description, and narrative. New Literary History6 (2): 273–294. 10.2307/468420
    https://doi.org/10.2307/468420 [Google Scholar]
  71. Van Dijk, Teun & Walter Kintsch
    1983Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York NY: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Wade, Elizabeth & Herbert H. Clark
    1993 Reproduction and demonstration in quotations. Journal of Memory and Language, 32 (6), 805–819. 10.1006/jmla.1993.1040
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1040 [Google Scholar]
  73. Wennerstrom, Ann
    2001The Music of Everyday Speech: Prosody and Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Wesseling, Wieneke & Rob J. J. H van Son
    2005 Timing of experimentally elicited minimal responses as quantitative evidence for the use of intonation in projecting trps. Interspeech6, 3389–3392.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. White, Sheida
    1989 Backchannels across cultures: A study of Americans and Japanese. Language in Society18 (1): 59–76. 10.1017/S0047404500013270
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500013270 [Google Scholar]
  76. Wong, Deanna & Pam Peters
    2007 A study of backchannels in regional varieties of English, using corpus mark-up as the means of identification. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics12 (4): 479–509. 10.1075/ijcl.12.4.03won
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.12.4.03won [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): backchannels; constructed dialog; continuers; demonstration; indexicals
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error