1887
Turn continuation in cross-linguistic perspective
  • ISSN 1018-2101
  • E-ISSN: 2406-4238

Abstract

This cross-linguistic study focuses on ways in which conversationalists speak beyond a point of possible turn completion in conversation, specifically on turn extensions which are grammatically dependent, backward-looking and extend the prior action. It argues that further distinctions can be made in terms of whether the extension is prosodically integrated with the prior unit, its host, () or not, and in terms of whether it repairs some part of the host () or not. Added-on, non-repairing extensions are further distinguished in terms of whether they are grammatically fitted to the end of the host () or not (). A preliminary survey of TCU continuation in English, German and Japanese conversation reveals a number of significant differences with respect to frequency and range of extension type. English is at one extreme in preferring Glue-ons over Non-Add-ons and Insertables, whereas Japanese is at the other extreme in preferring Non-add-ons and Insertables over Glue-ons. German occupies an intermediary position but is on the whole more like Japanese. The preference for Glue-ons vs. Insertables appears to reflect a language’s tendency towards syntactic left- vs. right headedness. In conclusion the study argues for a classification of ‘increment’ types which goes beyond the English-based Glue-on, attributes a central role to prosodic delivery and adopts a usage-based understanding of word order.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/prag.17.4.02cou
2007-01-01
2019-10-22
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Auer, Peter
    (1991) Vom Ende deutscher Sätze. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 19.2: 139-157. doi: 10.1515/zfgl.1991.19.2.141
    https://doi.org/10.1515/zfgl.1991.19.2.141 [Google Scholar]
  2. (1992) The neverending sentence. Rightward expansion in spoken language. In M. Kontra & T. Varadi (eds.), Studies in spoken languages: English, German, Finno-Ugric. Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, pp. 41-59.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. (1996) On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & M. Selting (eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57-100. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597862.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2005) Projection in interaction and projection in grammar. Text 25.1: 7-36.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Clancy, Patricia
    (1980) The acquisition of narrative discourse: A study in Japanese. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Du Bois , John W. , S. Schuetze-Coburn , et al
    (1993) Outline of discourse transcription. In J.A. Edwards & M.D. Lampert (eds.), Talking data. Transcription and coding in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 45-89.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Ford, Cecilia E
    (1993) Grammar in interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511554278
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511554278 [Google Scholar]
  8. Ford, Cecilia E. , & Sandra A. Thompson
    (1996) Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In E. Ochs , E.A. Schegloff & S.A. Thompson (eds), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 134-184. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874 [Google Scholar]
  9. Ford, Cecilia E. , Barbara A. Fox , & Sandra A. Thompson
    (2002) Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In Cecilia E. Ford , Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), The language of turn and sequence. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 14-38.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fox, Barbara A
    (2001) An exploration of prosody and turn projection in English conversation. In M. Selting & E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 287-315. doi: 10.1075/sidag.10.14fox
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.14fox [Google Scholar]
  11. Fox, Barbara A. , Makoto Hayashi , & Robert Jasperson
    (1996) Resources and repair: A cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In E. Ochs , E.A. Schegloff & S.A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 185-237. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.004 [Google Scholar]
  12. Geluykens, Ronald
    (1994) The pragmatics of discourse anaphora in English: Evidence from conversational repair. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110846171
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110846171 [Google Scholar]
  13. Günthner, Susanne
    (1993) ''...weil - man kann es ja wissenschaftlich untersuchen'' - Diskurspragmatische Aspekte der Wortstellung in WEIL-Sätzen. Linguistische Berichte143: 37-59.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Hayashi, Makoto
    (2003) Joint utterance construction in Japanese conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/sidag.12
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sidag.12 [Google Scholar]
  15. Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
    (2001a) Emerging syntax for interaction: Noun phrases and clauses as a syntactic resource for interaction. In M. Selting & E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 25-50. doi: 10.1075/sidag.10.04hel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.04hel [Google Scholar]
  16. (2001b) When discourse becomes syntax: Noun phrases and clauses as emergent syntactic units in Finnish conversational discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/sidag.9
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.9 [Google Scholar]
  17. Iguchi, Yoko
    (1998) Functional variety in the Japanese conjunctive particle kara 'because'. In Toshio Ohori (ed.), Studies in Japanese grammaticalization: Cognitive and discourse perspectives. Tokyo: Kurosio, pp. 99-128.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Jefferson, Gail
    (1983) On exposed and embedded correction in conversation. Studium Linguistik14: 58-68.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. (1984) Transcription notation. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action. Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ix-xvi.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Koike, Chisato
    (2001) An analysis of increments in Japanese conversation in terms of syntax and prosody. 11th Japanese/Korean Linguistics Conference, Santa Barbara, California.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kokuritsu Kokugo Kenkyuujo [National Language Research Institute]
    (1960) Hanashi kotoba no bunkei (1): Taiwa shiryoo ni yoru kenkyuu. Tokyo: Shuuei Shuppan.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Mori, Junko
    (1999) Negotiating agreement and disagreement in Japanese: Connective expressions and turn construction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/sidag.8
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sidag.8 [Google Scholar]
  23. Ono, Tsuyoshi & Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    (2002) A study of 'increments' in Japanese conversation: A progress report. Poster presented atthe 2nd Euroconference on Interactional Linguistics, Helsinki, Finland.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Ono, Tsuyoshi , & Thompson, Sandra A
    (1994) Unattached NPs in English conversation. Berkeley Linguistics Society20: 402-419.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ono, Tsuyoshi , & Sandra A. Thompson
    (1997) Deconstructing 'zero anaphora' in Japanese. Berkeley Linguistics Society23: 481-491.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. (2003) Japanese (w)atashi/ore/boku 'I': They're not just pronouns. Cognitive Linguistics14: 321-347.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Quirk, Randolph , Sidney Greenbaum , et al
    (1985) A comprehensive grammar of English. Longman: London.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Schegloff, Emanuel A
    (1987) Analyzing single episodes of interaction: An exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly 50.2: 101-114. doi: 10.2307/2786745
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2786745 [Google Scholar]
  29. (1996) Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Elinor Ochs , Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 52-133. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874 [Google Scholar]
  30. (2000) On turns' possible completion, more or less: Increments and trail-offs. Paper delivered atthe 1st Euroconference on Interactional Linguistics, Spa, Belgium.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (2001) Conversation Analysis: A project in process - "Increments". Forum lecture delivered atthe LSA Linguistic Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Schegloff, Emanuel , Gail Jefferson , & Harvey Sacks
    (1977) The preference for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language53: 361-382. doi: 10.1353/lan.1977.0041
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041 [Google Scholar]
  33. Schneider, Daniela
    (2003) Free constituents in English and German conversations. MA thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of Konstanz.
  34. Selting, Margret
    (1996) On the interplay of syntax and prosody in the constitution of turn-constructional units and turns in conversation. Pragmatics 6.3: 357-388.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. (2000) The constructions of units in conversational talk. Language in Society29: 477-517. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500004012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500004012 [Google Scholar]
  36. Shibatani, Masayoshi
    (1990) The languages of Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Szczepek Reed, B
    (2004) Turn-final intonation revisited. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & C.E. Ford (eds.), Sound patterns in interaction. Cross-linguistic studies from conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 97-117. doi: 10.1075/tsl.62.07szc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62.07szc [Google Scholar]
  38. Tanaka, Hiroko
    (1999) Turn-taking in Japanese conversation: A study in grammar and interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/pbns.56
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.56 [Google Scholar]
  39. (2001) The implementation of possible cognitive shifts in Japanese conversation: Complementizers as pivotal devices. In M. Selting & E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publication Company, pp. 81-109. doi: 10.1075/sidag.10.06tan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.06tan [Google Scholar]
  40. (2004) Prosody for marking transition-relevance places in Japanese conversation: The case of turns unmarked by utterance-final objects. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & C.E. Ford (eds.), Sound patterns in interaction. Cross-linguistic studies from conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 63-96. doi: 10.1075/tsl.62.06tan
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62.06tan [Google Scholar]
  41. (2005) Grammar and the "timing" of social action: Word order and preference organization in Japanese. Language in Society34: 389-430. doi: 10.1017/S0047404505050141
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050141 [Google Scholar]
  42. Tao, Hongyin
    (1996) Units in Mandarin conversation: Prosody, discourse and grammar. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company. doi: 10.1075/sidag.5
    https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/sidag.5 [Google Scholar]
  43. Uhmann, Susanne
    (1997) Grammatische Regeln und konversationelle Strategien. Fallstudien aus Syntax und Phonologie. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. (2001) Some arguments for the relevance of syntax to same-sentence self-repair in everyday German conversation. In M. Selting & E. Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 373-404. doi: 10.1075/sidag.10.17uhm
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.17uhm [Google Scholar]
  45. Vorreiter, Susanne
    (2003) Turn continuations: Towards a cross-linguistic classification. InLiSt, Interactionand Linguistic Structures, No. 39. www.rz.uni-potsdam.de/u/inlist.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Walker, Gareth
    (2001) A phonetic approach to talk-in-interaction – increments in conversation. MA thesis, University of York, United Kingdom.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. (2004) On some interactional and phonetic properties of increments to turns in talk-in-interaction. In E. Couper-Kuhlen & C. Ford (eds.), Sound patterns in interaction. Cross-linguistic studies from conversation. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 147-169. doi: 10.1075/tsl.62.10wal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62.10wal [Google Scholar]
  48. Wells, Bill & Macfarlane, Sarah
    (1998) Prosody as an interactional resource: Turn-projection and overlap. Language and Speech41: 265-298.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/prag.17.4.02cou
Loading
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