Volume 8, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1878-9714
  • E-ISSN: 1878-9722
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


In English the organization of talk into turns is routinely accomplished through a complex system of implicit, non-lexical cues. However, explicit verbalizations, such as “I haven’t finished” or “Can I say something?” do exist. This paper investigates instances in which participants employ meta formulations to structure their interaction. It describes their forms, sequential locations and interactional relevance. Speakers are found to make meta references to turn beginnings, both their own and those of others; and turn completions, typically by others. Meta turn-taking actions are used as a last resort, after other, implicit turn-taking strategies have failed; as a strategy to secure turn space; as a way of eliciting specific next actions; as a practice for initiating repair; and as a more general strategy for committing to a specific course of action.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Atkinson, J. Maxwell , and Paul Drew
    1979Order in Court: The Organisation of Verbal Interaction in Judicial Settings. London: Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/978‑1‑349‑04057‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-04057-5 [Google Scholar]
  2. Auer, Peter
    1996 “On the prosody and syntax of turn-taking.” InProsody and Conversation, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Margret Selting , 57–100. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597862.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.004 [Google Scholar]
  3. Cuff, Edward C. , and Wesley W. Sharrock
    1985 Meetings. InHandbook of Discourse Analysis, Volume 3: Discourse and Dialogue, ed. by Teun van Dijk , 149–160. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Deterding, David , and Ee Ling Low
    2001 “The NIE Corpus of Spoken Singapore English (NIECSSE).” SAAL Quarterly56: 2–5.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Du Bois, John W. , Wallace L. Chafe , Charles Meyer , and Sandra A. Thompson
    2000Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, Part 1. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Du Bois, John W. , Wallace L. Chafe , Charles Meyer , and Sandra A. Thompson , and Nii Martey
    2003Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, Part 2. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Du Bois, John W. , and Robert Englebretson
    2004Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, Part 3. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. 2005Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English, Part 4. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ford, Cecilia E. , Barbara A. Fox , and Sandra A. Thompson
    1996 “Practices in the Construction of Turns: The ‘TCU’ revisited.” Pragmatics6 (3): 427–454. doi: 10.1075/prag.6.3.07for
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.3.07for [Google Scholar]
  10. Ford, Cecilia E. , and Sandra A. Thompson
    1996 “Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns.” InInteraction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs , Emanuel A. Schegloff , and Sandra A. Thompson , 134–184. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.003
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.003 [Google Scholar]
  11. Fox, Barbara A.
    2001 “An exploration of prosody and turn projection in English conversation.” InStudies in Interactional Linguistics, ed. by Margaret Selting and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen , 287–315. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/sidag.10.14fox
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.14fox [Google Scholar]
  12. French, Peter , and John Local
    1986 “Prosodic features and the management of interruptions.” InIntonation in Discourse, ed. by Catherine Johns-Lewis , 157–180. London: Croom Helm.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Garcia, Angela C.
    1991 “Dispute resolution without disputing: How the interactional organization of mediation hearings minimizes argumentative talk.” American Sociological Review56: 818–835. doi: 10.2307/2096258
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2096258 [Google Scholar]
  14. Goodwin, Charles
    1980 “Restarts, pauses and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn beginning.” Sociological Inquiry50: 272–302. doi: 10.1111/j.1475‑682X.1980.tb00023.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00023.x [Google Scholar]
  15. Greatbatch, David
    1988 “A turn-taking system for British news interviews.” Language in Society17 (3): 401–430. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500012963
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500012963 [Google Scholar]
  16. Heritage, John
    1984 “A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.” InStructures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. by John M. Atkinson , and John Heritage , 299–345. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. 1998 “Oh-prefaced responses to enquiry.” Language in Society27: 291–334. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500019990
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019990 [Google Scholar]
  18. 2004 “Conversation Analysis and institutional talk.” InHandbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Robert Sanders and Kristine L. Fitch , 103–146. Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Heritage, John and D. Greatbatch
    1991 “On the institutional character of institutional talk: The case of news interviews.” InTalk and Social Structure, ed. by Deidre Boden and Don H. Zimmerman , 93–137. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Kim, Haeyeon
    1997 “Turn-taking and verbal affixes in Korean conversation.” Language Research33 (4): 601–627.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Li, Xiaoting
    2013 “Language and the body in the construction of units in Mandarin face-to-face interaction.” InUnits of Talk – Units of Action, ed. by Beatrice B. Szczepek Reed and Geoffrey Raymond , 343–375. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/slsi.25.11li
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.25.11li [Google Scholar]
  22. Local, John , Bill Wells , and Mark Sebba
    1985 “Phonology for conversation. Phonetic aspects of turn delimitation in London Jamaican.” Journal of Pragmatics9: 309–330. doi: 10.1016/0378‑2166(85)90029‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(85)90029-3 [Google Scholar]
  23. Local, John , John Kelly , and Bill Wells
    1986 “Towards a phonology of conversation: Turn-taking in Tyneside English.” Journal of Linguistics22: 411–437. doi: 10.1017/S0022226700010859
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700010859 [Google Scholar]
  24. McHoul, Alexander
    1978 “The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom.” Language in Society7: 183–213. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500005522
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005522 [Google Scholar]
  25. Mehan, Hugh
    1985 “The structure of classroom discourse.” InHandbook of Discourse Analysis, Volume 3: Discourse and Dialogue, ed. by Teun van Dijk , 120–131. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ogden, Richard
    2001 “Turn-holding, turn-yielding and laryngeal activity in Finnish talk-in-interaction.” Journal of the International Phonetics Association31: 139–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 2004 “Non-modal voice quality and turn-taking in Finnish.” InSound Patterns in Interaction, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen , and Cecilia E. Ford , 29–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.62.05ogd
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62.05ogd [Google Scholar]
  28. Peräkylä, Anssi
    1995AIDS Counselling: Institutional Interaction and Clinical Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597879
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597879 [Google Scholar]
  29. Raymond, Geoffrey
    2003 “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No type Interrogatives and the Structure of Responding.” American Sociological Review68 (DEC): 939–967. doi: 10.2307/1519752
    https://doi.org/10.2307/1519752 [Google Scholar]
  30. Rossano, Frederico , Penelope Brown , and Stephen C. Levinson
    2009 “Gaze, questioning and culture.” InConversation Analysis. Comparative Perspectives, ed. by Jack Sidnell , 187–249. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511635670.008
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511635670.008 [Google Scholar]
  31. de Ruiter, Jan-Peter , Holger Mitterer , and Nicholas J. Enfield
    2006 “Projecting the end of a speaker’s turn: A cognitive cornerstone of conversation.” Language82 (3): 515–536. doi: 10.1353/lan.2006.0130
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0130 [Google Scholar]
  32. Sacks, Harvey , Emanuel A. Schegloff , and Gail Jefferson
    1974 “A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation.” Language50 (4): 696–735. doi: 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1974.0010 [Google Scholar]
  33. Schegloff, Emanuel A.
    1968 “Sequencing in conversational openings.” American Anthropologist70: 1075–1095. doi: 10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030
    https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.1968.70.6.02a00030 [Google Scholar]
  34. 1980 “Preliminaries to preliminaries: ‘Can I ask you a question’”. Sociological Inquiry50 (3–4): 104–152. doi: 10.1111/j.1475‑682X.1980.tb00018.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00018.x [Google Scholar]
  35. 1996 “Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action.” American Journal of Sociology104: 161–216. doi: 10.1086/230911
    https://doi.org/10.1086/230911 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2007Sequence Organization in Interaction. A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  37. Schegloff, Emanuel A. , Gail Jefferson , and Harvey Sacks
    1977 “The preference for self- correction in the organization of repair in conversation.” Language53 (2): 361–382. doi: 10.1353/lan.1977.0041
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041 [Google Scholar]
  38. Selting, Margret
    1996 “On the interplay of syntax and prosody in the constitution of turn-constructional units and turns in conversation.” Pragmatics6 (3): 371–388. doi: 10.1075/prag.6.3.06sel
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.6.3.06sel [Google Scholar]
  39. 2000 “The constructing of units in conversational talk.” Language in Society29: 477–517. doi: 10.1017/S0047404500004012
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500004012 [Google Scholar]
  40. Selting, Margret , Peter Auer , Birgit Barden , Jörg Bergmann , Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen , Susanne Günthner , Christoph Meier , Uta Quasthoff , Peter Schoblinski , Susanne Uhmann
    1998 “Gesprächsanalytisches Transkriptionssystem (GAT).” Linguistische Berichte173: 91–122.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Streeck, Jürgen , and Ulrike Hartge
    1992 “Gestures at the transition place.” InThe Contextualization of Language, ed. by Peter Auer and Aldo di Luzio , 135–157. Amsterdam: Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/pbns.22.10str
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.22.10str [Google Scholar]
  42. Szczepek Reed, Beatrice B.
    2004 “Turn-final intonation in English.” InSound Patterns in Interaction, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen and Cecilia E. Ford , 97–118. Benjamins, Amsterdam. doi: 10.1075/tsl.62.07szc
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.62.07szc [Google Scholar]
  43. 2006Prosodic Orientation in English Conversation. Basingstoke: Palgrave. doi: 10.1057/9780230625273
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230625273 [Google Scholar]
  44. Tanaka, Hiroko
    1999Turn-taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and Interaction. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Wells, Bill , and Sue Peppè
    1996 “Ending up in Ulster: Prosody and turn-taking in English Dialects.” InProsody and Conversation, ed. by Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen , and Margret Selting , 101–130. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511597862.005
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.005 [Google Scholar]
  46. Wells, Bill , and Sarah Macfarlane
    1998 “Prosody as an interactional resource: Turn-projection and overlap.” Language and Speech41 (3/4): 265–294. doi: 10.1177/002383099804100403
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099804100403 [Google Scholar]
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