Volume 19, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1571-0718
  • E-ISSN: 1571-0726
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



The present investigation is a conversation-analytic study that examines a particular type of informing sequence where the new information is received with a turn displaying ritualized disbelief. In this paper, I analyze a range of ritualized disbelief and news-confirmation turn designs in Mexican Spanish talk: I describe the trajectory that different ritualized disbeliefs have, the composition of the disbelief they display, and how news-producers deal with ritualized disbelief turns. I argue that a speaker’s knowledge about the matter at hand relates to the type of disbelief expressed in his or her disbelieving turn; that is, the social actions involved in this type of sequences show a relationship between turn design, epistemics and disbelief.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Austin, John L.
    1961Philosophical Papers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bolden, Galina B., and Jeffrey D. Robinson
    2011 “Soliciting accounts with why- interrogatives in conversation.” Journal of Communication611: 94–119. 10.1111/j.1460‑2466.2010.01528.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01528.x [Google Scholar]
  3. Briz Gómez, Antonio
    1998El español coloquial en la conversación. Esbozo de pragmagramática. Barcelona: Ariel Lingüística.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Byee, Joan
    2006 “From Usage to Grammar: The Mind’s Response to Repetition.” Language82 (4): 711–733. 10.1353/lan.2006.0186
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0186 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2007Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language Changing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Clift, Rebecca
    2001 “Meaning in interaction: the case of ‘actually’.” Language77 (2): 245–291. 10.1353/lan.2001.0074
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2001.0074 [Google Scholar]
  7. 2016Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Cortés Rodríguez, Luis
    1991Sobre conectores, expletivos y muletillas en el español hablado. Málaga: Librería Agora.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2021Aproximación al dominio Análisis del discurso y su incidencia en la lengua española: nombres, teorías y corrientes. Vizcaya: Universidad de Almería.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth
    1996 “The prosody of repetition: On quoting and mimicry.” InProsody in conversation, ed. byE. Couper-Kuhlen and M. Selting, 366–405. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511597862.011
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597862.011 [Google Scholar]
  11. Cox, Ronald R.
    1974 “The Epistemology of Everyday Life.” Research in Phenomenology41: 137–145.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Descartes, René
    1984The Philosophical Writings of Descartes, Vol.II1. Translated byJohn Cottingham, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Dingemanse, Mark, and Nick J. Enfield
    2015 “Other-initiated repair across languages: towards a typology of conversational structures.” Open Linguistics11: 96–118. 10.2478/opli‑2014‑0007
    https://doi.org/10.2478/opli-2014-0007 [Google Scholar]
  14. D’olivares Durán, Nelson, and Clara L. Casteblanco Cifuentes
    2017 “Interacción Oral: una muestra de Análisis Conversacional.” Revista Humanismo y Sociedad5 (2): 23–29. 10.22209/rhs.v5n2a04
    https://doi.org/10.22209/rhs.v5n2a04 [Google Scholar]
  15. Drew, Paul
    1997 “‘Open’ class repairs initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics28 (1): 69–101. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(97)89759‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7 [Google Scholar]
  16. Endo, Tomoko
    2018 “The Japanese change-of-state tokens a and aa in responsive units.” Journal of Pragmatics1231: 151–166. 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gallardo Paúls, Beatriz
    1996Análisis conversacional y pragmática del receptor. Valencia: Episteme.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. García-García, Marta
    2021 “Turn-Initial Discourse Markers in L2 Spanish Conversations: Insights from Conversation Analysis.” Corpus Pragmatics10.1007/s41701‑019‑00075‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s41701-019-00075-8 [Google Scholar]
  19. García-Ramón, Amparo
    2018 “Indexing epistemic incongruence: uy as a formal sign of disagreement in agreement sequences in Spanish.” Journal of Pragmatics1311: 1–17. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.04.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.04.011 [Google Scholar]
  20. Golato, Andrea
    2010 “Marking understanding versus receipting information in talk: Achso. and ach in German interaction.” Discourse Studies12 (2): 147–176. 10.1177/1461445609356497
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445609356497 [Google Scholar]
  21. González Temer, Verónica
    2014 “Clicks in Chilean Spanish conversation.” InProceedings of the first Postgraduate and Academic Researchers in Linguistics at York (PARLAY 2013) conference, ed. byT. Lee, 74–99. UK: University of York.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2017 “A multimodal analysis of assessment sequences in Chilean Spanish interaction.” PhD Thesis. University of York.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hamel, R. Enrique
    1982 “Constitución y análisis de la interacción verbal.” Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada1 (2): 31–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 1984 “Análisis conversacional.” Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada2 (3): 9–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Heritage, John
    1984 “A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement.” InStructures of social action: studies in Conversation Analysis, ed. byJ. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage, 299–345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. 2012 “The epistemic engine: sequence organization and territories of knowledge.” Research on Language and Social Interaction45 (1): 30–52. 10.1080/08351813.2012.646685
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2012.646685 [Google Scholar]
  27. Heritage, John, and Geoffrey Raymond
    2005 “The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction.” Social Psychology Quarterly681: 15–38. 10.1177/019027250506800103
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250506800103 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hickey, Leo
    2004 “Spanish pragmatics: Whence, where, whither?” InCurrent Trends in the Pragmatics of Spanish, ed. byR. Márquez Reiter, and M. E. Placencia, 3–14. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/pbns.123.03hic
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.123.03hic [Google Scholar]
  29. Holt, Elizabeth
    1993 “The structure of death announcements: Looking on the bright side of death.” Text13 (2): 189–212.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Jefferson, Gail
    1972 “Side sequences.” InStudies in social interaction, ed. byDavid N. Sudnow, 294–333. New York, NY: Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 1981 “The abominable ‘ne’? An exploration of post-response pursuit of response.” InSprache der gegenwaart Düsseldorf, ed. byP. Shroder, 53–88. BRD: Pedagogischer Verlag Schwann.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Koivisto, Aino
    2019 “Repair receipts: On their motivation and interactional import.” Discourse Studies21 (4): 398–420. 10.1177/1461445619842737
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445619842737 [Google Scholar]
  33. Manrique, Elizabeth
    2016 “Other-initiated repair in Argentine sign language.” Open Linguistics21: 1–34. 10.1515/opli‑2016‑0001
    https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2016-0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Márquez Reiter, Rosina, and Marina Noelia Cantarutti
    2022 “The Value of Vale: Negotiating the Progressivity of Service in a Market Restaurant.” Contrastive Pragmatics3 (1): 59–88. 10.1163/26660393‑bja10032
    https://doi.org/10.1163/26660393-bja10032 [Google Scholar]
  35. Maynard, Douglas W.
    1997 “The news delivery sequence: news and good news in conversational interaction.” Research on Language and Social Interaction30 (2): 93–130. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3002_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3002_1 [Google Scholar]
  36. 2003Bad news good news: conversational order in everyday talk and clinical settings. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Olguín, L. M.
    (forthcoming). Corrupt conversations: The social organization of corruption in Peru’s CNM audios scandal. PhD thesis. University of California.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Pomerantz, Anita
    1988 “Offering a candidate answer: an information seeking strategy.” Communication Monographs55 (4): 360–373. 10.1080/03637758809376177
    https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758809376177 [Google Scholar]
  39. Raymond, Chase W.
    2015 “Questions and Responses in Spanish Monolingual and Spanish-English Bilingual Conversation.” Language and Communication421: 50–68. 10.1016/j.langcom.2015.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2015.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2016 “Linguistic Reference in the Negotiation of Identity and Action: Revisiting the T/V Distinction.” Language92 (3): 636–670. 10.1353/lan.2016.0053
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0053 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2018 “Bueno-, Pues-, and Bueno-Pues-prefacing in Spanish Conversation.” InAt the Intersection of Turn and Sequence: Turn-Initial Particles Across Languages, ed. byJ. Heritage and M-L. Sorjonen, 59–96. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slsi.31.03ray
    https://doi.org/10.1075/slsi.31.03ray [Google Scholar]
  42. Raymond, Chase W., and Tanya Stivers
    2016 “The omnirelevance of accountability: Off-record account solicitations.” InAccountability in Social Interaction, ed. byJeffrey D. Robinson, 321–353. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0011
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190210557.003.0011 [Google Scholar]
  43. Raymond, Geoffrey, and John Heritage
    2006 “The epistemic of social relations: owning grandchildren.” Language in Society351: 667–705. 10.1017/S0047404506060325
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404506060325 [Google Scholar]
  44. Robinson, Jeffrey D., and Heidi Kevoe-Feldman
    2010 “Using Full Repeats to Initiate Repair on Others’ Questions.” Research on Language and Social Interaction43 (3): 232–259. 10.1080/08351813.2010.497990
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2010.497990 [Google Scholar]
  45. Russell, Bertrand
    1984Theory of Knowledge: The 1913 Manuscript. Ed. byElizabeth Ramsden Eames. Cornwall: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Sacks, Harvey
    1992Lectures on Conversation, vol.1 and 21. Cornwall: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Satti, Ignacio
    2021 “Multimodal practices for managing opportunities to initiate other-repair in collaborative storytelling.” Narrative Inquiry, First articles. 10.1075/ni.21005.sat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.21005.sat [Google Scholar]
  48. Schegloff, Emmanuel A.
    1988 “On an actual virtual servo-mechanism for guessing bad news: A single case conjecture.” Social Problems351: 442–457. 10.2307/800596
    https://doi.org/10.2307/800596 [Google Scholar]
  49. 1996 “Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action.” American Journal of Sociology102 (1): 161–216. 10.1086/230911
    https://doi.org/10.1086/230911 [Google Scholar]
  50. 1997 “Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair.” Discourse Processes231: 499–545. 10.1080/01638539709545001
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539709545001 [Google Scholar]
  51. 2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: a primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511791208
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791208 [Google Scholar]
  52. 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. 10.1353/lan.1977.0041
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1977.0041 [Google Scholar]
  53. Schutz, Alfred, Thomas Luckmann
    1973The Structures of the Life-World, R. M. Zaner and T. Engelhardt (trans.). London: Heinemann.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Sorjonen, Marja-Leena
    1996 “Repeats and responses in Finnish conversations.” InInteration and grammar, ed. byE. Ochs, E. A. Schegloff, and S. A. Thompson, 277–327. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511620874.006
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620874.006 [Google Scholar]
  55. Stivers, Tanya
    2005 “Modified Repeats: One Method for Asserting Primary Rights from Second Position.” Research on Language and Social Interaction38 (2): 131–158. 10.1207/s15327973rlsi3802_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327973rlsi3802_1 [Google Scholar]
  56. Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig
    (eds.) 2011The Morality of knowledge in conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511921674
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921674 [Google Scholar]
  57. Terasaki, Alene K.
    2004 [1976] “Pre-announcement sequences in conversation.” InConversation Analysis: studies from the first generation, ed. byGene L. Lerner, 171–223. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.125.11ter
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.125.11ter [Google Scholar]
  58. Thompson, Sandra A., Barbara A. Fox, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
    2015Grammar in Everyday Talk: building responsive actions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139381154
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139381154 [Google Scholar]
  59. Tomasello, Michael
    1999The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. London: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Tusón Valls, Amparo
    1997El análisis de la conversación. Barcelona: Ariel.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Vázquez Carranza, Ariel
    2013 “Responding and Clarifying: an analysis of “pues” as a sequential marker in Mexican Spanish talk-in-interactions.” Spanish in Context10 (2): 284–309. 10.1075/sic.10.2.05vaz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.10.2.05vaz [Google Scholar]
  62. 2016a “Aceptación y Resistencia: un análisis de “ah” y “ay” como marcadores de cambio de estado.” Cuadernos de Lingüística de El Colegio de México3 (2): 71–103. 10.24201/clecm.v3i2.38
    https://doi.org/10.24201/clecm.v3i2.38 [Google Scholar]
  63. 2016b “Remembering and noticing: a conversation-analytic study of ah in Mexican Spanish Talk.” Spanish in Context13 (2): 213–236. 10.1075/sic.13.2.03vaz
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.13.2.03vaz [Google Scholar]
  64. 2019aAnálisis Conversacional: Estudio de la acción social. Guadalajara: Universidad de Guadalajara.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. 2019b “¿Para qué decimos “a poco” cuando conversamos?” Revista Digital Universitaria (RDU)20 (4). 10.22201/codeic.16076079e.2019.v20n4.a2
    https://doi.org/10.22201/codeic.16076079e.2019.v20n4.a2 [Google Scholar]
  66. Walker, Traci, and Trevor Benjamin
    2017 “Phonetic and sequential differences of other-repetitions in repair initiation.” Research on Language and Social Interaction50 (4): 330–347. 10.1080/08351813.2017.1340717
    https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2017.1340717 [Google Scholar]
  67. Wilkinson, Sue, and Celia Kitzinger
    2006 “Surprise as an Interactional Achievement: reaction tokens in Conversation.” Social Psychology Quarterly69 (2): 150–182. 10.1177/019027250606900203
    https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250606900203 [Google Scholar]
  68. Wu, Ruey-Jiuan Regina
    2006 “Initiating Repair and Beyond: The Use of Two Repeat-Formatted Repair Initiations in Mandarin Conversation.” Discourse Processes41(1): 67–109. 10.1207/s15326950dp4101_5
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp4101_5 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): conversation analysis; epistemics; Mexican Spanish; ritualized disbelief
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