Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T23:52:36.362Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Doing ‘being interrupted’ in political talk

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 May 2020

Marta Baffy
Marta Baffy*
Affiliation:
Georgetown University Law Center, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Marta Baffy, Georgetown University Law Center, 600 New Jersey Avenue NW, Washington, DC20001, USAmlb258@georgetown.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the questioning of US Attorney General Jeff Sessions by Senators Angus King and Kamala Harris during a congressional hearing. Analyses of the two exchanges, grounded in conversation analytic (CA) methodology, reveal that simultaneous and near-simultaneous talk initiated by the senators is pervasive in both exchanges. However, Sessions does ‘being interrupted’ (Hutchby 1996; Bilmes 1997)—that is, displays an orientation toward his interlocutors’ turns as a violation of his speaking rights—three times more often when he is questioned by Harris rather than King. The discrepancy in Sessions’ handling of the senators’ turns may explain why Harris is sanctioned by two colleagues during her questioning and why commentators have characterized her as aggressive and interruptive, while at the same time lauding (or ignoring) King. These findings ultimately suggest that doing being interrupted may influence how others perceive an interaction and those participating in it. (Institutional discourse, interruption, latching, overlap, political discourse)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 49 , Issue 5 , November 2020 , pp. 689 - 715
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Ainsworth-Vaugh, Nancy (1995). Claiming power in the medical encounter: The whirlpool discourse. Qualitative Health Research 5:270–91.10.1177/104973239500500302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angus King, United States Senator for Maine (2018). About Angus. Online: https://www.king.senate.gov/about/biography.Google Scholar
Antaki, Charles (2011). Six kinds of applied conversation analysis. In Antaki, Charles (ed.), Applied conversation analysis: Intervention and change in institutional talk, 1–14. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230316874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, J. Maxwell, & Drew, Paul (1979). Order in the court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. London: McMillan.10.1007/978-1-349-04057-5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berenson, Tessa (2017). Jeff Sessions hopes to escape his history of racial controversy at confirmation hearing. Time.com. Online: http://time.com/4623936/jeff-sessions-attorney-general-hearings-senate/.Google Scholar
Bilmes, Jack (1997). Being interrupted. Language in Society 26(4):507–31.10.1017/S0047404500021035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bogoch, Bryna, & Danet, Brenda (1984). Challenge and control in lawyer–client interaction: A case study in an Israeli legal aid office. Text 4:249–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight (1989). Intonation and its uses: Melody and grammar in discourse. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Boyd, Elizabeth, & Heritage, John (2006). Taking the patient's medical history: Questioning during comprehensive history taking. In Heritage, John & Maynard, Douglas (eds.), Communication in medical care: Interactions between primary care physicians and patients, 151–84. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511607172.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burr, Richard (2017). Opening statement. Open hearing with Attorney General Jeff Sessions Online: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings/open-hearing-attorney-general-united-states-jeff-sessions#.Google Scholar
Cameron, Deborah & Shaw, Sylvia (2016). Gender, power, and political speech: Women and language in the 2015 UK general election. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/978-1-137-58752-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carbó, Teresa (1992). Towards an interpretation of interruptions in Mexican parliamentary discourse. Discourse & Society 3:25–45.10.1177/0957926592003001002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chait, Jonathan (2017). Kamala Harris pummels Jeff Sessions so badly that John McCain has to stop her. New York, June 13. Online: http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2017/06/kamala-harris-pummels-sessions-so-badly-mccain-interrupts.html.Google Scholar
Chira, Susan (2017). The universal phenomenon of men interrupting women. The New York Times, June 14. Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/14/business/women-sexism-work-huffington-kamala-harris.html.Google Scholar
Cilizza, Chris (2017). Winners and losers from Jeff Session’ testimony on Russia. CNN.com, June 13. Online: https://www.cnn.com/2017/06/13/politics/sessions-testimony-russia/index.html.Google Scholar
Clayman, Steven (2001). Answers and evasions. Language in Society 30:403–42.10.1017/S0047404501003037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clayman, Steven, & Heritage, John (2002). The news interview: Journalists and public figures on the air. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511613623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca (2016). Conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781139022767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danet, Brenda; Hoffman, Kenneth B.; Kermish, Nicole C.; Jeffrey Rafn, H.; & Stayman, Deborah G. (1980). An ethnography of questioning in the courtroom. In Shuy, Roger W. & Shnukal, Anna (eds.), Language use and the uses of language, 222–34. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Daponte-Smith, Noah (2017). On Kamala Harris and the interruptions. National Review, June 16. Online: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/kamala-harris-jeff-sessions-interruptions/.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul (1992) Contested evidence in courtroom examination: The case of a trial for rape. In Drew, Paul & Heritage, John (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 470–520. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul (2009). ‘Quit talking while I'm interrupting’: A comparison between positions of overlap onset in conversation. In Haakana, Markku, Laakso, Minna, & Lindström, Jan (eds.), Talk in interaction: Comparative dimensions, 70–93. Helsinki: Finnish Literature Society.Google Scholar
Drew, Paul, & Heritage, John (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In Drew, Paul & Heritage, John (eds.), Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings, 3–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eades, Diana (2000). ‘I don't think it's an answer to the question’: Silencing Aboriginal witnesses in court. Language in Society 29:161–95.10.1017/S0047404500002013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan (2001). Representing rape: Language and sexual consent. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan (2002). Legal institutions, nonspeaking recipiency and participants’ orientations. Discourse & Society 13(6):731–47.10.1177/0957926502013006753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan (2007). Legal discourse and the cultural intelligibility of gendered meanings. Journal of Sociolinguistics 11(4): 452–77.10.1111/j.1467-9841.2007.00333.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, Susan, & Sidnell, Jack (2006). ‘I think that's not an assumption you ought to make’: Challenging presuppositions in inquiry testimony. Language in Society 35:655–76.10.1017/S0047404506060313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldscher, Kyle (2017). Watch: Kamala Harris makes Jeff Sessions ‘nervous’ with questioning. Washington Examiner, June 13. Online: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/watch-kamala-harris-makes-jeff-sessions-nervous-with-questioning.Google Scholar
Finnegan, Michael (2017). Sen. Kamala Harris leaves Sessions ‘nervous’ in interrogation over his refusal to disclose conversations with Trump. Los Angeles Times, June 13. Online: https://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-sen-kamala-harris-and-sessions-face-1497387259-htmlstory.html#nt=card.Google Scholar
Galatolo, Renata (2007). Active voicing in court. In Holt, Elizabeth & Clift, Rebecca (eds.), Reporting talk, 194–220. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Galatolo, Renata, & Drew, Paul (2006). Narrative expansions as defensive practices in courtroom testimony. Text 26:661–98.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Julia A. (1990). Interrupting the discourse on interruptions: An analysis in terms of relationally neutral, power- and rapport-oriented acts. Journal of Pragmatics 14:883–903.10.1016/0378-2166(90)90045-FCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greatbatch, David (1986). Aspects of topical organization in news interviews: The use of agenda-shifting procedures by interviewees. Media, Culture and Society 8:441–55.10.1177/0163443786008004005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John (2010). Questioning in medicine. In Freed, Alice F. & Ehrlich, Susan (eds.), ‘Why do you ask’?: The function of questions in institutional discourse, 42–68. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hobbs, Pamela (2003). ‘You must say it for him’: Reformulating a witness’ testimony on cross examination at trial. Text 23:477–511.10.1515/text.2003.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
House, Juliane, & Kasper, Gabriele (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In Coulmas, Florian (ed.), Conversational routine: Explorations in standardized communication situations and prepatterned speech, 157–85. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian (1996). Confrontation talk: Arguments, asymmetries, and power on talk radio. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Jashinsky, Emily (2017). Senator, interrupted: Kamala Harris outrage illustrates feminism's inability to react in proportion. The Washington Examiner, June 19. Online: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/senator-interrupted-kamala-harris-outrage-illustrates-feminisms-inability-to-react-in-proportion/article/2626086.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail (1986). Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies 9:153–83.10.1007/BF00148125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendon, Adam (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511807572CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lempert, Michael. (2011) Barack Obama, being sharp: Indexical order in the pragmatics of precision-grip gesture. Gesture 11(2):241–70.10.1075/gest.11.3.01lemCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Han Z.; Krysko, Michael; Desroches;, Nagmeh G. & Deagle, George (2004). Reconceptualizing interruptions in physician–patient interviews: Cooperative and intrusive. Communication & Medicine 1:145–57.10.1515/come.2004.1.2.145CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liao, Meizhen (2009). A study of interruption in Chinese criminal courtroom discourse. Text 29:175–99.Google Scholar
Luchjenbroers, June (1997). ‘In your own words…’: Questions and answers in a Supreme Court trial. Journal of Pragmatics 27:477–503.10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00033-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matoesian, Gregory (1993). Reproducing rape: Domination through talk in the courtroom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Matoesian, Gregory (2001). Law and the language of identity: Discourse in the William Kennedy rape trial. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McAfee, Tierney (2017). Sen. Kamala Harris fires back after she's repeatedly interrupted by male colleagues during Sessions Testimony. People, June 14. Online: https://people.com/politics/kamala-harris-interrupted-male-colleagues-sessions-testimony/.Google Scholar
Mettler, Katie (2017). As a prosecutor, Kamala Harris's doggedness was praised. As a senator, she's deemed ‘hysterical’. The Washington Post, June 14. Online: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/06/14/as-a-prosecutor-kamala-d-harris-doggedness-was-praised-now-shes-hysterical/?utm_term=.bf5ce8d7342c.Google Scholar
Murata, Kumiko (1994). Intrusive or cooperative? A cross-cultural study of interruption. Journal of Pragmatics 21:385–400.10.1016/0378-2166(94)90011-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orcutt, James, & Mennella, Diane L. (1995). Gender and perception of interruption as intrusive talk: An experimental analysis and reply to criticism. Symbolic Interaction 18(1):59–72.10.1525/si.1995.18.1.59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philips, Susan (1986). Reported speech as evidence in an American trial. In Tannen, Deborah & Alatis, James E. (eds.), Languages and linguistics: The interdependence of theory, data and application, 154–79. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey (2003). Grammar and social organization: Yes-no type interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68:939–66.10.2307/1519752CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, Katie (2017). Kamala is (again) interrupted while pressing a Senate witness. The New York Times, June 13. Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/us/politics/kamala-harris interrupted-jeff-sessions.html.Google Scholar
Romaniuk, Tanya (2014). Text trajectories and media discourse: Tracking gendered representations in presidential politics. Gender and Language 8(2):245–67.10.1558/genl.v8i2.245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romaniuk, Tanya (2016). On the relevance of gender in the analysis of discourse: A case study from Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential bid in 2007–2008. Discourse & Society 27(5):533–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romaniuk, Tanya, & Ehrlich, Susan (2017). Language and gendered politics: The ‘double bind’ in action. In Wodak, Ruth & Forchtner, Bernard (eds.), Routledge handbook of language and politics, 514–27. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315183718-39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, Harvey; Schegloff, Emanuel A.; & Jefferson, Gail (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50:695–735.10.1353/lan.1974.0010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (1987). Recycled turn beginnings: A precise repair mechanism in conversation's turn-taking organization. In Button, Graham & Lee, John R. E. (eds.), Talk and social organization, 70–85. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society 29:1–63.10.1017/S0047404500001019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, Sylvia (2016). Gender and politics in the devolved assemblies. Soundings: A Journal of Politics and Culture 55:81–93.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, & Hayashi, Makoto (2010). Transformative answers: One way to resist a question's constraints. Language in Society 39:1–25.10.1017/S0047404509990637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, & Hayashi, Makoto, & Heritage, John (2001). Breaking the sequential mold: Answering ‘more than the question’ during comprehensive history taking. Text 21:151–85.10.1515/text.1.21.1-2.151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streeck, Jürgen (2008). Gesture in political communication: A case study of the democratic presidential candidates during the 2004 primary campaign. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41:154–86.10.1080/08351810802028662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (1983). When is an overlap not an interruption? One component of conversational style. In Di Pietro, Robert J., Frawley, William, & Wedel, Alfred (eds.), The first Delaware symposium on language studies, 119–29. Newark: University of Delaware Press.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (1990). You just don't understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: William Morrow.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (1994). Gender and discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
ten Have, Paul (2007). Doing conversation analysis: A practical guide. 2nd edn. London: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2018). About the Committee. Online: https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/about.Google Scholar
West, Candace, & Zimmerman, Don H. (1977). Women's place in everyday talk: Reflections on parent child interaction. Social Problems 24:521–29.10.2307/800122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, Lena (1986). Senate panel hands Reagan first defeat on nominee for judgeship. The New York Times, June 6, A00013.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Hanni (1984). The strategic use of questions in court. Semiotica 8:197–228.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, Don H., & West, Candace (1975). Sex roles, interruptions, and silences in conversation. In Thorne, Barrie & Henley, Nancy (eds.), Language and sex: Difference and dominance, 105–29. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar