Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

On the syntax of sentences-in-progress*

  • Gene H Lerner (a1)

Abstract

This article describes how it could be possible for two participants engaged in conversation to jointly produce a single syntactic unit such as a sentence. From an inspection of sentence types that are achieved through such joint production, it was determined that participants have available a single utterance construction format. This format, the compound turn-constructional unit format, may be a component of a socially construed syntax-for-conversation. It can be constituted by a wide range of interactionally relevant features of talk in interaction that reveal an emerging utterance as a multiple component turn-constructional unit. The compound turn-constructional unit format is primarily a resource for turn-taking. It can be used to project the next proper place for speaker change. However, it concomitantly provides the resources needed to complete the utterance-in-progress of another participant, thus allowing for the construction of a single sentence across the talk of two speakers. (Conversation, interaction, recognizable activity)

Copyright

References

Hide All
Atkinson, J. M. (1984). Public speaking and audience response: Some techniques for inviting applause. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 370409.
Atkinson, J. M., & Heritage, J. (1984). Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Comrie, B. (1986). Conditionals: A typology In Traugott, E. C. (ed.), On conditionals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 7799.
Copi, I. M. (1972). Introduction to logic. New York: Macmillan.
Duncan, S. (1972). Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 23: 283–92.
Duncan, S., & Fiske, D. W (1977). Face to face interaction: Research, methods, and theory Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ford, C. E., & Thompson, S. A. (1986). Conditionals in discourse: A, text-based study from English. In Traugott, E. C. (ed.), On conditionals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 353–72.
Goldberg, J. (1975). A system for the transfer of instructions in natural settings. Semiotica 14: 269–96.
Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In Psathas, G. (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology New York: Irvington. 97121.
Goodwin, C. (1980). Restarts, pauses, and the achievement of a state of mutual gaze at turn beginnings. Sociological Inquiry 50: 272302.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization: Interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic.
Haiman, J. (1986). Constraints on the form and meaning of the protasis. In Traugott, E. C. (ed.), On conditionals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 215–27.
Heritage, J., & Greatbatch, D. L. (1986). Generating applause: A study of rhetoric and response at party political conferences. American Journal of Sociology 92: 110–57.
Jefferson, G. (1973). A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: Overlapped tagpositioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica 9: 4796.
Jefferson, G. (1983). Two explorations of the organization of overlapping talk in conversation. Tilburg papers in language and literature, No. 28. Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University
Jefferson, G. (1984). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately nextpositioned matters. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 191222.
Jefferson, G. (1990). List construction as a task and interactional resource. In Psathas, G. (ed.), Interactional competence. Washington, D.C.University Press of America. 6392.
Langacker, R. W. (1973). Language and its structure. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Lerner, G. H. (1987). Collaborative turn sequences: Sentence construction and social action. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of alifornia, Irvine.
Lerner, G. H. (1989). Transforming “dispreferreds” into “preferreds” A systematic locus for preempting a turn at talk. Paper presented at the Speech Communication Association convention, San Francisco.
Pomerantz, A. (1975). Second assessments: A study of some features of agreement/disagreement. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Irvine.
Pomerantz, A. (1984). Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson, J. M. & Heritage, J. (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 57101
Ray, J. L., &Findley, P (1984). Open and restricted context sentences and reasoning with conditional propositions. Communication Monographs 51: 243–52.
Sacks, H. (19641972). Unpublished transcribed lectures, University of California, Los Angeles and Irvine.
Sacks, H. (1974)- An analysis of the course of a joke's telling in conversation. In Bauman, R. & Sherzer, J. (eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 337–53.
Sacks, H. ([1973] 1987). On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In Button, G. & Lee, J. R. E. (eds.), Talk and social organization. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 5469.
Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In Psathas, G. (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology New York: Irvington. 1521.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50: 696735.
Schegloff, E. A. (1979). The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In Givon, T. (ed.), Discourse and syntax (Syntax and Semantics, 12). New York: Academic. 261–88.
Schegloff, E. A. (1980). Preliminaries to preliminaries: “Can I ask you a question?” Sociological Inquiry 50: 104–52.
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “uh huh” and other things that come between sentences. In Tannen, D. (ed.), Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics. Washington, D.C.Georgetown University Press. 7193.
Schegloff, E. A. (1990). On the organization of sequences as a source of “coherence” in talk in interaction. In Dorval, B. (ed.), Conversational organization and its development. Norwood, NJ. Ablex. 5177.
Schegloff, E. A., & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica 8: 289327.
Schenkein, J. (1978). Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic.
Taplin, J. E., & Staudenmayer, H. (1973). Interpretation of abstract sentences in deductive reasoning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 12: 530–42.
Wilson, T. P., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1986). The structure of silence between turns in two-party conversation. Discourse Processes 9: 375–90.

On the syntax of sentences-in-progress*

  • Gene H Lerner (a1)

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed