Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
My
idea
is
this.
We
all
go
to
the
airport
we
all
meet
them
we
bring
them
back
to
Trafalgar
Street
everyone
stays
there
the
night
and
the
next
morning
Carl
goes
on
the
train
you
take
the
girls
and
Fuzz
up
in
the
car
and
we
go
back
to
MacMasters
Beach.
(OZTALK)
In
each
of
the
above
examples
the
referent
is
recoverable
by
reference
to
what
has
just
been
said,
or
what
is
about
to
be
said.
The
reference
is
said
to
be
internal
to
the
text
(or
endophoric).
But
some
references
can
only
be
interpreted
by
reference
outside
the
co-text,
that
is
,
to
the
context
of
situation-including
the
knowledge
that
is
shared
by
the
speakers.
An
example
of
this
exophoric
type
of
reference
is
Odiles
mention
of
that
hole:
Im
so
glad
the
kids
were
not
there
because
you
know
that
hole
is
just
above
Debbies
head.
It
is
a
characteristic
of
spoken
language
that
many
of
the
references
are
exophoric,
that
is,
their
interpretation
is
context
dependent.
This
quality-
called
implicitness
by
Hasan
(1996)-
distinguishes
spoken
text
from
written
text,
which
is
typically
more
explicit.
The
production
and
interpretation
of
spoken
discourse
is
facilitated
by
reference
both
to
the
here
and
now
of
the
immediate
context,
and
to
the
speakers
shared
knowledge.
In
conversation
among
friends,
the
amount
of
shared
knowledge
is
lively
to
be
high,
allowing
a
proportionally
high
degree
of
implicitness.
This
is
evidenced
in
the
frequency
of
the
use
of
the
definite
article
the,
the
most
common
word
in
spoken
English.
The
is
commonly
used
as
a
form
of
exophoric
reference,
as
in
the
kids
(above)and
the
school,
in
Graces
question.
Here,
the
intended
reference
goes
beyond
the
immediate
context,
and
assumes
knowledge
that
is
mutually
shared,
which,
as
Hasan
puts
it,
argues
for
the
existence
of
interaction
in
the
past,
and
for
a
consequent
rapport
between
the
speaker
and
the
addressee
(1996:204).
Other
grammatical
means
of
achieving
cohesion
include
the
use
of
substitution
and
ellipsis.
An
example
of
the
former
is
the
use
of
does
in
the
following
exchange,
where
does
substitutes
for
the
verbal
element
come:
Speaker 1: He has to leave Helen in Britain because shes she doesnt want to come.
(OZTALK)
In
the
following
extract,
Speaker
3
used
did
to
substitute
for
the
italized
clausal
element
in
the
previous
speakers
utterances:
Speaker
1:
I
believe
you
bought
a
lovely
Dawn
Allen
lamp
at
the
school
fete.
Speaker
2:
At
a
bargain
price.
Speaker
3:
We
did!
(OZTALK)
Adjacency
pairs
It
is
composed
to
two
turns
produced
by
different
speakers
which
are
placed
adjacently
and
where
the
second
utterance
is
identified
as
related
to
the
first.
They
have
the
following
characteristics:
Examples:
Question/answer
A:
You
dont
like
the
fish?
B:
No,
its
not
that
I
dont
like
it,
its
the
way
it
is
done.
Request/grant
A:
Jerry
hi,
wheres
our
cake?
B:
Its
coming,
its
coming.
[laugh]
Offer/
accept
A:
Now,
who
can
I
make
an
iced
coffee
for?
B:
Oh,
I
think
you
could
make
one
for
my
stomach.
Compliment/response
A:
Great
haircut.
B:
Do
you
think?
The
hair
colour
burnt
my
scalp!
Challenge
/rejection
Instruct
/receipt
A:
Mmm,
dont
speak
with
your
mouth
half
A:
Hand
me
the
knife
from
the
bench,
will
full,
pull
the
bloody
thing
out.
you.
B:
I
will
do
what
I
bloody
well
like.
B:
Here
you
go.
When
there
is
a
choice
of
response,
the
listener
can
accept
or
refuse.
The
first
is
less
threatening
than
the
second,
that
is
why
it
is
called
a
preferred
response.
The
second
is
called
a
dispreferred
response.
In
such
case,
mitigating
strategies
are
used
to
ensure
conversational
cooperativeness.
There
are
sequences
that
are
longer
than
two
units
and
a
more
complex
sequential
organization
than
a
strict
adjacency.
A
sequence
is
an
adjacency
pair
and
any
expansion
of
that
adjacency.
There
are
three
types
of
expansions:
pre-sequences,
insertion,
sequences,
and
post
sequences.
For
example:
1.
pre-sequence
2.
pre-sequence
3.
base
adjacency
pair
4.
Insertion
sequence
5.
insertion
sequence
6.
base
adjacency
pair
The
concept
of
adjacency
pair
has
been
extremely
significant
as
it
provides
a
way
of
capturing
the
local
organization
of
talk.
However,
it
is
limited
as
it
can
only
describe
the
relationship
between
the
base
adjacent
utterance
and
its
expansions.
It
cannot
account
for
the
structure
of
extended
stretches
of
conversation,
including
the
relationship
that
exists
between
the
different
moves
made
by
the
same
speaker
in
longer
turns
of
talk.
In
short,
it
cannot
account
on
its
own
for
the
discourse
structure
of
conversation.
Moves
and
exchanges
in
conversation
It
this
section
the
unfold
of
conversational
exchanges
is
explained.
To
account
for
the
interactivity
of
conversation,
it
is
necessary
to
go
beyond
the
analysis
of
vocabulary
and
grammar
and
give
functional
labels
to
the
different
roles
speakers
can
assume,
and
to
the
roles
they
assign
to
others.
The
Birmingham
School
and
the
Systemic
Functional
Linguistics
describe
what
function
each
speakers
move
achieves
in
that
context
(functional
description).
Each
utterance
in
a
conversation
can
be
described
as
a
move
which
is
the
basic
semantic
unit
in
interactive
talk
(it
is
the
smallest
unit
of
potential
interaction
see
Slade,
1996;
Eggins
and
Slade,
1997).
It
indicates
a
point
of
possible
turn-transfer,
and
therefore
carries
with
it
the
idea
of
it
could
stop
here
.
According
to
Hallidays
functional
description
(1994:69),
the
basic
initiation
moves
in
conversation
are
the
four
primary
speech
functions
of
command,
statement,
offer
and
question.
With
each
speech
function
there
is
an
expected
response
and
a
discretionary
alternative,
with
each
of
these
examples
constituting
an
interactive
move
in
conversation.
Initiating
speech
function
Offer
Do
you
want
to
get
married?
Command
Get
married
first
Statement
I
am
getting
married
Question
Are
you
getting
married?
Expected
response
Acceptance
absolutely
Compliance
Okay
Acknowledgement
Wonderful
news
Answer
Yes.
Discretionary
alternative
Rejection
Certainly
not!
Refusal
Under
no
conditions
Contradiction
Over
my
dead
body
Disclaimer
What
do
you
mean?
Every
move
in
dialogue
can
be
assigned
a
speech
function.
So,
a
move
can
be
defined
as
the
basic
semantic
unit
in
interactive
talk
that
selects
for
speech
function.
Speech
function
then
describes
the
adjacency
pair
structure
of
dialogue.
Expected
and
discretionary
responses
engage
with
the
initiating
move.
However,
the
difference
is
that
the
expected
responses
tent
to
finish
the
exchanges
are
there
is
a
resolution.
Discretionary
responses,
on
the
other
hand,
tend
to
open
out
the
exchange
because,
for
example,
if
an
offer
is
rejected
or
a
statement
contradicted,
further
negotiation
is
needed-
such
as
a
reason,
an
excuse
or
an
apology.
Expected
responses
support
the
proposition
of
the
speaker
and
thereby
serve
to
create
alignments
and
solidarity.
By
contrast,
the
discretionary
responses
are
either
disengaging
and
non-committal
or
openly
confronting.
Discretionary
moves
occur
more
frequently
in
casual
conversation
than
do
expected
responses.
This
is
because
the
social
role
of
conversation
is
not
only
to
affirm
likenesses
and
similarities
but
also
to
explore
differences.
Martin
(1992)
and
Eggins
and
Slade
(1997)
have
extended
the
analysis
of
the
different
types
of
discretionary
moves
that
can
occur.
There
are
two
categories
of
discretionary
moves:
tracking
and
challenging
moves
(see
Martin,
1992:
70,
and
Eggins
and
Slade,
1997:
207).
Tracking
moves
monitor,
check
or
clarify
the
content
of
prior
moves.
For
example:
A:
Im
just
going
to
the
shop.
B:
Where
did
you
say?
Or
confirmation..
A:
Im
just
going
to
the
shop.
B:
To
the
shop?
Challenging
moves
challenge
the
speakers
initiation
move
in
some
way.
For
example,
in
the
case
of
one
speaker
trying
to
terminate
the
interaction:
A:
Im
leaving
tomorrow.
B:
I
dont
want
to
hear
about
it.
Or
where
the
proposition
is
countered
in
some
way.
For
example:
A:
Im
leaving
tomorrow.
B:
I
thought
you
said
next
week.
The
tracking
and
challenging
moves
tend
to
trigger
sequences
of
talk
that
interrupt,
postpone,
abort
or
suspend
the
initial
speech
function
sequence.
These
kinds
of
moves
are
characteristic
of
conversational
English.
Major
types
of
moves
that
can
occur
in
conversation
in
English:
Initiating
moves
(I)
Statement:
I:S
Question:
Rhetorical
question:
Offer:
Command:
Expected
responding
moves
(
R)
Answer:
Acknowledge:
R:K
Response
acknowledge
offer:
Response
to
command:
Discretionary
moves
Tracking:
Response
to
tracking:
Challenging:
Response
to
tracking:
I:S
I:Q
Q:R
I:
O
I:
C
R:A
R:K
R:O
R:C
Tr
(confirming,
checking,
clarifying)
Rtr
Ch
(disengaging,
challenging,
countering)
rch
A
single
move
will
often
make
a
distinct
contribution
to
the
development
of
the
exchange.
It
may
serve
to
initiate
a
new
exchange;
it
may
serve
to
respond
to
an
exchange
that
has
been
initiated;
or
it
may
serve
to
complete
an
exchange
after
a
response
has
been
supplied.
At
other
times,
these
functions
in
a
an
exchange
wil
be
achieved
by
a
group
of
moves,
this
is
called
a
move
complex
(Slade,
1996).
For
example,
in
this
extract
form
a
coffee-break
conversation
between
a
group
of
women
supervisors
in
a
hospital,
Jessie
asks
a
question
that
elicits
gossip
about
Richard:
Exchange
structure
I:Q
Tr
R:A
I:Q
move
1
2a
2b
2c
2d
3
speaker
Jessie:
Judy:
Jessie:
Transcript
Mmm,
what
happened
about
Richard?
Ah
about
Richard
Ah
nothing
[laughs]
Hes
been
spoken
to,
Itll
be
a
sort
of
watch
and
wait===something..
==
Yeah,
what
do
you
reckon
is
going
to
happen?
Judys
response
in
the
exchange
is
not
a
single
move
but
three
grammatically
related
moves
that
form
her
answer
to
the
question.
This
then
is
followed
by
a
new
exchange,
initiated
by
Jessie
asking
another
question.
For
this
reason,
functional
linguistics
refers
to
this
basic
interactive
pattern
as
an
exchange
(rather
than
to
an
adjacency
pair).
An
exchange
can
be
defined
as
a
sequence
of
moves
concerned
with
negotiating
a
proposition
stated
or
implied
in
an
initiating
move.
An
exchange
can
be
identified
as
a
beginning
with
an
opening
move,
and
continuing
until
another
opening
move
occurs
Turn
taking
in
conversation
Sacks
(1974)
describes
how
turn
taking
works
in
English:
the
current
speaker
can
either
select
the
next
speaker,
by
for
example,
naming
them,
looking
at
them,
directing
a
question
to
them,
or
the
next
speaker
can
self
select
with
many
possible
strategies,
such
as
that
reminds
me
of
or
have
you
heard
what
Mary
did
yesterday?
Taking
or
allocating
turns
is
not
at
random.
It
is
systematic
and
the
way
people
take
and
the
signals
which
may
not
be
explicit
are
clearly
understood
by
speakers
familiar
with
the
cultural
context.
CA
is
interested
in
uncovering
how
it
is
that
conversation
keeps
making
sense
and
how
people
know
when
and
how
to
make
a
contribution.
Accoridng
to
Sacks
(1974)
interactants
in
the
conversation
recognize
points
of
potential
speaker
change
indicated
by
linguistic
units
called
turn-constructional
units
(TCU).
In
this
example
each
of
these
turns
is
a
TCU.
A:
Do
you
want
to
have
a
drink?
B:
Great
idea.
However
in
the
following
example
each
utterance
could
constitute
a
complete
turn
in
its
own
right.
Hence
there
are
two
turn-constructional
units
within
the
one
speaker
turn:
A:
Do
you
want
a
drink?
We
could
go
somewhere
after
work.
It
is
at
the
end
of
the
turn-constructional
unit
that
interactants
in
conversation
recognize
points
of
potential
speaker
change.
There
are
two
possibilities
for
interactants
to
determine
who
the
next
speaker
will
be.
One
is
that
the
current
speaker
sleects
the
person
who
is
to
be
the
next
speaker,
and
the
second
possibility
is
that
the
next
speaker
self
selects.
Sacks,
Schegloff
and
Jefferson
(1974/1978)
argue
that
speaker
change
needs
to
be
negotiated
at
every
turn;
partly
motivated
by
the
need
to
avoid
the
possibility
of
a
lapse.
The
function
of
turntaking
in
conversation
is
to
assign
turns
to
interactants
in
conversation.
Unlike
formal
conversation
in
which
a
person
with
a
higher
status
assigns
the
turns,
in
informal
conversation
the
turn
is
not
assigned
by
a
particular
person.
Overlapping,
interruptions
and
back
chanelling
are
very
common.
They
all
demonstrate
that
the
speaker
is
collaborating
and
actively
participating
in
the
conversation.
Topic
management:
topic
development,
topic
change
and
topic
choice.
The
way
speakers
introduce,
develop
and
change
topics
is
an
important
dimension
of
conversational
structure.
When
a
topic
starts
to
flag:
the
participants
may
change
topic
or
reintroduce
(or
recycle)
sa
topic
from
earlier
conversation.
If
a
new
topic
is
introduced,
then
a
link
with
the
previous
topic
is
made
through
initiating
moves
such
as
this
reminds
me
of,
or
that
is
what
happened
to
me,
but
they
can
also
be
introduced
without
those
words.
Topics.
Expectations
of
appropriate
and
acceptable
topics
for
conversation
differ
from
context
to
context
as
well
from
culture
to
culture.
There
are
studies
that
show
how
topics
of
conversation
differ
according
to
the
gender
make-up
of
the
group,
class,
age
and
ethnicity,
as
well
as
the
degree
of
familiarity
or
distance
between
the
participants.
Group
1
Jocking
and
teasing
each
Supervisors
in
a
car
factory
other.
Teasing
the
most
between
40
and
60
yrs.
Old
frequent.
Telling
danger,
violence,
heroic
deeds
stories.
Leisure
and
entertainment.
Group
2
Gossiping
or
chatting
about
All
female
group
supervisors
others..
of
a
hospital
kitchen.
20-
Personal
information.
30s.
Mainly
Anglo- Exchanging
opinions.
Australian.
Leisure
and
entertainment.
Telling
stories
(amusing
Friendly
ridicule
(not
gossip).
Few
story
telling
texts.
No
teasing
at
all.
Gossip
and
storytelling.
Personal
details
and
future.
More
storytelling
than
men.
stories
involving
embarrassing
or
worrying
situations).
Group
3
Narratives
and
anecdotes
A
clerical
staff
in
a
hospital
(amusing
ones).
in
their
20s.
Employment
Leisure
and
entertainment
(what
they
did
on
the
weekend).
Personal
information
Chatting
about
others.
Future
plans.
Illness
and
death.
The
primary
goals
for
people
who
work
together
but
are
not
friends
is
to
share
opinions
and
attitudes
about
the
world,
to
explore
similarities
and
likenesses.
Gossip
implies
saying
implicitly
saying
what
the
appropriate
way
to
behave
is.
Disagreement
rarely
occurs
among
workmates
which
is
different
from
close
friends
who
are
not
only
exploring
similarities
but
also
differences.
In
language
teaching
contexts
it
is
obviously
important
to
be
aware
of
what
topics
and
genres
the
learners
will
need
when
speaking
English.
The
textbooks
cover
a
limited
range
of
topics
an
genres
and
some
of
them
may
not
be
relevant
to
students.
Discourse
strategies
Opening
and
closing
are
culturally
and
contextually
dependent.
Opening
and
closing
in
casual
conversation
are
rarely
achieved
through
a
simple
adjecancy
pair
structure,
but
they
are
achieved
through
exchanges
of
three
or
more
moves.
Closing
are
preceded
by
pre-closings
such
as
anyway,
I
have
to
go
now
or
look
at
the
time,
a
have
to
rush.
Pre-closing
doesnt
always
lead
to
closing.
The
closing
is
not
abrupt.
Feedback in conversation
The
way
in
which
listeners
show
that
they
are
following
the
conversation
ans
wys
that
the
speaker
checks
on
the
attention
of
the
listeners.
Feedback
conveys
agreement,
disagreement,
interest,
and
attention.
It
is
essential
for
maintaining
coherent
and
smooth
conversation.
The
form
and
rate
of
feedback
is
culturally
specific
because
the
lack
of
it
can
lead
to
the
breakdown
of
communication.
Kinds
of
feedback:
1.
continuers
(mm,
uh,
juh)
2.
Achnolegement
(agreement
or
understandin
of
the
previous
turn)
3.
Assessments.
(how
awful,
shit,
wonderful)
4.
news
markers.
Really,
is
it!
5.
questions
to
ask
for
further
details,
or
to
repair
misunderstanding
6.
collaborative
completions:
to
finish
or
repeat
anothers
utterance.
7.
non-verbal
vocalizations:
laughter,
sighs,
tec
Feedback
is
culturally
specific
and
changes
from
context
to
context
(gender,
formality
level
of
contact
between
participants.
Cross-cultural
variation
and
the
use
of
discourse
strategies
Interactional
sociolinguistics
(branch
of
sociolinguistics):
studies
relationship
between
language,
society
and
culture.
Gumperzresearch
into
cross-cultural
communication.