ON THE SYNTAX OF SENTENCES-IN-PROGRESS

被引:312
作者
LERNER, GH
机构
[1] Department of Sociology, University of California, Santa Barbara
关键词
D O I
10.1017/S0047404500016572
中图分类号
H0 [语言学];
学科分类号
030303 ; 0501 ; 050102 ;
摘要
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). © 1991, Cambridge University Press. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:441 / 458
页数:18
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]  
Atkinson J. M., 1984, STRUCTURES SOCIAL AC
[2]  
Atkinson John M, 1984, STRUCTURES SOCIAL AC, P370
[3]  
CHOMSKY N, 1965, ASPECTS THEORY SYNAX
[4]  
Comrie B., 1986, CONDITIONALS, P77, DOI [10.1017/CBO9780511753466.005, DOI 10.1017/CBO9780511753466.005]
[5]  
Copi I.M., 1972, INTRO LOGIC, V4th
[7]  
Duncan S., 1977, FACE TO FACE INTERAC, DOI DOI 10.4324/9781315660998
[8]  
FORD C. E., 1986, CONDITIONALS, P353, DOI DOI 10.1017/CB09780511753466.019
[9]  
Goldberg JoAnn., 1975, SEMIOTICA, V14, P269, DOI [10.1515/semi.1975.14.3.269, DOI 10.1515/SEMI.1975.14.3.269]
[10]   RE-STARTS, PAUSES, AND THE ACHIEVEMENT OF A STATE OF MUTUAL GAZE AT TURN-BEGINNING [J].
GOODWIN, C .
SOCIOLOGICAL INQUIRY, 1980, 50 (3-4) :272-302