Phrasal unit boundaries and organization of turns and sequences in korean conversation
Human Studies 22 (2-4):425-446 (1999)
| Abstract | This paper examines an aspect of the grammar-interaction interface with respect to how participants orient to intra-turn phrasal unit boundaries as a locus that has interactional import for turn and sequence organization in Korean conversation. Phrasal unit boundaries in Korean serve as a space within a turn in which the speaker of the turn in-progress invites the recipient to acknowledge the speaker's point expressed up-to-that-point and collaboratively display his/her understanding thereof. In a sequentially and topically 'ripe' context, such unit boundaries often constitute places where more active participation on the part of the recipient is invited in the form of collaborative completion in which the recipient co-constructs the primary speaker's on-going turn. Phrasal unit boundaries also provide interactional resources which the speaker may exploit to sequentially delete out a problem in talk, e.g., by a sort of tying operation in which a subsequently added phrasal unit ties back to the speaker's previous utterance to the effect that the intervening talk containing a problem is canceled out by way of being shown to have been an interruption of the speaker's turn in-progress. This practice points to an aspect of the way in which the 'agglutinative' grammatical process involving the use of phrasal units shapes interactional patterns as observed in the course of organizing turns/sequences and managing problems in talk. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesThomas F. Shipley (1998). Spatiotemporal Unit Formation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):772-772.
Harmon R. Holcomb Iii (1986). Causes, Ends, and the Units of Selection. Philosophy Research Archives 12:519-539.
Esther Romero & Belén Soria (2010). On Phrasal Pragmatics and What is Descriptively Referred To. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 10 (1):63-84.
Wolfgang Ludwig Schneider (2000). The Sequential Production of Social Acts in Conversation. Human Studies 23 (2):123-144.
Makoto Hayashi (1999). Where Grammar and Interaction Meet: A Study of Co-Participant Completion in Japanese Conversation. Human Studies 22 (2-4):475-499.
Hiroko Tanaka (1999). Grammer and Social Interaction in Japanese and Anglo-American English: The Display of Context, Social Identity and Social Relation. Human Studies 22 (2-4):363-395.
Tomoyo Takagi (1999). Introduction to Grammer and Interaction Papers. Human Studies 22 (2-4):397-423.
Koenraad Kuiper (2006). Knowledge of Language and Phrasal Vocabulary Acquisition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (3):291-292.
Tomoyo Takagi (1999). "Questions" in Argument Sequences in Japanese. Human Studies 22 (2/4):397 - 423.
Arnulf Deppermann (2011). Notionalization: The Transformation of Descriptions Into Categorizations. Human Studies 34 (2):155-181.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
