Henricson2025a
| Henricson2025a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Henricson2025a |
| Author(s) | Sofie Henricson, Jan Lindström |
| Title | Action formation, projection, and participation framework: Pseudoclefts in Swedish talk-in-interaction |
| Editor(s) | Jakob Steensig, Maria Jørgensen, Jan Lindström, Nicholas Mikkelsen, Karita Suomalainen, Søren Sandager Sørensen |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, action formation, discourse organization, grammar-in-action, participation framework, projection, pseudocleft, Swedish, turn design |
| Publisher | John Benjamins |
| Year | 2025 |
| Language | English |
| City | Amsterdam |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 366–391 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1075/slsi.37.12hen |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | Grammar in Action: Building Comprehensive Grammars of Talk-in-Interaction |
| Chapter | 12 |
Abstract
This chapter discusses the structural, interactional and situational specifics of the pseudocleft construction in Swedish talk-in-interaction, specifying its use as a resource for turn and action formation but also as a means to regulate discursive trajectories and the participation framework. An analysis of nearly 100 instances of pseudoclefts collected from casual conversations and institutional interactions revealed that this format is a recognizable and conventionally available building block of interaction exhibiting a regular grammatical pattern which can be characterized as a compound turn constructional unit. The pseudocleft is used for discourse organization in marking transitions in the pragmatic course of an interaction. This gives the construction a projecting force on the level of sequence organization. Our analysis illustrates that pseudoclefts are not dedicated to accomplishing one single kind of action but typically contribute to the formation of directive-commissive and evaluative actions. The pseudoclefts in our datasets were often used by participants to claim an expert position. This implies a rather strong link between the grammatical format and the participation framework in which the format casts one of the participants as possibly more knowledgeable and as the one who controls the agenda, has the right to direct others, and to make assessments.
Notes
