Topicalization
| Encyclopedia of Terminology for CA and IL: Topicalization | |
|---|---|
| Author(s): | Luis Manuel Olguín (UCLA, USA) (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7019-2026) |
| To cite: | Olguín, Luis Manuel. (2026). Topicalization. In Alexandra Gubina, Elliott M. Hoey & Chase Wesley Raymond (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Terminology for Conversation Analysis and Interactional Linguistics. International Society for Conversation Analysis (ISCA). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/X4VQM |
In CA/IL research, topicalization can be conceptualized in both sequence-organizational and grammatical terms. From a sequence-organizational perspective, topicalization refers to the process whereby participants establish a topic as a candidate for subsequent development in the unfolding talk. Topicalization may involve introducing a new topic into the conversation or promoting a previously stated or alluded to referent or action to topical status. These procedures can include stepwise-transition practices or “disjunctive” topic initiations (see Topic), typically occurring in sequential environments characterized by topic attrition (see Topic attrition/Topic hold). Extract (1) captures a case in point from a conversation between two pregnant girlfriends in La Habana. Janet has been telling Sariel about a music video that she likes which depicts significant life stages in the singer’s life since birth. As the topic withers due to repeated assessments and thus the lack of further empirical reporting (line 1-4), Janet tells her friend that she will make a similar video for “Mario,” embedding the announcement of her baby’s name in the telling (line 5). At line 8, Sariel topicalizes the news within the telling through a question that seeks confirmation on Janet’s decision to name the baby “Mario.”
(1) [CCCELE/La Habana/01m23s]
01 JAN: (...) Sí::: era: ↑es lindo %el video.
Yes it was the video is nice
sar %shift gaze from TV toward JAN--->
02 (1.0)
03 JAN: °mm° °Me gust(ó/a).°
°mm° °I like(d) it°
04 (0.6)
05 Le &voy a hacer así &algo a:: (.) así a: (.) a Mario.
I’ll make something like that for (.) like that for (.) Mario
jan &................&touches and rubs her belly->
06 (0.8)+#(0.2)
sar #smiles
07 JAN: Sí de verdad que voy (x[xx xxx )
Yes I definitely will (x[xx xxx )
08 SAR: [Y ya l- te decidiste que
[And you’ve already decided that
09 le vas a poner Mario,
you will name him Mario
10 (0.5)
11 JAN: Bueno: si es varón.
Well if it’s male
12 (0.6)
13 SAR: Y si es hembra?
And if it is female
14 (.)
15 JAN: No sé.
I don’t know
16 (1.8)
In addition to questions such as the one shown in the extract above, topicalization devices also include next-positioned repeats and newsmarks (Button & Casey 1985; Jefferson 1983/1993; Gubina & Betz 2021) and formulations in various sequential positions (Heyman 1986; Boden & Bielby 1986; Zinken & Kaiser 2022). In their study of “itemized news inquiries,” which nominate a possible topic by asking the recipient about a specific activity or circumstance that is presumably worth telling, Button and Casey (1985) analyze news receipt tokens such as “Ye:s?”, “Did the::y,” or “You ha:ve,” as “topicalizing responses,” that is, as warrants for the news announcer to develop topic talk by elaborating on the news in the next turn. Indeed, as Schegloff (2007:169-80) suggests, sequence expansion is a defining feature of “topic talk” and, in this way, underlies topicalization as a sequence-organizational process through which a set of interactional devices are set in motion.
Topicalization can also be conceptualized grammatically, especially in studies that bring in insights from linguistic analysis. From this perspective, topicalization describes a grammatical procedure whereby a constituent moves from its canonical syntactic position to highlight its topical status within a sentence’s information structure. Various syntactically marked constructions, like left-dislocation and wh-clefts in English, can be used for grammatical topicalization (see e.g., Kim 1995). Most commonly, however, topicalization narrowly refers to fronting the noun phrase (NP) that functions as verb complement to the beginning of a sentence (Pekarek-Doehler, De Stefani & Horlacher 2015:51; see also Couper-Kuhlen & Selting 2018:393-410 for a discussion of clause extensions). Extract (2) below offers an example from a bit later in the same conversation between the two pregnant girlfriends in La Habana. As the topic quickly shifted to discussing possible female names given the possibility of the future baby being a girl, Janet stands firm on her inability to think of other names besides Mario, orienting to a subsequently revealed desire to have a baby boy. At line 5, the name “Mario” is grammatically topicalized twice within the same turn-at-talk: “^Mario a mí me gusta mucho.” (“Mario I like a lot”) and “Mario me gusta.” (“Mario I like”).
(2) [CCCELE/La Habana/02:20]
01 SAR: .hhh No sé &no sé.
.hhh I don’t know &I don’t know
sar &withdraws gaze from JAN to look at TV
02 (0.8)
03 JAN: *(ºMmº)
*rubs belly
04 (0.9)
05 JAN: No ^Mario a=mí me gusta mucho. (.) Mario me gusta.
NEG NAME DAT.1 REFL.1 like.3 much NAME REFL.1 like.3
No Mario I like a lot (.) Mario I like
06 (0.2)
07 JAN: Pero de he%mbra no puedo pensar en nombres para hembra.
But female ones I can’t think of names for a female
sar %looks at JAN
08 (0.6)
09 SAR: No #te: sale: [(de) la imaginación?]
It #doesn’t come out [(from) your imagination
jan #half-smile
10 JAN: [No:, porque ] yo quiero: °varoncito.°
[No because ] I want a °little boy°
In both instances above, topicalization involves fronting the NP “Mario” to sentence beginning, thereby giving it informational prominence. Focusing on the first instance, i.e. “^Mario a mí me gusta mucho.” (“Mario I like a lot”), notice that the NP “Mario” gets positioned before the indirect object “a mí” (“to me”), which would typically appear initially in gustar (“to like”) constructions (cf. A mí me gusta Mario [I like Mario]), but after the turn-initial particle “No” that prefaces a turn that orients to possible disagreement in bringing back the discussion about Janet’s inability to think of other names beside Mario. Relocating “Mario” to the beginning of the sentence but crucially after the turn-initial particle showcases the relevance of both grammatical and sequential structures in the construction of this turn-at-talk (Ochs, Schegloff & Thompson 1996).
Interactional linguists have explored how topicalization and other marked syntactic constructions operate as resources for action in languages beyond English (e.g., Monzoni 2005; Pekarek-Doehler et al. 2015; see also Couper-Kuhlen & Selting 2018:393-410). For example, Pekarek Doehler, De Stefani, and Horlacher (2015) find that, in French, topicalization that involves fronting the demonstrative pronoun ça (“this/that”) in feeling and cognition verb constructions (e.g., et ça je trouve regrettable “and this I find regrettable”) occurs in proffering assessments, claiming or disclaiming epistemic access, and producing lists and contrasts. For Italian, Monzoni (2005) finds that topicalization is one way to design disconnected interjections in multi-party interactions. Compared to other marked syntactic structures in this context, by moving the verb complement to sentence beginning, topicalization is shown to bring awareness to referents in the proximate physical environment, signaling a rather abrupt shift from ongoing activities. In this way, grammatical conceptualizations of topicalization are particularly useful for exploring the intersection between turn design and action formation.
Additional Related Entries:
Cited References:
Button, G., & Casey, N. (1985). Topic nomination and topic pursuit. Human Studies, 8, 3–55.
Boden, D., & Bielby, D. (1986). The Way It Was: Topical Organization in Elderly Conversation. Language & Communication, 6 (1): 73–89.
Couper-Kuhlen, E., & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional Linguistics: Studying Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge University Press.
Gubina, A., & Betz, E. (2021). What Do Newsmark-Type Responses Invite? The Response Space After German echt. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 54(4), 374–396.
Heyman, R. D. (1986). Formulating Topic in the Classroom. Discourse Processes, 9(1): 37–55.
Jefferson, G. (1983/1993). Caveat Speaker: Preliminary Notes on Recipient Topic-Shift Implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction'', 26(1), 1–30. (Originally published in 1983).
Kim, K. (1995). Wh-clefts and left dislocation in English conversation: Cases of topicalization. In P. A. Downing & M. Noonan (Eds.), Word Order in Discourse (pp. 247-296). John Benjamins.
Monzoni, C. M. (2005). The use of marked syntactic constructions in Italian multi-party conversation. In A. Hakulinen & M. Selting (Eds.), Syntax and Lexis in Conversation: Studies on the use of linguistic resources in talk-in-interaction (pp. 129–157). John Benjamins.
Ochs, E., Schegloff, E. A., & Thompson, S. A. (Eds.). (1996). Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge University Press.
Pekarek-Doehler, S., De Stefani, E. & Horlacher, A.-S. (2015). Time and Emergence in Grammar: Dislocation, Topicalization and Hanging Topic in French Talk-in-Interaction. John Benjamins.
Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis (vol. 1). Cambridge University Press.
Zinken, J., & Kaiser, J. (2022). Formulating other minds in social interaction: Accountability and courses of action. Language in Society, 51(2), 185–210.
Additional References:
