Difference between revisions of "Raymond2017a"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) m (SaulAlbert moved page Raymond2017 to Raymond2017a without leaving a redirect) |
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|Title=Indexing a contrast: The do-construction in English conversation | |Title=Indexing a contrast: The do-construction in English conversation | ||
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Social interaction; Grammar; Morphosyntax; Emphasis; Agency; | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Social interaction; Grammar; Morphosyntax; Emphasis; Agency; | ||
| − | |Key= | + | |Key=Raymond2017a |
|Year=2017 | |Year=2017 | ||
|Journal=Journal of Pragmatics | |Journal=Journal of Pragmatics | ||
Latest revision as of 05:04, 29 July 2019
| Raymond2017a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Raymond2017a |
| Author(s) | Chase Wesley Raymond |
| Title | Indexing a contrast: The do-construction in English conversation |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Social interaction, Grammar, Morphosyntax, Emphasis, Agency |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2017 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Pragmatics |
| Volume | 118 |
| Number | |
| Pages | 22-37 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This conversation-analytic paper reports on the structure and interactional use of what I termthe ‘do-construction’ in English-language conversation: Utterances such as The kids do eat cake (cf. The kids eat cake). The argument developed here is that, at its core, the do-construction is used to index a contrast with a prior understanding. As will be shown, this prior understanding can be overtly demonstrated or merely presumed or potential, and it may be the understanding of the speaker him/herself, or that of the recipient. Similarly, the do-construction can be seen in a variety of sequential positions, and in conjunction with a range of social actions. Nonetheless, what binds this diversity of cases together is the use of the do-construction to introduce content into the interaction in a way that actively orients to a contrastive understanding. After establishing the contrastive work that this resource accomplishes as a general feature of turn design, we then consider how the use of the do-construction can be seen to be relevant to specific sequences of action. I conclude with a discussion of the relationship between the grammatical construction analyzed here and other-correction, and comment on some related resources for indexing contrasts in English.
Notes
