Difference between revisions of "Park2016a"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis" to "Conversation Analysis") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
|Key=Park2016a | |Key=Park2016a | ||
|Year=2016 | |Year=2016 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Journal of Pragmatics | |Journal=Journal of Pragmatics | ||
|Volume=99 | |Volume=99 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=62–77 |
| − | | | + | |URL=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378216616301321 |
| − | |Abstract=On the basis of Sacks et al.’s (1974) turn-taking model, I explore the flexibility of the Korean turn-taking system. Noting first that speakers bring a turn to a stopwithout projected final turn elements, I propose that the turn stop is a legitimate completion specifiable as a transition-relevance place (TRP). I view turn construction as a process of improvisation in which lexical chunks are accumulated one after another to deliver a recognizable action; a TRP is thus constituted at the completion of a lexical chunk loosely tied to a prior lexical chunk. In parallel, a turn stop occurs at a lexical boundary in which the lexical chunks thus far accumulated have conveyed a complete | + | |DOI=10.1016/j.pragma.2016.04.011 |
| − | action. I argue that any lexical boundary can serve as a TRP on the condition of action completion, as negotiated and determined by the participants’ shared knowledge and experiences. This flexibility of TRP constitution is proposed as a specification of Sacks et al.’s (1974) generic model applied to Korean conversation. | + | |Abstract=On the basis of Sacks et al.’s (1974) turn-taking model, I explore the flexibility of the Korean turn-taking system. Noting first that speakers bring a turn to a stopwithout projected final turn elements, I propose that the turn stop is a legitimate completion specifiable as a transition-relevance place (TRP). I view turn construction as a process of improvisation in which lexical chunks are accumulated one after another to deliver a recognizable action; a TRP is thus constituted at the completion of a lexical chunk loosely tied to a prior lexical chunk. In parallel, a turn stop occurs at a lexical boundary in which the lexical chunks thus far accumulated have conveyed a complete action. I argue that any lexical boundary can serve as a TRP on the condition of action completion, as negotiated and determined by the participants’ shared knowledge and experiences. This flexibility of TRP constitution is proposed as a specification of Sacks et al.’s (1974) generic model applied to Korean conversation. |
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 11:07, 25 December 2019
| Park2016a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Park2016a |
| Author(s) | Jae-Eun Park |
| Title | Turn-taking in Korean conversation |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Turn-taking, Turn constructional unit, Transition-relevance place, Korean |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Journal of Pragmatics |
| Volume | 99 |
| Number | |
| Pages | 62–77 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.pragma.2016.04.011 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
On the basis of Sacks et al.’s (1974) turn-taking model, I explore the flexibility of the Korean turn-taking system. Noting first that speakers bring a turn to a stopwithout projected final turn elements, I propose that the turn stop is a legitimate completion specifiable as a transition-relevance place (TRP). I view turn construction as a process of improvisation in which lexical chunks are accumulated one after another to deliver a recognizable action; a TRP is thus constituted at the completion of a lexical chunk loosely tied to a prior lexical chunk. In parallel, a turn stop occurs at a lexical boundary in which the lexical chunks thus far accumulated have conveyed a complete action. I argue that any lexical boundary can serve as a TRP on the condition of action completion, as negotiated and determined by the participants’ shared knowledge and experiences. This flexibility of TRP constitution is proposed as a specification of Sacks et al.’s (1974) generic model applied to Korean conversation.
Notes
