Difference between revisions of "Ekberg2012"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis" to "Conversation Analysis")
m
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Stuart Ekberg;
 
|Author(s)=Stuart Ekberg;
 
|Title=Addressing a source of trouble outside of the repair space
 
|Title=Addressing a source of trouble outside of the repair space
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Trouble Source; Repair; Conversation Analysis, Post-completion account; Repair space; Intersubjectivity; Talk-in-interaction.
+
|Tag(s)=EMCA; Trouble Source; Repair; Conversation Analysis; Repair space; Intersubjectivity; Talk-in-interaction.; Post-completion account
 
|Key=Ekberg2012
 
|Key=Ekberg2012
 
|Year=2012
 
|Year=2012
Line 25: Line 25:
 
involved. I argue that because the trouble is addressed in this manner, and
 
involved. I argue that because the trouble is addressed in this manner, and
 
in this particular position, the repair space can be considered as being
 
in this particular position, the repair space can be considered as being
limited to the sequence in which a source of trouble originates.  
+
limited to the sequence in which a source of trouble originates.
 
}}
 
}}

Revision as of 04:03, 14 August 2018

Ekberg2012
BibType ARTICLE
Key Ekberg2012
Author(s) Stuart Ekberg
Title Addressing a source of trouble outside of the repair space
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, Trouble Source, Repair, Conversation Analysis, Repair space, Intersubjectivity, Talk-in-interaction., Post-completion account
Publisher
Year 2012
Language
City
Month
Journal Journal of Pragmatics
Volume 44
Number 4
Pages 374-386
URL Link
DOI
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

A body of research in Conversation Analysis has identified a range of structurally-provided positions in which sources of trouble in talk-in-interaction can be addressed using repair. These practices are contained within what Schegloff (1992) calls the repair space. In this paper, I examine a rare instance in which a source of trouble is not resolved within the repair space and comes to be addressed outside of it. The practice by which this occurs is a post-completion account; that is, an account that is produced after the possible completion of the sequence containing a source of trouble. Unlike fourth position repair, the final repair position available within the repair space, this account is not made in preparation for a revised response to the trouble-source turn. Its more restrictive aim, rather, is to circumvent an ongoing difference between the parties involved. I argue that because the trouble is addressed in this manner, and in this particular position, the repair space can be considered as being limited to the sequence in which a source of trouble originates.

Notes