Difference between revisions of "Raymond2017a"

From emcawiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (title)
m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis;" to "Conversation Analysis;")
Line 3: Line 3:
 
|Author(s)=Chase Wesley Raymond;
 
|Author(s)=Chase Wesley Raymond;
 
|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=Raymond2017
 
|Key=Raymond2017
 
|Year=2017
 
|Year=2017

Revision as of 04:20, 15 May 2018

Raymond2017a
BibType ARTICLE
Key Raymond2017
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

Download BibTex

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