Clift2003
| Clift2003 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Clift2003 |
| Author(s) | Rebecca Clift |
| Title | Synonyms in action |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Synonyms |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2003 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | International Journal of English Studies |
| Volume | 3 |
| Number | 1 |
| Pages | 167–187 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper discusses what the methods of conversation analysis (CA) might have to offer the study of linguistic synonymy. It takes as a case study two items commonly held to be synonyms -'actually' and 'in fact'- and shows considerable differences between the two in their interactional implementation: they are implicated in the prosecution of differing courses of action. Such cases argue that it is analytically more profitable to consider what a lexical item does in the context of talk than what it means.
Notes
