Dausendschon-Gay2009
| Dausendschon-Gay2009 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Dausendschon-Gay2009 |
| Author(s) | Ulrich Dausendschon-Gay, Ulrich Kafft |
| Title | Preparing next actions in routine activities |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Projection, Action formation, Routine Activities |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2009 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Processes |
| Volume | 46 |
| Number | 2-3 |
| Pages | 247–268 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/01638530902728900 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Projection is one of the classic topics in conversation analysis. It is introduced in the “simplest systematics” (Sacks, Schegloff, & Jefferson, 1974) as a principle that enables the recognition of unit types constituting turn-constructional units (TCUs) and thereby the recognition of possible completion, which is relevant for the organization of turn-taking. Additional clarification of this concept has developed that projection is achieved through syntactic and prosodic constructions and pragmatically and lexico-semantically specified contexts during the accomplishment of a specific task (which can be a “larger project,” such as an argumentation or a narration). We consider that the multimodal approach to conversation, which we have adopted as our basis, should broaden the concept of projection. Our contribution is meant to demonstrate that not only the shape and possible completion of TCUs and turns is projected, but also that potential nexts are prepared; announced; and, in this broader sense, projected. To prevent terminological confusion, we propose to introduce “preparation” as a cover term and to reserve “projection” for the classic turn-oriented approach. Some relevant aspects of preparation are exemplified with videotaped episodes from a butcher's stall in a market near a midsized city in Germany.
Notes
