Try-marking

Encyclopedia of Terminology for CA and IL: Try-marking
Author(s):	Marina N. Cantarutti (University of York, UK) (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1688-0896)
To cite:	Cantarutti, Marina N. (2023). Try-marking. In Alexandra Gubina & Chase Wesley Raymond (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Terminology for Conversation Analysis and Interactional Linguistics. International Society for Conversation Analysis (ISCA). DOI: []

Try-marking is the practice of producing a referent (often a name/proper noun) “as a ‘try’” (Schegloff 2007: 238) to achieve recognition (Sacks & Schegloff 1979; Schegloff 2007, but see other uses below). In terms of form, the term refers to the production of this action with rising intonation, often followed by a short pause.

Try-marking is said to be deployed when a speaker “figures” (Schegloff 2007: 278) that an upcoming referent may be familiar to the recipient but may not be certain of this. Try-marking then initiates a “recognition search sequence” (Sacks & Schegloff 1979: 20) which makes relevant from the recipient some mark of validated recognition (verbal or non-verbal, elaborated or minimal). If unsuccessful, a first minimal try-marked referent may be followed by subsequent, more elaborate “tries” (e.g., Heritage 2007). Often the response to ratification results in a resumption of the base sequence and incorporates the use of a pronoun co-indexical with the try-marked noun-phrase (see Pekarek Dohler 2011, for this phenomenon in French).

Later work uses the term “try-marked” more widely to refer to “upward intoned” prosody (e.g., Clift 2016: 109) beyond recognitional practices, including for example, appendor questions (Sacks 1992) and other kinds of candidate understandings by the recipient (see, e.g., Brouwer 2003; Enfield & Sidnell 2017).

Two examples of try-marking from the CallFriend corpus (Canavan & Zipperlen 1996) appear below, both produced with rising intonation. The first one conforms to the original description by Schegloff & Sacks (1979), with a speaker’s production of a recognitional reference (line 8) that makes the marking of recognition relevant. Line 9 shows a candidate understanding of the referent in the prior turn, also try-marked. Acoustic visualisations of both try-marked contributions are provided below.

[CallFriend_4984_l788_796]

01  RO:    where are you ↑li:ving no:w. 
02  LI:    (0.3)∙hhh I:::'m on_ 
03  RO:    ((baby cooing)) 
04  LI:    pro:bably the [same-          ]
05  RO:                  [((baby cooing))]
06  LI:    (0.5) pla:ce when_ (.) 
07         since I la:st >talked to you.< =
08      -> =I'm on Avenue Bee:, = and Fou:rth Stree:t?
09  RO: -> (0.6) that's like- where Bru:ce li:ves? 
10         ºor [something?º] 
11  LI:        [↑ye::ah.   ] = with Bru:ce.

Figure 1: Acoustic visualization of "I'm on Avenue Bee:, = and Fou:rth Stree:t?"

Figure 2: Acoustic visualization of "that's like- where Bru:ce li:ves?"

Additional Related Entries:

• Period intonation
• Candidate understanding
• Question intonation
• Intonation contour

Cited References:

Brouwer, C. E. (2003). Word searches in NNS-NS interaction: Opportunities for language learning? Modern Language Journal, 87(4), 534–545.

Canavan, A., & Zipperlen, G. (1996). CALLFRIEND American English-Non-Southern Dialect. Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia, 10(1).

Clift, R. (2016). Conversation Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

Enfield, N. J., & Sidnell, J. (2017). On the concept of action in the study of interaction. Discourse Studies, 19(5), 515–535.

Heritage, J. (2007). Intersubjectivity and progressivity in references to persons (and places). In N. J. Enfield & T. Stivers (Eds.), Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural and Social Perspectives (pp. 255–280). Cambridge University Press.

Pekarek Doehler, S. (2011). Emergent grammar for all practical purposes: the on-line formatting of left and right dislocations in French conversation. In P. Auer & S. Pfänder (Eds.), Constructions: Emergent and Emerging (pp. 45–87). De Gruyter.

Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on Conversation (Vols. 1-2). Blackwell

Sacks, H., & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology (pp. 15–21). Irvington.

Schegloff, E. A. (2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis (Volume 1). Cambridge University Press.

Additional References:

Auer, P. (1984). Referential problems in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics, 8(5), 627–648.

Moerman, M. (1988). Talking Culture: Ethnography and Conversation Analysis. University of Pennsylvania.

Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. B. (2017). Transcribing for Social Research. Sage.