Difference between revisions of "Schegloff2010a"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Emanuel A. Schegloff; |Title=Some Other “Uh(m)”s’ |Tag(s)=EMCA; Uhm |Key=Schegloff2010a |Year=2010 |Journal=Discourse and Society...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{BibEntry | {{BibEntry | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
| − | |Author(s)=Emanuel A. Schegloff; | + | |Author(s)=Emanuel A. Schegloff; |
| − | |Title=Some Other “Uh(m) | + | |Title=Some Other “Uh(m)”s |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Uhm | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Uhm; Sequence organization; |
|Key=Schegloff2010a | |Key=Schegloff2010a | ||
|Year=2010 | |Year=2010 | ||
| − | |Journal=Discourse | + | |Journal=Discourse Processes |
|Volume=47 | |Volume=47 | ||
|Number=2 | |Number=2 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=130–174 |
| − | |Abstract=Recent work on the occurrence of “uh” and “uhm” in ordinary talk-in-interaction | + | |URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01638530903223380 |
| − | is concerned almost exclusively with its relation to trouble in the speech | + | |DOI=10.1080/01638530903223380 |
| − | + | |Abstract=Recent work on the occurrence of “uh” and “uhm” in ordinary talk-in-interaction is concerned almost exclusively with its relation to trouble in the speech production process. After touching briefly on this environment of occurrence, this conversation-analytic article focuses attention on several interactional environments in which “uh(m)” figures in other ways—most extensively on its use to indicate the “reason-for-the-interaction's-launching.” The underlying theme is that accounts for what gets done and gets understood in talk-in-interaction must take into account not only its composition, but also its position—not only with respect to the grammar of sentences, but also with respect to the organization of turns at talk, of action sequences encompassing multiple turns at talk, and of occasions of talk, all of which are demonstrably oriented to by speakers in their production of the talk and by recipients in their analyzing of the talk. | |
| − | conversation-analytic article focuses attention on several interactional environments | ||
| − | in which “uh(m)” | ||
| − | “reason-for-the- | ||
| − | what gets done and gets understood in talk-in-interaction must take into account not | ||
| − | only its composition, but also its position—not only with respect to the grammar | ||
| − | of sentences, but also with respect to the organization of turns at talk, of action | ||
| − | sequences encompassing multiple turns at talk, and of occasions of talk, all of | ||
| − | which are demonstrably oriented to by speakers in their production of the talk and | ||
| − | by recipients in their analyzing of the talk. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 07:54, 25 November 2019
| Schegloff2010a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Schegloff2010a |
| Author(s) | Emanuel A. Schegloff |
| Title | Some Other “Uh(m)”s |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Uhm, Sequence organization |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2010 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Discourse Processes |
| Volume | 47 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 130–174 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/01638530903223380 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Recent work on the occurrence of “uh” and “uhm” in ordinary talk-in-interaction is concerned almost exclusively with its relation to trouble in the speech production process. After touching briefly on this environment of occurrence, this conversation-analytic article focuses attention on several interactional environments in which “uh(m)” figures in other ways—most extensively on its use to indicate the “reason-for-the-interaction's-launching.” The underlying theme is that accounts for what gets done and gets understood in talk-in-interaction must take into account not only its composition, but also its position—not only with respect to the grammar of sentences, but also with respect to the organization of turns at talk, of action sequences encompassing multiple turns at talk, and of occasions of talk, all of which are demonstrably oriented to by speakers in their production of the talk and by recipients in their analyzing of the talk.
Notes
