Difference between revisions of "Raymond2017a"
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) m (Text replace - "Conversation analysis;" to "Conversation Analysis;") |
SaulAlbert (talk | contribs) |
||
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
|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= | + | |Key=Raymond2017a |
|Year=2017 | |Year=2017 | ||
|Journal=Journal of Pragmatics | |Journal=Journal of Pragmatics |
Latest revision as of 04:04, 29 July 2019
Raymond2017a | |
---|---|
BibType | ARTICLE |
Key | Raymond2017a |
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 |
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