Difference between revisions of "Gibson2005a"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=David R. Gibson; |Title=Opportunistic Interruptions: Interactional Vulnerabilities Deriving from Linearization |Tag(s)=EMCA; Interrupti...") |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 07:33, 25 February 2017
| Gibson2005a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Gibson2005a |
| Author(s) | David R. Gibson |
| Title | Opportunistic Interruptions: Interactional Vulnerabilities Deriving from Linearization |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Interruptions, Press briefings, Courtroom Interaction |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2005 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Social Psychology Quarterly |
| Volume | 68 |
| Number | 4 |
| Pages | 316-337 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Speaking involves "linearizing" a message into a string of words. This process leaves us
vulnerable to being interrupted in such a way that the aborted turn is a misrepresenta- tion of the intended message. Further, because we linearize our messages in standard ways, we are recurrently vulnerable to interruptions at particular turn-construction junctures, and consequently to recurrent types of self-misrepresentation. These vulnera- bilities can be exploited strategically when an interrupter responds to the truncated turn in a way that might not have been possible if the turn had run to completion: I refer to interruptions of this sort as "opportunistic." I explore the connection between lin- earization and opportunistic interruptions using data from two institutional settings characterized by confrontational exchanges: Supreme Court oral arguments and Pentagon press briefings. The extracts illustrate how speakers open themselves to opportunistic interruptions through projection of incipient options consequences, opinions, and restrictions.
Notes
