Difference between revisions of "Kim2013a"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Hye Ri Stephanie Kim |Title=Retroactive indexing of relevance: the use of well in third position |Tag(s)=EMCA; |Key=Kim2013a |Year=2013...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Hye Ri Stephanie Kim | |Author(s)=Hye Ri Stephanie Kim | ||
|Title=Retroactive indexing of relevance: the use of well in third position | |Title=Retroactive indexing of relevance: the use of well in third position | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; |
|Key=Kim2013a | |Key=Kim2013a | ||
|Year=2013 | |Year=2013 | ||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=46 | |Volume=46 | ||
|Number=2 | |Number=2 | ||
| − | |Pages= | + | |Pages=125–143 |
| + | |URL=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08351813.2013.780338 | ||
| + | |DOI=10.1080/08351813.2013.780338 | ||
| + | |Abstract=Using conversation analysis, this article describes the use of well-prefacing in third position after a question-response sequence. Well as a discourse marker has been examined extensively from various perspectives. In conversation analysis, well is described as indexing “dispreferredness” (Pomerantz, 1984) and “unstraightforwardness” (Schegloff & Lerner, 2009) in second position (e.g., responses to assessments and questions). By examining American and British English conversations, the present study investigates the use of well in a previously unexamined sequential position, third position, and demonstrates that the well: (a) retroactively marks the prior action (i.e., the question) as having been preliminary to the impending turn and (b) prospectively marks the impending turn as the reason for the question. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 14:35, 1 March 2016
| Kim2013a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Kim2013a |
| Author(s) | Hye Ri Stephanie Kim |
| Title | Retroactive indexing of relevance: the use of well in third position |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2013 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Research on Language and Social Interaction |
| Volume | 46 |
| Number | 2 |
| Pages | 125–143 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1080/08351813.2013.780338 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Using conversation analysis, this article describes the use of well-prefacing in third position after a question-response sequence. Well as a discourse marker has been examined extensively from various perspectives. In conversation analysis, well is described as indexing “dispreferredness” (Pomerantz, 1984) and “unstraightforwardness” (Schegloff & Lerner, 2009) in second position (e.g., responses to assessments and questions). By examining American and British English conversations, the present study investigates the use of well in a previously unexamined sequential position, third position, and demonstrates that the well: (a) retroactively marks the prior action (i.e., the question) as having been preliminary to the impending turn and (b) prospectively marks the impending turn as the reason for the question.
Notes
