Tanaka2008

From emcawiki
Revision as of 05:56, 26 May 2019 by PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Hiroko Tanaka; |Title=Delaying dispreferred responses in English: From a Japanese perspective |Tag(s)=EMCA; conversation analysis; prefe...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search
Tanaka2008
BibType ARTICLE
Key Tanaka2008
Author(s) Hiroko Tanaka
Title Delaying dispreferred responses in English: From a Japanese perspective
Editor(s)
Tag(s) EMCA, conversation analysis, preference organization, dispreferred response, word order, adverbial clause, epistemic phrase, discourse marker, copular construction, pseudocleft, repair
Publisher
Year 2008
Language English
City
Month
Journal Language in Society
Volume 37
Number 4
Pages 487-513
URL Link
DOI https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404508080743
ISBN
Organization
Institution
School
Type
Edition
Series
Howpublished
Book title
Chapter

Download BibTex

Abstract

This article employs conversation analysis to explore the interpenetration of grammar and preference organization in English conversation in comparison with a previous study for Japanese. Whereas varying the word order of major syntactic elements is a vital grammatical resource in Japanese for accomplishing the potentially universal task of delaying dispreferred responses to a range of first actions, it is found to have limited utility in English. A search for alternative operations and devices that conversationalists deploy for this objective in English points to several grammatical constructions that can be tailored to maximize the delay of dispreferred responses. These include the fronting of relatively mobile, syntactically “non-obligatory” elements of clause structure and the employment of various copular constructions. A close interdependence is observed between the rudimentary grammatical resources available in the two languages and the types of operations that are respectively enlisted for the implementation of the organization of preference.

Notes