Transitional onset overlap
| Encyclopedia of Terminology for CA and IL: Transitional onset overlap | |
|---|---|
| Author(s): | Robert Prettner (Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands) (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6446-9965) |
| To cite: | Prettner, Robert. (2023). Transitional overlap onset. In Alexandra Gubina, Elliott M. Hoey & Chase Wesley Raymond (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Terminology for Conversation Analysis and Interactional Linguistics. International Society for Conversation Analysis (ISCA). DOI: [] |
Transitional overlap (also transitional overlap onset, or simply transitional onset) refers to the initiation and production of talk by a next speaker near a possible transition-relevance place (TRP) while a current speaker extends their turn. Transitional onset occurs when a second speaker acts upon syntactic completeness, and thus possible turn completeness, of a first speaker’s utterance (Jefferson, 1984). Given that there is some flexibility as to when a turn could be considered transition-ready, sub-types of transitional overlap can be distinguished depending on the point of onset relative to the TRP. Drew (2009) identifies three distinct points for transitional onset:
(i) In the space between two turn-constructional units (TCUs) of a current speaker, as transition space onset. For instance, Emma’s turn reached a point of possible completion after “or not” in line 2, but opts to extend her turn beyond that point. Simultaneously, Nan responds to just finished TCU in line 3, leading to overlapping talk at the TRP.
[NB:II:25] (adapted from Drew 2009: 79) 01 Emm: I do too I shoulda had’m drop me off but I didn’t know 02 -> whether you were home or not [And] uh] 03 Nan: -> [Oh ] Em]ma why‘ncha call
(ii) During the last phrase, word or syllable of a TCU, namely last item onset. In line 6, Doreen initiates her turn just prior to a point of possible completion of a current speaker’s turn. It should be noted that Jefferson (1986) reserves the term ‘last-item onset’ for overlapping talk that coincides with the last word of a current speaker’s turn, whereas overlapping talk concerning less than a word of a current speaker’s TCU is referred to as ‘terminal onset’.
[Her:01:2:2] (adapted from Jefferson 1986: 157) 05 Jea: -> So well they won’t be here Boxing [day 06 Dor: -> [Oh well 07 that doesn’mattuh
(iii) After the transition-relevance place, just when a current speaker has started another TCU. This may be referred to as post continuation onset (Jefferson 1986) or post-transition onset (Drew 2009). In the example below, Emma’s turn reached a point of possible completion after “deeple dopot Sundee” in line 9. Just after she extends her turn (“so ‘e siz”), Lottie comes in at line 10, resulting in post-transition onset.
[NB:IV:4:4] (adapted from Jefferson 1986: 160) 08 Emm: c’z you see she w’z dependin on him taking ‘er 09 -> in tuh the L.A. deeple depot Sundee so [‘e siz] 10 Lot: -> [Ah’ll ] 11 take ‘er in
Since transitional overlap occurs as a result of routine turn-taking practices (cf. Sacks, et al. 1974), Jefferson (1984) argues that this type of overlap may also be seen as byproduct to speaker transition. As such, the placement of transitional overlap is best described as non-turn-competitive (Kurtic, et al. 2013; for prosodic-phonetic design of competitive turns, see overlap).
Additional Related Entries:
Cited References:
Drew, P. (2009). Quit talking while I'm interrupting: a comparison between positions of overlap onset in conversation. In M. Haakana, M. Laakso & J. Lindström (Eds.) Talk in Interaction: Comparative Dimensions (pp. 70-93). Finnish Literature Society.
Jefferson, G. (1984). Notes on some orderlinesses of overlap onset. In V. D’Urso (Ed.), Discourse Analysis and Natural Rhetoric (pp. 11–38). Cleup.
Jefferson, G. (1986). Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies, 9(2), 153–184.
Jefferson, G. (2004). A sketch of some orderly aspects of overlap in natural conversation. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation (pp. 43–59). John Benjamins.
Kurtic, E., Brown, G. J., & Wells, B. (2013). Resources for turn competition in overlapping talk. Speech Communication, 55, 721–743.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696–735.
Wells, B. & Macfarlane, S. (1998). Prosody as an interactional resource: turn-projection and overlap. Language and Speech, 41(3-4), 265–294.
Additional References:
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (1993). English Speech Rhythm: Form and Function in Everyday Verbal Interaction. John Benjamins.
French, P. & Local, J. (1983). Turn-competitive incomings. Journal of Pragmatics, 7, 17–38.
Lerner, G. H. (1989). Notes on overlap management in conversation: the case of delayed completion. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 53(2), 167–177.
Local, J., & Walker, G. (2005). Methodological imperatives for investigating the phonetic organization and phonological structures of spontaneous speech. Phonetica, 62(2-4), 120-130.
Local, J. K., Kelly, J., & Wells, W. H. (1986). Towards a phonology of conversation: turn-taking in Tyneside English. Journal of Linguistics, 22(2), 411-437.
Schegloff, E. A. (2000). Overlapping talk and the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language in Society, 29(1), 1–63.
