Lindstroem2017
| Lindstroem2017 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | INCOLLECTION |
| Key | Lindstroem2017 |
| Author(s) | Anna Lindström |
| Title | Accepting remote proposals |
| Editor(s) | Geoffrey Raymond, Gene H. Lerner, John Heritage |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Remote Proposals, Responses, Alignment, Grammar And Interaction, Conversation Analysis, Sequence Organization, Swedish Conversation |
| Publisher | John Benjamins |
| Year | 2017 |
| Language | English |
| City | Amsterdam / Philadelphia |
| Month | |
| Journal | |
| Volume | |
| Number | |
| Pages | 125–142 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1075/pbns.273.07lin |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | Enabling Human Conduct: Studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This study focuses on the preferred sequence trajectory of remote proposals. A remote proposal is a request, invitation, or related proposal that cannot be immediately satisfied. The data consists of 34 remote proposal sequences drawn from recordings of Swedish telephone conversations. The analysis shows that although remote proposals are formatted as yes no interrogatives, an affirmative response token is insufficient as a claim of alignment with the proposal. An additional unit of talk is required where the accepter enacts a stance that demonstrates a commitment to fulfill the remote proposal.
Notes
