Abstract
This paper offers an exploratory Interactional Linguistic account of the role that inferences play in episodes of ordinary conversational interaction. To this end, it systematically reconsiders the conversational practice of using the lexico-syntactic format oh that’s right to implicitly claim “just-now” recollection of something previously known, but momentarily confused or forgotten. The analyses reveal that this practice typically occurs as part of a larger sequential pattern that the participants orient to and which serves as a procedure for dealing with, and generating an account for, one participant’s production of an inapposite action. As will be shown, the instantiation and progressive realization of this sequential procedure requires local inferential work from the participants. While some facets of this inferential work appear to be shaped by the particular context of the ongoing interaction, others are integral to the workings of the sequence as such. Moreover, the analyses suggest that participants’ understanding of oh that’s right as embodying an implicit memory claim rests on an inference which is based on a kind of semanticpragmatic compositionality. The paper thus illustrates how inferences in conversational interaction can be systematically studied and points to the merits of combining an interactional and a linguistic perspective.
References
Antaki, Charles. 2012. Affiliative and disaffiliative candidate understandings. Discourse Studies 14 (5). 531-547.10.1177/1461445612454074Search in Google Scholar
Bach, Kent. 2006. The top 10 misconceptions about implicature. http://userwww.sfsu.edu/kbach/TopTen.pdf (accessed 29 March 2017) published as: Bach, Kent. 2006. The top 10 misconceptions about implicature. In Birner, Betty J., Gregory Ward (eds.), Drawing the boundaries of meaning: Neo-Gricean studies in pragmatics and semantics in honor of Laurence R. Horn, 21-30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.80.03bacSearch in Google Scholar
Barnes, Scott E. 2011a. Claiming mutual stance: On the use of “that’s right” by a person with aphasia. Research on Language and Social Interaction 44 (4). 359-384.10.1080/08351813.2011.619312Search in Google Scholar
Barnes, Scott E. 2011b. Aphasia and topic talk: A case study. PhD thesis. Sydney, New South Wales: Macquarie University, Australia.Search in Google Scholar
Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar. 2008. Interactional linguistics. In Antos, Gerd, Eija Ventola. (eds.), in cooperation with Weber, T. Handbooks of Applied Linguistics: Handbook of Interpersonal Communication (Vol. 2). 77-105. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110211399.1.77Search in Google Scholar
Betz, Emma. 2014. Confirming and agreeing: Different uses of responsive ‘genau’ in German. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference on Conversation Analysis (ICCA-14), University of California, Los Angeles, 26 June.Search in Google Scholar
Betz, Emma. 2015. Indexing epistemic access through different confirmation formats: Uses of responsive (das) stimmt in German interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 87. 251-266.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.03.018Search in Google Scholar
Betz, Emma, Andrea Golato. 2008. Remembering relevant information and withholding relevant next actions: The German token ‘ach ja’. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1). 55-98.10.1080/08351810701691164Search in Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H. 1996. Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2016. Conversation Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca, Paul Drew, John Local. 2013. “Why that, now?”: Position and composition in interaction (or, don’t leave out the position in composition). In Kempson, Ruth, Christine Howes, Martin Orwin (eds.), Language, music and interaction, 211-232. London: College Publications.Search in Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2012. On affectivity and preference in responses to rejection. Text & Talk 32 (4). 453-457.10.1515/text-2012-0022Search in Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, Dagmar Barth-Weingarten. 2011. A system for transcribing talk-in-interaction: GAT 2 - Translated and adapted for English. Gesprächsforschung - Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 12. 1-51. http://www.gespraechsforschung-online.de/fileadmin/dateien/heft2011/px-gat2-englisch.pdf (accessed 27 April 2017)Search in Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, Margret Selting. 2001. Introducing Interactional Linguistics. In: Selting, Margret, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in Interactional Linguistics, 1-22. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sidag.10.02couSearch in Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, Margret Selting. 2018. Interactional Linguistics. Studying language in social interaction.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139507318Search in Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf. 2007. Grammatik und Semantik aus gesprächsanalytischer Sicht (Grammar and semantics from a conversation analytic perspective). Berlin, New York: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf. 2012. How does ‘cognition’ matter to the analysis of talk-in-interaction? Language Sciences 34. 746-767. Detges, Ulrich (n.d.). Implikaturen und Inferenzen. Sagen, Meinen und Verstehen; Sprachgebrauch und Sprachsystem. (Implicatures and inferences. Saying, meaning, understanding; Language use and language system.) https://www.academia.edu/11481145/Implikaturen_und_Inferenzen._Sagen_Meinen_und_Verstehen_Sprachgebrauch_und_Sprachsystem (accessed 29 March 2017)Search in Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1997. ‘Open’ class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of troubles in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 28 (1). 69-101.10.1016/S0378-2166(97)89759-7Search in Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 2005. Is confusion a state of mind? In te Molder, Hedwig, Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 161-183. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511489990.008Search in Google Scholar
Drew, Paul. 2017. The interface between pragmatics and conversation analysis. In press. In Illie, Cornelia, Neal R. Norrick (eds.), Pragmatics and its interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313847355_The_Interface_between_Pragmatics_and_Conversation_Analysis (accessed 29 March 2017)Search in Google Scholar
Enfield, Nick J. 2006. Social consequences of common ground. In Enfield, Nick J., Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 399-430. Oxford: Berg Publishers (Bloomsbury).10.4324/9781003135517-20Search in Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A., Sandra A. Thompson, Cecilia E. Ford, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen. 2013. Conversation analysis and linguistics. In Sidnell, Jack, Tanya Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, 726-740. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch36Search in Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1963. A conception of, and experiments with, “trust” as a condition of stable concerted actions. In Harvey, O.J. (ed.), Motivation and social interaction: Cognitive determinants, 187-238. New York: Ronald Press.Search in Google Scholar
Garfinkel, Harold. 1967. Studies in Ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Search in Google Scholar
Gumperz, John J. 1982. Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611834Search in Google Scholar
Haugh, Michael. 2017. Implicature and the inferential substrate. In Cap, Piotr, Marta Dynel (eds.), Implicitness: From lexis to discourse, 281-304. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.276.13hauSearch in Google Scholar
Hayano, Karou. 2013. Question design in conversation. In Sidnell, Jack, Tanya Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, 395-414. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch19Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984a. Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984b. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 299-345. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.020Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 1998. Oh-prefaced responses to inquiry. Language in Society 27. 291-334.10.1017/S0047404500019990Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2002. Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara A. Fox, Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), The language of turn and sequence, 196-224. New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2005. Cognition in discourse. In te Molder, Hedwig, Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 184-202. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511489990.009Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2012. Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (1). 1-29.10.1080/08351813.2012.646684Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2013a. Epistemics in conversation. In Sidnell, Jack, Tanya Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, 370-394. Malden, Mass.: Wiley Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch18Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2013b. Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies 15 (5). 551-578.10.1177/1461445613501449Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2015. Well-prefaced turns in English conversation: A conversation analytic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics 88. 88-104.10.1016/j.pragma.2015.08.008Search in Google Scholar
Hopper, Robert. 2005. A cognitive agnostic in Conversation Analysis: When do strategies affect spoken interaction? In te Molder, Hedwig, Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 134-158. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511489990.007Search in Google Scholar
Hutchby, Ian, Robin Wooffitt. 2008. Conversation Analysis: Principles, practices and applications (2nd edition). Cambridge: Polity Press.Search in Google Scholar
Keisanen, Tiina. 2007. Stancetaking as an interactional activity: Challenging the prior speaker. In Engelbretson, Robert (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 253-282. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.164.10keiSearch in Google Scholar
Koivisto, Aino. 2013. On the preference for remembering: Acknowledging an answer with Finnish Ai Nii(n) (“Oh That’s Right”). Research on Language and Social Interaction 46 (3). 277-297.10.1080/08351813.2013.810411Search in Google Scholar
Küttner, Uwe-A. 2016. That-initial turns in conversation - An interactional linguistic investigation of two formats for designedly tying a current turn to a prior. PhD thesis. Potsdam: University of Potsdam.Search in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813313Search in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2006a. Cognition at the heart of human interaction. Discourse Studies 8 (1). 85-93.10.1177/1461445606059557Search in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2006b. On the human “Interaction Engine”. In Enfield, Nick J., Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 39-69. Oxford: Berg Publishers (Bloomsbury).10.4324/9781003135517-3Search in Google Scholar
Levinson, Stephen C. 2013. Action formation and ascription. In Sidnell, Jack, Tanya Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, 103-130. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch6Search in Google Scholar
Local, John. 1996. Conversational phonetics: Some aspects of news receipts in everyday talk. In Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth, Margret Selting (eds.), Prosody in conversation: Interactional studies, 177-230. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511597862.007Search in Google Scholar
Macagno, Fabrizio. 2017. Defaults and inferences in interpretation. Journal of Pragmatics 117. 280-290.10.1016/j.pragma.2017.06.005Search in Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 2007. The TalkBank Project. In Beal, Joan C., Karen P. Corrigan, Hermann L. Moisl, (eds.), Creating and digitizing language corpora: Synchronic databases (Vol. 1), 163-180. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave-Macmillan.10.1057/9780230223936_7Search in Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984a. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 57-101. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008Search in Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984b. Pursuing a response. In Atkinson, J. Maxwell, John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, 152-163. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 2017. Inferring the purpose of a prior query and responding accordingly. In Raymond, Geoffrey, Gene H. Lerner, John Heritage (eds.), Enabling human conduct: Studies of talk-in-interaction in honor of Emanuel A. Schegloff, 61-76. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.273.04pomSearch in Google Scholar
Potter, Jonathan, Hedwig te Molder. 2005. Talking cognition: Mapping and making the terrain. In te Molder, Hedwig, Jonathan Potter (eds.), Conversation and cognition, 1-54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511489990.002Search in Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2003. Grammar and social organization: Yes/no interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68 (3). 939-967.10.2307/1519752Search in Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey. 2010. Prosodic variation in responses: The case of type-conforming responses to yes/no interrogatives. In Barth-Weingarten, Dagmar, Elizabeth Reber, Margret Selting (eds.), Prosody in interaction, 109-129. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/sidag.23.12raySearch in Google Scholar
Robinson, Jeffrey D. 2009. Managing counterinformings: An interactional practice for soliciting information that facilitates reconciliation of speakers’ incompatible positions. Human Communication Research 35. 561-587.10.1111/j.1468-2958.2009.01363.xSearch in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey 1987. On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation. In Button, Graham, John R.E. Lee (eds.), Talk and social organization, 54-69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey. 1995. Lectures on conversation vol. 1 (ed. by Gail Jefferson). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.10.1002/9781444328301Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff. 1979. Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons in conversation and their interaction. In Psathas, George (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in Ethnomethodology, 15-21. New York: Irvington.Search in Google Scholar
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, Gail Jefferson. 1974. A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50. 696-735.10.1353/lan.1974.0010Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1986. The routine as achievement. Human Studies 9 (2-3). 111-151.10.1007/BF00148124Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1990. On the organization of sequences as a source of “coherence” in talk-in-interaction. In Dorval, Bruce (ed.), Conversational organization and its development, 51-77. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1991. Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition. In Resnick, Lauren B., John M. Levine, Stephanie D. Teasley (eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, 150-171. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.10.1037/10096-007Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1995a. Discourse as an interactional achievement III: The omnirelevance of action. Research on Language and Social Interaction 28 (3). 185-211.10.1207/s15327973rlsi2803_2Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1995b. Introduction. In Sacks, Harvey, Lectures on conversation vol. 1 (ed. by Gail Jefferson), ix-lxii. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996a. Turn Organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Ochs, Elinor, Emanuel A.10.1017/CBO9780511620874.002Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and Grammar, 52-133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996b. Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology 102 (1). 161-216.10.1086/230911Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1997. Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes 23. 499-545.10.1080/01638539709545001Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2005. On integrity in inquiry... of the investigated, not the investigator. Discourse Studies 7 (4-5).455-80.10.1177/1461445605054402Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2006. Interaction: The infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted. In Enfield, Nick J., Stephen C. Levinson (eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition and interaction, 70-96. Oxford: Berg Publishers (Bloomsbury).10.4324/9781003135517-4Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2007. Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in Conversation Analysis (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511791208Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2010. Commentary on Stivers and Rossano: “Mobilizing response”. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43 (1). 38-48.10.1080/08351810903471282Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Harvey Sacks. 1973. Opening up closings. Semiotica 8 (4). 289-327.10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289Search in Google Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, Harvey Sacks. 1977. The preference for self-correction and the organization of repair in conversation. Language 53. 361-382.10.1353/lan.1977.0041Search in Google Scholar
Schütz, Alfred. 1945. On multiple realities. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 5 (4). 533-576.10.2307/2102818Search in Google Scholar
Schütz, Alfred. 1962. Collected papers vol. 1 - The problem of social reality. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Search in Google Scholar
Shaw, Chloe, Jonathan Potter, Alexa Hepburn. 2015. Advice-implicative actions: Using interrogatives and assessments to deliver advice in mundane conversation. Discourse Studies 17 (3). 317-342.10.1177/1461445615571199Search in Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2010. Conversation Analysis: An introduction. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.21832/9781847692849-020Search in Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2013. Basic conversation analytic methods. In Sidnell, Jack, Tanya Stivers (eds.), The Handbook of Conversation Analysis, 77-99. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001.ch5Search in Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2014. The architecture of intersubjectivity revisited. In Enfield, Nick J, Paul Kockelmann, Jack Sidnell (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology, 364-399. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139342872.018Search in Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack, Tanya Stivers. 2013. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118325001Search in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan, Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2005. Modified repeats: One method for asserting primary rights from second position. Research on Language and Social Interaction 38 (2). 131-158.10.1207/s15327973rlsi3802_1Search in Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, Jakob Steensig. 2011. Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In Stivers, Tanya, Lorenza Mondada, Jakob Steensig (eds.), The morality of knowledge in conversation, 3-24. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511921674.002Search in Google Scholar
Walker, Traci, Paul Drew, John Local. 2011. Responding indirectly. Journal of Pragmatics 43 (9). 2434-2451.10.1016/j.pragma.2011.02.012Search in Google Scholar
Wilkinson, Sue, Celia Kitzinger. 2006. Surprise as an interactional achievement: Reaction tokens in conversation. Social Psychology Quarterly 69 (2). 150-182.10.1177/019027250606900203Search in Google Scholar
© 2018 Uwe-A. Küttner, published by De Gruyter Open
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
