University of New Hampshire Examining Different Adjacency Pairs Worksheet Now using your transcripts you will start to examine the different kinds of adjac

University of New Hampshire Examining Different Adjacency Pairs Worksheet Now using your transcripts you will start to examine the different kinds of adjacency pairs there are in interaction. You will identify 3 different pairs using extracts from your transcript. You will write 400-600 words to identify two different kinds of adjacency pairs, linking back to the textbook and the assigned readings. You will be required to use the APA citation style and give a bibliography. The transcript is included in the word count.

This exercise will assess you on your understanding of TCUs, adjacency pairs, actions and transcription.

You will include

You will use recordings from Assignment 1 Recording assignment

You will include 2 different transcripts, from two different students. One of these may be yours, I will grade you on whether you have taken my feedback. This requires you to do new Jeffersonian transcripts, symbols included. You must include 1 TCU before the target adjacency pair and one TCU after.

There is no ‘correct list’ of actions, while you may choose actions and pairs you see identified in the readings you may also identify other kinds of social action we engage in. In terms of labeling actions most actions will be verbs (though not all verbs are actions).

For each adjacency pair identify

1. What line number is the FPP? What action is the FPP? What condition does the FPP set up?

2. What line number is the SPP? What action is the SPP? What condition does the SPP satisfy?

3. Quoting the turn AFTER each SPP demonstrate how the other speaker treats the SPP as that action (e.g. if the SPP is a ‘story receipt’ then how does the next person treat the story as ‘being responded to’? if the SPP is a return greeting how does the next participant act as if mutual greetings have occurred?)

Quote and cite from the readings, include a reference list.

In terms of formatting I’ve included this example from a different course (With different instructions and a longer wordcount) you may not use the transcripts or recordings from this example (doing so will get you a 0). CMN 580: Lying, Deception, and the Truth
May 30th, 2020
Transcription 1:
Robert Pattinson Makes Up A Story About A Dead Clown | TODAY
In this interview with Matt Lauer, actor Robert Pattinson tells a story about seeing a clown die when
Lauer asks him if he ever dreamed of running away with the circus as a kid.
Video Length: 00:46.97
Transcribed section: 00:12.00 – 00:43.10
LAU: Matt Lauer (Host) PAT: Robert Pattinson UNK: Unknown person
01.LAU:
02.
03.PAT:
04.
?
05.
06.
07.LAU:
08.UNK:
09.LAU:
10.LAU:
11.LAU:
12.
13.PAT:
14.PAT:
15.
16.UNK:
17.LAU:
18.PAT:
19.LAU:
20.PAT:
21.PAT: ?
22.PAT:
23.(0.4)
24.LAU:
25.PAT:
26.PAT:
Did you have any of those dreams as a kid?
(0.5)
Run?ning away and joining the circus¿
=n ?uh::h no.
the first time I went to a circus somebody di?:ed.
one of the clow[ns died]. °an sa° hh he[h ] heh .hh
[tah hh ha hh]
[ha]
[HA] (person in background)
[Alright]=
=I’m not lettin that go.
Ha:ow did the clo::own D:IE.
(0.2)
His li’le car exploded.(0.4)
=The joke car e-exploded on him.
(0.4)
(chatter or laughter in background)
[You be]ing se?rious ?about th[is ?ya?]
[ha hh]
[yah serious:ly. .hh]
=So hh [so did that] kind-o[f r]uin the circus for Yo:u?
[°ha° hh .hh]
[.hh]
=It waz_ il lik- my parents had to like (li:eh-)=
=everybody ran ?o:ut. (0.2) >It was, it was< terrifying. ?Biz[ar:re. What a] bizar:re way to start ?the interview. [hh hh ha ha ha] [(inaudibl)e .hh]= =ahe only time I’d been to ah circus. Transcription 2: Ryan Lochte Talks To Billy Bush About Being Held Up At Gunpoint In this interview with Billy Bush, professional athlete Ryan Lochte tells Bush about his experience being held up at gunpoint in Brazil. Video Length: 04:05.26 Transcribed Section: 02:10.1 – 02:59.6 BUS: Billy Bush (interviewer) LOC: Ryan Lochte 01. BUS: 02. 03. 04. LOC: 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 32. 33. 34. 35: BUS: 36: Discussion: ? ? ? ? What happe- Wa wa- who were you with¿ =what time of night¿ =Who¿ pulled ?you over. Uh I was with a couple of ah swi:mmers¿ (.) U::h °w-were coming back from a friend’s house.° (.) a:nd we got pulled o:ver? in ou::r (0.5) =ta?xi¿_ (1.1) a:nd (.) these gu:?yst (.) came out with ah ba:dge¿ (.) >a police badgedown on the groundthey got down< on the gro:und_ (.) I refused¿ (.) I >was like< we didn’t do anything ?wr::ong¿ so::(1.5) I’m not getting down on the gro:und¿ and then the gu:y (.) pulled out his ?g:un, (0.7) he cocked ?it (.) put it to my forehe:ad (.) and-he say gat do:wn on the ground (.) and I was like- (.) I put my hands up (.) >I was like< whatever. (0.7) (°eh-h-°) (0.5) He (.) he took o:ur ?money, (.) he took my wallet_ (0.3) =and th:e[nn][=so] he left your cell phone. he left your credentials. In each of the transcripts above a famous person in being interviewed on camera with the understanding that this is being seen by a larger audience. In both interviews there are a number of “uhs” and “ums” spoken (lines indicated with ?). While Ums and Uhs have typically been treated as “uncertainty” on the speaker’s part, Rendle-Short (2004) argues that these are not random and instead can function as discourse markers which indicate the start of a sentence, story, etc in certain environments. The environment this research was done was academic seminars, which like TV interviews involves a person putting on a public performance in order to tell a story or convey information. Position of the uh or um within the discourse also influences its importance as a structure providing word much like a discourse marker such as “okay” or “so” would be used.(Rendle-Short, 2004). In the first transcript, line 04, Pattinson uses an elongated u::h to begin his story. In Rendle-Short’s 2004 analysis, “um systematically occurs in predictable environments where discourse markers occur”. This can be seen as similar to the way “okay so” would signal to the audience that the speaker plans to continue their story. Pattinson’s “u::h” in line 04 is also marked by a higher pitch, drawing attention to that there is more to come. This same use can be seen in transcript 2 of Ryan Lochte using Um or Uh (or a combination) in lines 04, 06, and 16. Again these utterances are as prominent, if not more prominent than the rest of the statement indicating that um is an intentional device to the listener that the story will be continuing. In contrast, at the end of line 21 of the Pattinson interview he uses “eh” (or uh) as part of a word repair or maybe sentence correction. This type of repair is also seen in word stretches as in line 22 of the Lochte interview. Rendle-Short (2004) notes that “Repair sequences are quite distinctive in that they are associated with uncertainties and dysfluencies of speech production” but that at least in the case of seminar talk they are much less frequent (only 13.3% in her study). Which can also be anecdotally seen in the cases transcribed here. In summary, Rendle-Short argues that to simply put uhs and ums into the category of repairs or fillers would not match the data that show they are much more often systematically used to signal to the listener that a statement is following like a discourse marker does. In short that “talk is highly ordered and structured….nothing can be dismissed as accidental”. References: Have, P. (1999). Transcribing talk in interaction. Chapter 6 in Doing conversation analysis: A practical guide (pp. 75-98) Rendle-Short, Johanna. “Showing Structure.” Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) Pragmatics, vol. 14, no. 4, Jan. 2004, pp. 479–498., doi:10.1075/prag.14.4.04ren. Reynolds, E. (2020). Day 9 Transcription Symbols Lecture. MyCourses CMN 580. Retrieved from https://mycourses.unh.edu/courses/69397/pages/day-9-finding-the-orderintalk?module_item_id=1478154 Michela and Nick,0:18 01 Nic: perfect= 02 Mic: =I really (backed) on (.) c(h)ause I took pho:to:s? of (.) 03 what:? (.) he said in class yesterday: ¿ 04 Nic: yeah 05 Mic: well that was so funny with the (.) (beg) at the end: ¿ 06 hh he he he he= 06 Nic: = mm (0.5) 07 Mic: = hhhhh (0.3) hh 08 09 (1.5) Nic: 10 11 yeah it was um: (0.3) Nic: yeah I took a photo- I think I took photos of a couple of 12 tho::se um, 13 (0.5) 10 Nic: 11 12 ((Chewing)) (2.0) Nic: 13 14 Nic: e::y like I- what an example of one e::y was or something like tha:t (0.6) Mic: 17 18 I was really hoping he would like show us like an, (0.3) 15 16 slides too lately:. of one what:? (0.5) Nic: 19 of like an- I wish- I was ey- >I was hoping he’d show us the
example< of modern ey: to the passed out class= 20 Mic: =mm 21 Nic: =>but well remember they:-< uh- the well done, (0.9) 22 23 u[ Mic: hm: ] (0.3) really well done:, (0.4) no: (.) powerpoint. [project,] yeah. Old and young man talking about a trip,0:00 01 Boy: 02 03 (0.5) Gra: 04 05 Gra: and uh were nice and qui::et and went up to here (0.4) Boy: 08 09 Was ve::ry: ni:ce I was (.) rea:lly ama::zed (0.4) 06 07 SO, how was your trip? Where did you sta:y? (0.6) Gra: 10 We sta:y in a (0.5) 11 Gra: (trailer valley) in ( 12 Boy: Is that near Bristol? (0.9) 13 Gra: It’s above Bristol but it’s very close to Bristol (.) 14 15 [ Boy: yes camping 17 (0.7) Boy: 19 20 ] [There’s] a guy from work. He said that (.) his son goes 16 18 )? (0.7) and he said that he’s is in Bristol (0.3) Boy: 21 And the ( ) was in I- I said thought it was- (0.9) 22 Boy: nee- (.) I thought it was Bristol I actually live by 23 Gra: (Where) to (Nash) (remember them)? 24 25 (0.4) Gra: 26 27 (0.7) Gra: 28 29 there’s o:nly li:ke twe:nty mi::les from (0.7) Gra Bristol. The Turn Taking System 5 Chapter contents Introduction The turn constructional component Turn allocation component Summary of turn allocation procedures Facts about conversation explained by the turn-taking system Turn-taking in talk in institutional settings Student activities Recommended sources Copyright © 2013. Bloomsbury Publishing. All rights reserved. Introduction There are some activities that participants can or should do at the same time. For example, applauding is most effectively done in a group, with everyone in the audience coordinating their actions so that the applause becomes a collective rather than an individual response (Atkinson, 1984). Booing has a similar interactional structure. While an individual may start the process by booing independently, “successful” booing involves a group of people taking up the charge and booing together in a coordinated fashion (Clayman, 1993a). However, many of the activities we participate in are not successfully accomplished unless people take turns. For example, we take turns when playing a game of cards or a game of baseball. When we go shopping, some stores may ask us to take a ticket with a number on it in order to determine our turn to be served. When going to a movie we may simply wait in line, with the people at the front of the line going in first. Turn taking is also the convention in social actions involving talk. In some situations and types of activities the rules of turn taking are very explicit and routinized. For example, in a debate, the order of speakers is based on the role each participant will play in the debate. The person taking the “pro” position speaks first, and the person taking the “con” position speaks second. In the television game show “Jeopardy” the first contestant to ring the buzzer gets to speak. Turn taking procedures are also used in informal interactions in every day settings. The methods used to organize the exchange of turns at talk may vary with culture, the identity or social standing of the participants, and the nature of the activity the talk is embedded in. For example, in some societies there may be turn taking rules based on social status. Elders may be Garcia, A. C. (2013). Introduction to interaction : Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from unh on 2020-07-03 19:09:14. expected to speak first, men or women may be expected to speak first, or people with higher rank may be expected to speak first. Turn taking systems can also be related to social role or position in an institutional hierarchy. For example, if you were a private in the army, you would probably not speak to a general until he or she addressed you first. However, in ordinary conversation, the order of turns at talk is flexible and emerges during the interaction rather than being predetermined. In 1974 Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson published a highly influential article on how turn taking in conversation is organized (Google Scholar lists over 5,000 citations for this article). Sacks et al. (1974) based their analysis of turn taking on a collection of tape recordings of many different conversations. The turn taking system they found operating in ordinary conversation solves two problems for interactants: 1. How do people know when to begin a new turn? Listeners pay attention to how speakers structure their turn as they are talking in order to figure out when the speaker is probably “done.” This is what Sacks et al. (1974) refer to as the “turn constructional” component of the turn taking system. 2. If there are more than two participants in a conversation, how do people determine which of them will speak next? Sacks et al. (1974) refer to this as the “turn allocational” component of the turn taking system. The turn constructional component Copyright © 2013. Bloomsbury Publishing. All rights reserved. Sacks et al. (1974) note that turns at talk are made up of grammatical units of a variety of lengths. A complete turn at talk can be constructed out of one or more of the following types of units: a word, phrase, clause or sentence. Listeners try to project the possible completion of these units, in order to locate an appropriate place to take a turn at talk. Excerpt 1 is from a conversation between students in a college classroom. Excerpt 1 illustrates turns constructed out of a range of different types and sizes of units: Excerpt 1: Conversation between Students 11 Roy: What year are you? 12 (0.2) 13 Cindy: I’m uh graduate student. 14 (0.2) 15 Roy: Oh really! 16 (0.1) 17 Cindy: °Yeah.° 18 (0.2) 19 Roy: (Well okay) s’you uh soc major? 20 (0.3) 21 Cindy: Yeup. 22 (0.6) 23 Roy: Okay, (0.2) so u:m, what exactly do you plan on doing with 24 (that?) 25 (0.2) 26 Cindy: Well, I’d like to teach!, one of these days,… Garcia, A. C. (2013). Introduction to interaction : Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from unh on 2020-07-03 19:09:14. Constructing a turn out of a single word In line 21 of Excerpt 1 we see Cindy using a single word to construct a turn at talk which is possibly complete in the context of Roy’s question in the previous turn (line 19). Sacks et al. (1974) argue that turn transition is relevant at the end of such possibly complete units. Note that whether transition is relevant depends not just on the words produced or on the grammatical structure of the utterance. The speaker’s intonation and the timing of their actions may also project whether their utterance is reaching completion or not. For example, Cindy’s answer in line 21 was produced with “period” intonation (it sounded as if she was done). In addition, note that she stopped speaking after producing this one word, thus leaving space in the conversation for Roy to speak. Just because a turn constructional unit is possibly complete does not mean that turn transition will necessarily occur, only that it is relevant at this point in the interaction. Constructing a turn with a complete sentence There are several turns at talk in Excerpt 1 which are constructed out of grammatically complete sentences (lines 11, 13, 19, and 23–4). If you were a participant in this conversation, and you were listening to Cindy produce the turn in line 13 (“I’m uh graduate student.”), you probably would not be able to project the completion of Cindy’s utterance after the first word (“I’m”) or the second word (“uh”). However, after the third word (“graduate”), you might be able to project the completion of her utterance, so if Roy’s response (“Oh really!”) had been placed immediately after “graduate,” it would not have seemed out of place. Sacks et al. (1974) found that overlaps in speakers’ talk often occurs at a point in the utterance where the current speaker’s turn completion can be projected. In this instance, Roy waits until Cindy completes her turn and stops speaking before responding at a point where transition in speakership is clearly relevant. Copyright © 2013. Bloomsbury Publishing. All rights reserved. Constructing a turn from a phrase or sentence fragment Incomplete sentences (such as phrases, clauses, or other sentence fragments) are typically unacceptable in written language but are acceptable (and common) in spoken interaction, assuming that they are produced in an appropriate interactional context. Excerpt 2 shows Ann constructing a turn out of a sentence fragment. In the context of a response to Mark’s “that’s thuh longest three minutes of my [life.]” (line 1), Ann’s sentence fragment “mine too:!,” (line 4) is comprehensible as a complete turn at talk. Since utterances are interpreted in the interactional context they occur within, we can infer that Ann is referring to the same thing that Mark has referred to in his utterance—whatever it is that makes it “the longest three minutes” of Mark’s life.” Although it is an incomplete sentence, line 4 is not an incomplete turn. Excerpt 2: Conversation between Students 1 Mark: °that’s thuh longest three minutes of my 2 Ann: [life.°] [eh ] HENH! hih Garcia, A. C. (2013). Introduction to interaction : Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com Created from unh on 2020-07-03 19:09:14. 3 4 (1.1) Ann: -> nhh mine too:! eh hinh hinh
In Excerpt 3 there are two examples of sentence fragments being used as complete turns at talk.
After Ann says “oh! he was hidding on ev’ry body!” (line 1), a pause elapses and then Barb
responds with laughter (line 3). Ann then produces another turn at talk: “=ev’ry girl.=” in line
4. This sentence fragment is hearable as a repair of her prior utterance, specifying that it is
only the girls that he was “hitting on” rather than literally “everybody.” After some more talk
and laughter responses (lines 5 and 6), Barb produces a turn which assesses the person Ann is
talking about: “.hh [dir ]dy old man!” (line 7). While not a complete sentence, given the
interactional context it occurs within this fragment is hearable as a possibly complete turn
constructional unit.
Excerpt 3: Conversation between Students
1
Alice:
oh! he was hidding on ev’ry body!
2
( )
3
Barb:
huh=huh=
4
Alice: ->
=ev’ry girl.=
5
Barb:
=unh=hunh=hunh! .hh (some old man) hhhh
6
Alice:
yeah=unh honh honh honh!
7
Barb: -> .hh
[dir ]dy old man!
8
Ann:
[yeah]
9
( )
10 Barb:
.nhh! .n[hh!]
11 Ann:
[oye]:ah!o ( ) ooh that was super fun though.o=
Copyright © 2013. Bloomsbury Publishing. All rights reserved.
Summary of turn constructional component
These examples have shown that speakers can construct a complete turn at talk out of an
utterance of any length or any combination of words, phrases or sentences. Whether an
utterance is possibly complete or not depends on its interactional context. Because members of
a culture share an understanding of how turns at talk are constructed, listeners can analyze a
speaker’s utterance-in-progress and “project” when the turn will be possibly complete (Sacks
et al., 1974). This projectability enables participants to identify viable places to take a turn,
thus minimizing both interruptions and gaps (extended silences) in talk.
The turn constructional component of the turn taking system for conversation shows how
listeners know when a current speaker might be reaching completion of their utterance.
However, if there are several participants in the interaction, which of the two or more
“listeners” will be the one to speak next? We now turn to the problem of turn allocation—how
participants work out who will be the one to take the next turn at talk.
Turn allocation component
Garcia, A. C. (2013). Introduction to interaction : Understanding talk in formal and informal settings. Retrieved from http://ebookcentral.proquest.com
Created from unh on 2020-07-03 19:09:14.
The turn allocation component of the turn taking system explains how participants determine
who will speak next once a transition relevance place has been reached. In the following quote
Sacks et al. (1974) describe the turn allocation process in ordinary conversation:
Copyright © 2013. Bloomsbury Publishing. All rights reserved.
The following seems to be a basic set of rules governing turn construction, providing for the allocation of a next turn
to one party, and co-ordinating transfer so as to minimize gap and overlap.
(1) For any turn, at the initial transition-relevance place of an initial turn-constructional unit:
(a) If the turn-so-far is so constructed as to involve the use of a ‘current speaker selects next’ technique, then the
party so selected has the right and is obliged to take next turn to speak; no others have such rights or obl…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment