One of the aspects of conversation that I find interesting is repair. This is the act of clearing up problems of communication (i.e. speaking, hearing, understanding) and in CA is usually defined in terms of who initiates the repair and who ultimately resolves the confusion. In the conversation from the handout about the shopping center, this can be seen in lines 15-17. In 15, person C mistakenly asks about a typewriter instead of a tape recorder. Before A can even finish the word, B has already recognized the possible confusion and works to repair it. In 16, B initiates the repair by correcting C. Ultimately, C follows B's advice and self-corrects, effectively completing the repair.
This week we discussed the role of extralinguistic communication in creating an equal opportunity for members of a conversation to have the floor. We discussed several models for how silence in conversation is negotiated by the members of the group, including deferential nodding that maximizes the amount of communication even during silence and an aversion to silence that leads some to finish a speaker's sentence.
Personally, I can identify with the method of providing feedback in silences that let the speaker know I am listening. That is, when acting as a listener, I feel the need to fill in the silences left by the speaker with affirmations such as "uh huh" or "oh yeah?" This not only eliminates silences, but also reaffirms the status of the speaker has having the floor. I am communicating that I am listening and understanding the story, while still maintaining my deference of the floor to the speaker.
Do you think these methods are truly cultural? Or can anyone provide exceptions (i.e. americans who nod and smile)? What are your conversational styles?
Our discussion of conversational implicature and relevance theory/grice's maxims made me think of the common practice among parents or caregivers of spelling out a word in order to avoid stating it for fear of an adverse reaction from a child (or possibly pet). For example, here's a mock conversation between two parents:
A: "We should take the kids out for something fun"
B: "Ok, but lets not get i-c-e-c-r-e-a-m"
or between pet owners
A: "What's wrong with Fido?"
B: "I think he wants a t-r-e-a-t, but I already gave him 3 earlier."
In these examples, although B is flouting the maxim of manner by spelling out a word instead of pronouncing it, A is able to understand the meaning by assuming that the speaker is following the principles of relevance.
As you probably noticed while traversing campus this week, the genocide/pro-life activists set up some interesting displays near the walkway between chem-phys and Whitehall CB. The reason I bring this up is that they also set up a perimeter of warning signs that read something like "danger, graphic photos of genocide ahead".
Now, as we know, this usage of 'ahead' is an example of deixis of place. That is, upon reading the sign, one knows in which direction the pictures will be in relation to themselves and the sign. Interestingly, the activists failed to understand this concept, as the signs yesterday were all facing the pictures. For example, if you were to walk up from the king library towards the classroom building, you would see the backs of the signs. If you were to walk from CB towards the King library, you would be able to read the sign, but the pictures would be behind you, not in front of you.
Maybe this was an attempt at social commentary? or just a lack of observation? What do you think?
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
