Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T07:28:08.433Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Toward a model of members' methods for recognizing interruptions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Stephen O. Murray
Stephen O. Murray
Affiliation:
Instituto Obregón, San Francisco, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Simultaneous speech is neither necessary nor sufficient for the recognition of “interruption” by interlocutors. A peaker's “completion right” is vitiated by how long she has been speaking, how often she has spoken, the number of “points” made in a speaking turn, and the special rights of some speakers to speak about some topics. There are no absolute syntactical or acoustical criteria for recognizing an occurrence of “interruption” available either to those involved in a speech event nor to analysts. (Turn taking, California English conversation)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 1985 , pp. 31 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albert, E. (1964). “Rhetoric,” “logic” and “poetics” in Burundi. American Anthropologist 44, part 2:35–54.Google Scholar
Basso, K. H. (1970). To give up words. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 26:213–30.Google Scholar
Basso, K. H. (1974). Basic conversation rules. Ms.Google Scholar
Basso, K. H. (1981). Portraits of “the Whiteman. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bauman, R. Speaking in the light. In Bauman, R. & Sherzer, J. (eds.), Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. Cambridge University Press. 144–60.Google Scholar
Bennett, A. (1981). Interruption and the interpretation of conversation. Discourse Processes 4:171–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Covelli, L. H. & Murray, S. O. (1981). Accomplishing topic change. Anthropological Linguistics 22:382–90.Google Scholar
Darnell, R. (1979a). Reflections on Cree interactional etiquette. Working Papers in Sociolinguistics 57.Google Scholar
Darnell, R. (1979b). Politeness in American Indian speech communities. Presented at American Anthropological Association meetings inCincinnati.Google Scholar
Edelsky, C. (1981a). Introduction. Journal of the Linguistic Association of the Southwest 4:5–8.Google Scholar
Darnell, R. (1981b). Who's got the floor? Language in Society 10:383–421.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. & Sacks, H. (1970). On formal structures of practical action. In McKinney, J. & Tiryakian, E. (eds.). Theoretical sociology. New York: Appleton. Century-Crofts. 337–66.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1980). The sociolinguistic bases of speech act theory. VS 26:101–21.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1982a). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (ed.) (1982b). Language and social identity. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gumperz, J. J., & Kaltman, H. (1980). Prosody. language diffusion and conversational inference. Berkeley Linguistic Society 6:44–65.Google Scholar
Irvine, J. T. (1979). Formality and informality in communicative events. American Anthropologist 81:791–817.Google Scholar
Maltz, D., & Borker, R. (1981). Socialization and sex differences in speech interpretation. In Gumperz (1982b). 195–216.Google Scholar
Mannheim, K. (1945). American sociology. In Gurvitch, G. & Moore, W. (eds.). Twentieth-century sociology. New York: Philosophical Library. 507–37.Google Scholar
Murray, S. O., (1975). Power and solidarity in the oval office. Presented at the American Sociological Association meetings inSan Francisco.Google Scholar
Murray, S. O., (1982). What is a conversation? Working Papers of the Language Behavior Research Laboratory 52.Google Scholar
Murray, S. O., & Covelli, L. H. (1981). Women and men speaking at the same time. Presented at the Kroeber Anthropological Society meetings inBerkeley.Google Scholar
Rosaldo, M. (1973). I have nothing to hide. Language in Society 2:193–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. A.simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking. Language 50:696–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samarin, W. J. (1965). Language of silence. Practical Anthropology 12:115–19.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. (1979). Literacy as interethnic communication. Working Papers in Sociolinguistics 59.Google Scholar
Shaw, M. E., & Sandler, D. W. (1965). Interaction patterns in heterosexual dyads varying in degrees of intimacy. Journal of Social Psychology 66:345–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
West, C. & Zimmerman, D. (1978). Small insults. Presented at the American Sociological Association meetings inSan Francisco.Google Scholar
West, C. (1982). Conversation analyses. In Scherer, K. & Ekman, P. (eds.). Handbook of methods in nonverbal behavior research. Cambridge University Press. 506–41.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D., & West, C. (1975). Sex role, interruptions and silences in conversation. In Thorne, B. & Henley, N. (eds.). Language and sex. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. 105–29.Google Scholar