Adjacency pairs

Last updated

In linguistics, an adjacency pair is an example of conversational turn-taking. An adjacency pair is composed of two utterances by two speakers, one after the other. The speaking of the first utterance (the first-pair part, or the first turn) provokes a responding utterance (the second-pair part, or the second turn). [1] Adjacency pairs are a component of pragmatic variation in the study of linguistics, and are considered primarily to be evident in the "interactional" function of pragmatics. [2] Adjacency pairs exist in every language and vary in context and content among each, based on the cultural values held by speakers of the respective language. Oftentimes, they are contributed by speakers in an unconscious way, as they are an intrinsic part of the language spoken at-hand and are therefore embedded in speakers' understanding and use of the language. Thus, adjacency pairs may present their challenges when a person begins learning a language not native to them, as the cultural context and significance behind the adjacency pairs may not be evident to a speaker outside of the primary culture associated with the language. [3]

Contents

Usage

Adjacency pairs are most commonly found in what Schegloff and Sacks described as a "single conversation," a unit of communication in which a single person speaks and a second person replies to the first speaker's utterance. While the turn-taking mechanism of single conversation uses silence to indicate that the next speaker's turn may begin, adjacency pairs are used to show that both speakers are finished with the conversation and that the ensuing silence does not require either of the speakers to take another turn. [1]

The prevalent use of adjacency pairs in greetings and terminal exchanges demonstrate the adjacency pair's primary function of being an organizational unit of conversation. Without the signal and expected response of the two utterances, the silence of one speaker may be never filled by the second speaker, or filled incorrectly. Adjacency pairs also convey politeness and a willingness from one speaker to acknowledge the feelings of the second speaker. For example, in English the greeting "How are you?" is mostly commonly followed by "I'm doing well," thus creating an adjacency pair that demonstrates a polite interest from one speaker and a reciprocal acknowledgment of that interest from the other. Failure to reply politely to the greeting "How are you?" is usually a sign of bad manners or an unwillingness to converse, thus showing how an adjacency pair is necessary to establish a working rapport between two speakers. [1]

Examples of pairs

Many actions in conversation are accomplished through established adjacency pairs, examples of which include:

"Waiter!" → "Yes, sir"
"It's awfully cold in here" → "Oh, sorry, I'll close the window"
"I really like your new haircut!!" → "Oh, thanks"
"See you!" → "Yeah, see you later!"
"Your phone is over there" → "I know"
"Hiya!" → "Oh, hi!"
"Would you like to visit the museum with me this evening?" → "I'd love to!"
"What does this big red button do?" → "It causes two-thirds of the universe to implode"
"Is it OK if I borrow this book?" → "I'd rather you didn't, it's due back at the library tomorrow"

Cultural significance

In some contexts, adjacency pairs may act as an indicator of varying demographic elements. For instance, restaurants are a setting notorious for the adjacency pair that presents a 'thank you', followed by some response eliciting acceptance of the gratitude displayed by the 'thank you'. A variety of responses to the statement 'thank you' have been recorded, and an English speaker's choice of response may imply details of his dialect and ultimately his place of origin. For instance, the employment of 'you're welcome' as the second half of this adjacency pair is most often indicative of an English speaker's residence within the United States. American English is the English dialect most highly associated with 'you're welcome' as a response to 'thank you', while other dialects of English (e.g. British and Irish English) may deem this phrase more formal than other options. The phrase 'my pleasure' is also most commonly associated with American English. British English speakers, in contrast, often omit a response to 'thanks' when it is presented to them. [2]

Additionally, the "'thank you' followed by an acknowledgement of gratitude" adjacency pair may work as an indicator of socioeconomic status based on when/in what context an English speaker decides to propose a 'thank you' statement. Nine restaurants in Los Angeles- representative of three different socioeconomic backgrounds- were studied by scholar Larssyn Staley from the University of Zurich to create an understanding of this idea. The results indicated that the offer of gratitude displayed in the 'thank you' statement is evident most prominently in non-verbal acts of service (e.g. presenting the check after the meal or wiping the table between courses) particularly among customers dining at restaurants in the highest and mid-socioeconomic levels. However, no 'thank you' comment was offered for non-verbal service acts in the restaurant representing the lowest socioeconomic level. The category most susceptible to 'thank you' comments from customers in the restaurant with the lowest socioeconomic association was the a verbal, explicit offer of service (e.g. Is there anything more I can get for you?) and this same category received the second highest quantity of 'thank you' offers in both the highest and mid-socioeconomic settings. [2]

Three-part interchange

A three-part exchange occurs after the first speaker in a conversation adds an additional response to the former two utterances. The third part serves many conversational functions, including evaluation of the response, recognition of an acceptable response, and comprehension of the response. Additionally, the third part can initiate topic bounding, a technique used to end a conversational exchange. [4] In face-to-face communication, the third utterance can also be expressed non-verbally. Conversational transcripts may leave out non-verbal third part responses, falsely indicating that a third part is missing from the conversation [4]

Much like adjacency pairs themselves, the various types of three-part interchanges may be associated most closely with specific social settings and contextual situations. The evaluative three-part interchange (example displayed below) is commonly found in education settings, particularly within elementary education. The use of the evaluative three-part interchange has proven itself useful in such a setting as it helps teachers to ascertain themselves as both educators and "evaluators", in that the interchange grants them the opportunity to ask their students questions to which they already know the answers. In doing so, the teacher has the capacity to offer evaluation of a response as he can determine whether or not an answer is acceptable based on his own understanding of what answer is "correct". [5] Adversely, if a teacher were to ask a question for which he did not know the answer, he would lose the ability to contribute the third part of this interchange as it would not be appropriate for him to determine the quality of the answer, as he himself has no certainty in its validity. Thus, the evaluative three-part interchange is often indicative of a classroom setting where this educator and evaluator combination is frequently perpetuated. [5]

Examples of three-part interchanges

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pragmatics</span> Branch of linguistics and semiotics relating context to meaning

In linguistics and related fields, pragmatics is the study of how context contributes to meaning. The field of study evaluates how human language is utilized in social interactions, as well as the relationship between the interpreter and the interpreted. Linguists who specialize in pragmatics are called pragmaticians. The field has been represented since 1986 by the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Utterance</span> Smallest unit of speech

In spoken language analysis, an utterance is a continuous piece of speech, by one person, before or after which there is silence on the part of the person. In the case of oral languages, it is generally, but not always, bounded by silence. Utterances do not exist in written language; only their representations do. They can be represented and delineated in written language in many ways.

An interjection is a word or expression that occurs as an utterance on its own and expresses a spontaneous feeling or reaction. It is a diverse category, encompassing many different parts of speech, such as exclamations (ouch!, wow!), curses (damn!), greetings, response particles, hesitation markers, and other words. Due to its diverse nature, the category of interjections partly overlaps with a few other categories like profanities, discourse markers, and fillers. The use and linguistic discussion of interjections can be traced historically through the Greek and Latin Modistae over many centuries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Paul Grice</span> British philosopher of language (1913–1988)

Herbert Paul Grice, usually publishing under the name H. P. Grice, H. Paul Grice, or Paul Grice, was a British philosopher of language who created the theory of implicature and the cooperative principle, which became foundational concepts in the linguistic field of pragmatics. His work on meaning has also influenced the philosophical study of semantics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conversation analysis</span> Approach to the study of social interaction

Conversation analysis (CA) is an approach to the study of social interaction that empirically investigates the mechanisms by which humans achieve mutual understanding. It focuses on both verbal and non-verbal conduct, especially in situations of everyday life. CA originated as a sociological method, but has since spread to other fields. CA began with a focus on casual conversation, but its methods were subsequently adapted to embrace more task- and institution-centered interactions, such as those occurring in doctors' offices, courts, law enforcement, helplines, educational settings, and the mass media, and focus on multimodal and nonverbal activity in interaction, including gaze, body movement and gesture. As a consequence, the term conversation analysis has become something of a misnomer, but it has continued as a term for a distinctive and successful approach to the analysis of interactions. CA and ethnomethodology are sometimes considered one field and referred to as EMCA.

In pragmatics, a subdiscipline of linguistics, an implicature is something the speaker suggests or implies with an utterance, even though it is not literally expressed. Implicatures can aid in communicating more efficiently than by explicitly saying everything we want to communicate. The philosopher H. P. Grice coined the term in 1975. Grice distinguished conversational implicatures, which arise because speakers are expected to respect general rules of conversation, and conventional ones, which are tied to certain words such as "but" or "therefore". Take for example the following exchange:

In linguistics, a phatic expression is a communication which primarily serves to establish or maintain social relationships. In other words, phatic expressions have mostly socio-pragmatic rather than denotational functions. They can be observed in everyday conversational exchanges, as in, for instance, exchanges of social pleasantries that do not seek or offer information of intrinsic value but rather signal willingness to observe conventional local expectations for politeness.

A speech disfluency, also spelled speech dysfluency, is any of various breaks, irregularities, or non-lexical vocables which occur within the flow of otherwise fluent speech. These include "false starts", i.e. words and sentences that are cut off mid-utterance; phrases that are restarted or repeated, and repeated syllables; "fillers", i.e. grunts, and non-lexical or semiarticulate utterances such as huh, uh, erm, um, and hmm, and, in English, well, so, I mean, and like; and "repaired" utterances, i.e. instances of speakers correcting their own slips of the tongue or mispronunciations. Huh is claimed to be a universal syllable.

In social science generally and linguistics specifically, the cooperative principle describes how people achieve effective conversational communication in common social situations—that is, how listeners and speakers act cooperatively and mutually accept one another to be understood in a particular way.

In the linguistic sub-fields of applied linguistics and pragmatics, a hedge is a word or phrase used in a sentence to express ambiguity, probability, caution, or indecisiveness about the remainder of the sentence, rather than full accuracy, certainty, confidence, or decisiveness. Hedges can also allow speakers and writers to introduce ambiguity in meaning and typicality as a category member. Hedging in category membership is used in reference to the prototype theory, to signify the extent to which items are typical or atypical members of different categories. Hedges might be used in writing, to downplay a harsh critique or a generalization, or in speaking, to lessen the impact of an utterance due to politeness constraints between a speaker and addressee.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rudeness</span> Display of disrespect

Rudeness is a display of actual or perceived disrespect by not complying with the social norms, boundaries or etiquette expected within a relationship, social group, or culture. Social norms are established as the essential guidelines of normally accepted behavior within a given context, and individuals often establish personal boundaries to meet their own needs and desires within smaller settings, such as friendships. To be unable or unwilling to align one's behavior with these norms known to the general population of what is socially acceptable is to be rude, and these norms may resemble a sort of "unspoken law", with social repercussions or rewards for violators or advocates, respectively.

In psycholinguistics, the collaborative model is a theory for explaining how speaking and understanding work in conversation, specifically how people in conversation coordinate to determine definite references.

A turn construction unit (TCU) is the fundamental segment of speech in a conversation, as analysed in conversation analysis.

Grounding in communication is a concept proposed by Herbert H. Clark and Susan E. Brennan. It comprises the collection of "mutual knowledge, mutual beliefs, and mutual assumptions" that is essential for communication between two people. Successful grounding in communication requires parties "to coordinate both the content and process". The concept is also common in philosophy of language.

In linguistics, a backchanneling during a conversation occurs when one participant is speaking and another participant interjects responses to the speaker. A backchannel response can be verbal, non-verbal, or both. Backchannel responses are often phatic expressions, primarily serving a social or meta-conversational purpose, such as signifying the listener's attention, understanding, sympathy, or agreement, rather than conveying significant information. Examples of backchanneling in English include such expressions as "yeah", "OK", "uh-huh", "hmm", "right", and "I see".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turn-taking</span> Type of organization in conversation and discourse

Turn-taking is a type of organization in conversation and discourse where participants speak one at a time in alternating turns. In practice, it involves processes for constructing contributions, responding to previous comments, and transitioning to a different speaker, using a variety of linguistic and non-linguistic cues.

In linguistics, a co-construction is a single syntactic entity in conversation and discourse that is uttered by more than two or more speakers. Other names for this concept include collaboratively built sentences, sentences-in-progress, and joint utterance constructions. Used in this specific linguistic context, co-construction is not to be confused with the broader social interactional sense of the same name. Co-construction is studied across several linguistic sub-disciplines, including applied linguistics, conversation analysis, linguistic anthropology, and language acquisition.

A display question is a type of question requiring the other party to demonstrate their knowledge on a subject matter when the questioner already knows the answer. They are contrasted with referential questions, a type of question posed when the answer is not known by the questioner at the time of inquiry.

<i>Thank you</i> Expression of gratitude in the English language

"Thank you" is a common expression of gratitude in the English language. The term itself originated as a shortened form of the expression "I thank you".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">English interjections</span> Interjections in the English language

English interjections are a category of English words – such as yeah, ouch, Jesus, oh, mercy, yuck, etc. – whose defining features are the infrequency with which they combine with other words to form phrases, their loose connection to other elements in clauses, and their tendency to express emotive meaning. These features separate English interjections from the language's other lexical categories, such as nouns and verbs. Though English interjections, like interjections in general, are often overlooked in descriptions of the language, English grammars do offer minimal descriptions of the category.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Schegloff, Emanuel; Sacks, Harvey (1973). "Opening up closings". Semiotica. 8 (4): 289–327. doi:10.1515/semi.1973.8.4.289.
  2. 1 2 3 Rüegg, Larssyn. “Thanks Responses in Three Socio-Economic Settings: A Variational Pragmatics Approach.” Journal of Pragmatics, vol. 71, Elsevier B.V., Sept. 2014, pp. 17–30, https://www.sciencedirect.com/search/advanced?docId=10.1016/j.pragma.2014.07.005.
  3. ↑ Iglesias Moreno, Ángela Eugenia (2001). "Native Speaker Non-Native Speaker Interaction: The Use of Discourse Markers". Estudios de Lingüística Inglesa Aplicada. 2: 129–142. hdl:11441/33962.
  4. 1 2 Tsui, Amy B. M. (1989). "Beyond the adjacency pair". Language in Society. 18 (4): 545–564. doi:10.1017/s0047404500013907. ISSN   0047-4045. S2CID   143629036.
  5. 1 2 Mehan, Hugh (Fall 1979). ""What Time Is It, Denise?" Asking Known Information Questions in Classroom Discourse". Theory into Practice. 18 (4): 285–294. doi:10.1080/00405847909542846.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.