Even though the computer plays a significant role in modern communication, it could not replace the telephone as an communication tool, whose history goes back to the 19th century. In contrast to face-to-face interaction participants do not have the opportunity to involve gesture, facial expressions or eye contact in telephone conversations and therefore have lesser possibilities to manage turntaking within these conversations.
In this paper I will have a closer look at how turntaking in English telephone conversations works. First I will explain the turntaking model, which was developed by Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, and analyze examples from recorded telephone conversations. After concentrating on Transition Relevance Places, I will also analyze overlaps, asking for clarification and back-channel-responses. Following this, I will have a look at adjacency pais in telephone conversation. Finally, I will conclude by summarizing my findings.
The data which will be analyzed in this paper, was derived from two telephone conversations, which were recorded and afterwards partly transcribed. In each case one of the participants was a native speaker of English and the other a native speaker of German. The examples found in this paper are taken from this data. However, in most cases only one or two examples are taken from the transcript, as an analysis of more examples would exceed the scope of this paper.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION
2. TURN-TAKING IN ENGLISH TELEPHONE CONVERSATION
2.1. TURN-TAKING MODEL BY SACKS, SCHEGLOFF AND JEFFERSON
2.2. TRANSITION RELEVANCE PLACES IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS
2.3. OVERLAPS, ASKING FOR CLARIFICATION AND BACK-CHANNEL BEHAVIOR
3. THE ROLE OF ADJACENCY PAIRS IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS
3.1. PREFERRED VERSUS DISPREFERRED SECOND PARTS
3.2. ADJACENCY PAIRS IN OPENING AND CLOSING SEQUENCES OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS
4. CONCLUSION
5. APPENDIX
5.1. GENERAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE TRANSCRIPTIONS
5.2. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 1
5.3. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 2
5.4. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 3
5.5. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 4
5.6. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 5
5.7. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 6
5.8. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 7
5.9. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 8
5.10. TRANSCRIPTION NO. 9
Objectives and Topics
The primary objective of this paper is to examine the structural mechanisms of turn-taking within English telephone conversations. It investigates how participants manage the floor in the absence of non-verbal cues such as gestures or eye contact, focusing on how communicative signals are adapted to the medium.
- Turn-taking models and speaker allocation components.
- Identification of Transition Relevance Places (TRPs).
- Analysis of overlaps, clarification requests, and back-channel behavior.
- The function and structure of adjacency pairs in diverse conversational sequences.
- Ritualized procedures in telephone opening and closing sequences.
Excerpt from the Book
3. THE ROLE OF ADJACENCY PAIRS IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS
An adjacency pair is “a pair of turns that mutually affect one another” (McCarthy, Matthiessen & Slade 2002: 62) and is uttered by different speakers. The parts of an adjacency pair are divided into first pair and second pair part. if a first pair part is uttered, the appropriate second pair part needs to be produced by the next speaker a response (cf. Grundy 2000: 187). Examples for adjacency pairs are greeting - greeting, question - answer, request - grant, and apology - acceptance. The common illocutionary force of an adjacency pair characterizes its type (cf. Mey 2011: 243). First pair parts and second pair parts can be identical or different. In each telephone call one may find various adjacency pairs. One of these is the following example, taken from T3: 1-2:
(6)
1 A: Is your boyfriend still in college, too?
2 B: No he is working he finished eh::m last October. I guess
This example is of the type question - answer. Person A asks person B a question. This is the first pair part. the second pair part, that is now demanded to be uttered by person B, is an answer to that question. The appearance of this second pair part, which is a valid response to the question, functions “as an indicator of the recipient's understanding [...] of the act performed with the first-pair part” (Holtgraves 2002: 106). In the case that person B would have not understood the question put forward by speaker A, B could have asked for clarification (see 2.3.). Pathas explained that in some way the next speaker has to show if he or she is not able to produce an adequate second pair part because of “a failure to understand, a nonhearing, a misunderstanding or a disagreement” (Pathas 1995: 18, as cited in Forrester 1996: 99).
Summary of Chapters
1. INTRODUCTION: This chapter outlines the scope of the study, noting that telephone conversations require specific management techniques for turn-taking due to the absence of visual non-verbal cues.
2. TURN-TAKING IN ENGLISH TELEPHONE CONVERSATION: The author explains the turn-taking model developed by Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson and discusses the significance of Transition Relevance Places (TRPs) and back-channel responses.
3. THE ROLE OF ADJACENCY PAIRS IN TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS: This section explores how pairs of turns function in discourse, focusing on preferred versus dispreferred responses and the ritualized nature of opening and closing sequences.
4. CONCLUSION: The author summarizes that while turn-taking on the telephone is similar to face-to-face interaction, it relies more heavily on prosodic markers and vocalized feedback to overcome the lack of physical presence.
5. APPENDIX: This section provides the detailed transcriptions of recorded telephone calls and describes the symbols used for the conversation analysis.
Keywords
Turn-taking, Telephone Conversation, Transition Relevance Place, Adjacency Pairs, Discourse Analysis, Conversation Analysis, Back-channel Behavior, Ethnomethodology, Overlap, Preferred Response, Dispreferred Response, Prosodic Features, Opening Sequences, Closing Sequences, Communication Tools.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on the structural analysis of turn-taking in English telephone conversations and how participants maintain conversational flow without visual cues.
What are the primary thematic areas explored?
The key themes include turn-taking models, the management of speech through Transition Relevance Places, the role of adjacency pairs, and the ritualistic nature of phone call openings and closings.
What is the central research objective?
The objective is to identify how speakers manage the transition between turns when they cannot rely on gestures, eye contact, or facial expressions.
Which scientific method is utilized in this study?
The study employs an ethnomethodological approach, performing a conversation analysis on recorded and transcribed telephone data between native and non-native speakers.
What content is covered in the main body of the work?
The main body examines Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson’s model, the function of overlaps and clarification, and the normative expectations surrounding adjacency pairs.
Which keywords characterize the essence of the work?
Primary keywords include Turn-taking, Conversation Analysis, Adjacency Pairs, Transition Relevance Place, and Telephone Conversation.
How do speakers handle "hearing problems" during phone conversations?
Speakers often use specific overlaps or clarification requests to address communication breakdowns when a Transition Relevance Place is misjudged.
What differentiates preferred from dispreferred second pair parts?
Preferred parts are generally produced without delay, whereas dispreferred parts are often marked by pauses, hesitations, and justifications to maintain politeness.
- Quote paper
- Marijke Eggert (Author), 2010, An Analysis of Turn-Taking in English Telephone Conversations, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/231502
