Cover not available

In:Perception Metaphors
Edited by Laura J. Speed, Carolyn O'Meara, Lila San Roque and Asifa Majid
[Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 19] 2019
► pp. 253–274

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 13
Evidential vindication in next turn

Using the retrospective “see?” in conversation

 | University of York
Published online: 21 February 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.19.13ken
Abstract
Perception verbs are frequent in conversation across diverse languages and cultures. This chapter presents a case study of a recurrent but previously undocumented use of the perception verb see in everyday English conversation. Using conversation analysis, the chapter explicates the use of “See?” – the verb see produced with rising intonation as a possibly complete turn-constructional unit – as claim of evidential vindication. With “See?” a speaker claims a just prior turn, action, or event as support for a previous assertive action. The analysis demonstrates that the practice exploits two distinct forms of sequence organisation, adjacency pairs and retro-sequences, and reflects on the fit between the perception verb see and the action it implements within this practice.
Article outline
  • 1.The phenomenon
  • 2.The present study
  • 3.“See?” as a retro-sequence initiator
  • 4.Provables: Actions that can be evidenced
  • 5.The relationship between the prior and the provable
    • 5.1An independent assertion corroborates the provable
    • 5.2An event instantiates the provable
    • 5.3A prior turn supports the provable
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1The sequential organisation of “See?”
    • 6.2The fit between the practice and the action
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (38)
References
Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2006). Evidentiality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, A. Y., & Storch, A. (2013). Linguistic expression of perception and cognition: A typological glimpse. In A. Y. Aikhenvald, & A. Storch (Eds.), Perception and cognition in language and culture (pp. 1–46). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2012). Some truths and untruths about final intonation in conversational questions. In J. P. de Ruiter (Ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives (pp. 123–145). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Curl, T. S. (2006). Offers of assistance: Constraints on syntactic design. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(8), 1257–1280.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Edwards, D. (2000). Extreme case formulations: Softeners, investment, and doing nonliteral. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 33(4), 347–373.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, N., & Wilkins, D. (2000). In the mind’s ear: The semantic extensions of perception verbs in Australian languages. Language 76(3): 546–592.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geluykens, R. (1988). On the myth of rising intonation in polar questions. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(4), 467–485.
Hepburn, A., & Bolden, G. B. (2017). Transcribing for social research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (2002). Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In C. E Ford, B. A. Fox, & S. A Thompson (Eds.), The language of turn and sequence (pp. 1–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). Action formation and its epistemic (and other) backgrounds. Discourse Studies, 15(5), 551–578.
Heritage, J., & Raymond, G. (2005). The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 15–38.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoey, E. M., & Kendrick, K. H. (2017). Conversation analysis. In P. Hagoort & A. M. B. De Groot (Eds.), Research Methods in Psycholinguistics and the Neurobiology of Language. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendrick, K. H. (2006). Linguistic Form and Social Action: The Use of “See” in Conversational Interaction (Master’s thesis). University of California, Santa Barbara, Department of Linguistics.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kendrick, K. H., & Drew, P. (2016). Recruitment: Offers, requests, and the organization of assistance in interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 49(1), 1–19.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In J. Sidnell & T. Stivers (Eds.), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 101–130). Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C., & Majid, A. (2014). Differential ineffability and the senses. Mind & Language, 29(4), 407–427.
Pollner, M. (1987). Mundane reason: Reality in everyday life and sociological discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A. (1980). Telling my side: “Limited access” as a “fishing” device. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3), 186–198.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1984). Giving a source or basis: the practice in conversation of telling “how I know”. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 607–625.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1986). Extreme case formulations: A way of legitimizing claims. Human studies, 9(2), 219–229.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1989). Giving evidence as a conversational practice. In D. T. Helm, W. T. Anderson, A. J. Meehan & A. W. Rawls (Eds.), The interactional order: New directions in the study of social order (pp. 103–115). New York, NY: Irvington Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, H. (1992). Lectures on conversation. (G. Jefferson, Ed.) (Vol. 1). Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
San Roque, L., Kendrick, K. H., Norcliffe, E., Brown, P., Defina, R., Dingemanse, M., Dirksmeyer, T., Enfield, N. J., Floyd, S., Hammond, J., Rossi, G., Tufvesson, S., Van Putten, S., & Majid, A. (2015). Vision verbs dominate in conversation across cultures, but the ranking of non-visual verbs varies. Cognitive Linguistics, 26(1), 31–60.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
San Roque, L., Kendrick, K. H., Norcliffe, E., & Majid, A. (2018). Universal meaning extensions of perception verbs are grounded in interaction. Cognitive Linguistics, 29(3), 371–406.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology, 102(1), 161–216.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). On complainability. Social Problems, 52(4), 449–476.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schutz, A. (1962). Common-sense and scientific interpretation of human action. In M. Natanson (Ed.), Collected Papers I (pp. 3–47). Springer Netherlands.
Sidnell, J., & Stivers, T. (Eds.). (2013). The handbook of conversation analysis. Malden: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sidnell, J. (2007). ‘Look’-prefaced turns in first and second position: launching, interceding and redirecting action. Discourse Studies, 9(3), 387–408.
Stokes, D., & Biggs, S. (2014). The dominance of the visual. In D. Stokes, M. Matthen, & S. Biggs (Eds.), Perception and its modalities. Oxford Scholarship Online.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vázquez Carranza, A. (2014). Sequential markers in Mexican Spanish talk: A conversation-analytic study (Ph.D. thesis). University of Essex.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Análisis de oye como marcador secuencial y de acción en la conversación. Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada, 61, 73–103.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Viberg, Å. (1983). The verbs of perception: A typological study. Linguistics, 21, 123–162.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. (2010). Experience, evidence, and sense: The hidden cultural legacy of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Pan, Yun
2025. Evidential Strategies in Chinese Social‐Mediated Communication: A Digital Conversation‐Analytic Approach. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 35:4 ► pp. 1953 ff. DOI logo
Keevallik, Leelo & Marri Amon
2024. Seeing is believing. Interactional Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 38 ff. DOI logo
Inbar, Anna & Yael Maschler
2023.  Shared Knowledge as an Account for Disaffiliative Moves: Hebrew ki ‘Because’-Clauses Accompanied by the Palm-Up Open-Hand Gesture . Research on Language and Social Interaction 56:2 ► pp. 141 ff. DOI logo
Hou, Lynn
2022. LOOKing for multi-word expressions in American Sign Language. Cognitive Linguistics 33:2 ► pp. 291 ff. DOI logo
Siitonen, Pauliina, Mirka Rauniomaa & Tiina Keisanen
2021. Language and the Moving Body: Directive Actions With the Finnish kato “look” in Nature-Related Activities. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria & Sophia Fiedler
2021. Multimodal Practice for Mobilizing Response: The Case of Turn-Final Tu Vois ‘You See’ in French Talk-in-Interaction. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Mandelbaum, Jenny
2014. How to do things with requests. In Requesting in Social Interaction [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 26], ► pp. 215 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue