In:Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts
Edited by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni and Carla Canestrari
[Dialogue Studies 25] 2014
► pp. 389–401
Self-repairs and certainty in Romanian academic meetings
Published online: 26 November 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.18vel
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.18vel
This paper investigates the connection between self-repairs, conversation analytical mechanisms, and the concept of certainty in Romanian academic meetings. The focus is on the design of turn(s) in which the chair and the other participants provide feedback on a piece of writing. The data reveal that at the turn design level, through self-repairs (namely replacing, deleting, reformatting, inserting), the speakers employ several lexical and grammatical items in order to communicate different degrees of certainty.
References (24)
Asmuß, Birte, and Jan Svennevig. 2009. “Meeting Talk – an Introduction.” Journal of Business Communication 46: 3–22.
Bach, Kent, and Robert M. Harnish. 1979. Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Birkner, Karin, and Sofie Henricson, et al. 2012. “Grammar and Self-repair: Retraction Patterns in German and Swedish Prepositional Phrases.” Journal of Pragmatics 44 (11): 1413–1433.
Curl, Traci. 2006. “Offers of Assistance: Constraints on Syntactic Design.” Journal of Pragmatics 38 (8): 1257–1280.
Dascălu Jinga, Laurenţia. 2002. Corectarea şi autocorectarea în conversaţia spontană. Bucureşti: Editura Academiei Române.
Drew, Paul. 1997. ““Open’’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to Sequential Sources of Troubles in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28 (1): 69–101.
. 2005. “Conversation Analysis.” In Handbook of Language and Social Interaction, ed. by Kristine L. Fitch, and Robert E. Sanders, 71–102. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Drew, Paul, and John Heritage. 1992. Talk at Work. Interaction in Institutional Settings.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Drew, Paul, Traci Walker, and Richard Ogden. 2012. “Self-repair and Action Construction.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Hayashi Makoto, Geoff
Raymond, and Jack Sidnell, 113–147. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fox, Barbara A., Yael Maschler, and Susanne Uhmann. 2010. “A Cross-Linguistic Study of Self-repair: Evidence from English, German, and Hebrew.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (9): 2487–2505.
Hepburn, Alexa, and Jonathan Potter. 2010. “Interrogating Tears: Some Uses of ‘Tag Questions’ in a Child Protection Helpline.” In “Why Do You Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse, ed. by A.F. Freed, and S. Ehrlich, 69–86. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Heritage, John. 2012. “Epistemics in Action: Action Formation and Territories of Knowledge.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 45 (1): 1–29.
Heritage, John, and Steven Clayman. 2010. Talk in Action: Interactions, Identities, and Institutions. Oxford: Blackwell.
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. “Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction.” In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, ed. by Gene Lerner, 13–31. Amsterdam,
Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.
Laakso, Minna, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen. 2010. “Cut-off or Particle – Devices for Initiating Self-repair in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 42 (4): 1151–1172.
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 2013. “Ten Operations in Self-Initiated, Same-Turn Repair.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Rayond, and Jack Sidnell, 41–70. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks. 1977. “The Preference for Self-Correction in the Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language 53 (2): 361–382.
Stivers, Tanya. 2004. “No no no and Other Types of Multiple Sayings in Social Interaction.” Human Communication Research 30: 260–293.