Article published In: Narrative Inquiry
Vol. 30:1 (2020) ► pp.161–184
“I’ll tell you later on”
Proleptic and analeptic tying devices in oral history interviews
Published online: 10 March 2020
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.18020.mly
https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.18020.mly
Abstract
This article investigates an interactional phenomenon in which oral history interview participants
deal with temporal structure in extended storytelling. It is based on the observation that while narrating a
life story, participants routinely use its temporal structure as an organizing principle of the interview.
Drawing inspiration from Sacks’ notion of tying devices and Genette’s distinction of prolepsis/analepsis, I
have identified two forms of practices that interrelate storytelling sequences in an interview. For the first
form, I propose the term analeptic tying: in this practice, turns produced earlier are treated as a resource
for the current turn. For the second form, I propose the term proleptic tying, which refers to planned turns
of speech that have yet to be produced being treated as a resource. I discuss the proleptic and analeptic
tying devices in relation to relevant research in ethnomethodology/conversation analysis, which is the
approach taken in this article.
Keywords: storytelling, oral history, time, temporality, ethnomethodology, conversation analysis
Article outline
- Oral history: Method, setting, data-set
- Proleptic and analeptic tying devices in interview storytelling
- Tying structures and formulations
- Analeptic tying
- Proleptic tying
- Discussion: Dealing with temporal structure in oral history narratives
- Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (51)
Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX, USA: University of Texas Press.
Boden, D., & Bielby, D. D. (1983). The past as resource: A conversational analysis of elderly talk. Human Development 26(6), 308–319.
Bublitz, W. (1998). Cohesion and coherence. In J.-O. Östman & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics Online.
Burns, S. L. (2012). ‘Lecturing’s Work’: A Collaborative Study with Harold Garfinkel. Human Studies 35(2), 175–192.
Cicourel, A. V. (1974). Cognitive Sociology: Language and Meaning in Social Interaction. New York, NY, USA: The Free Press.
Dunaway, D. K., & Baum, W. K. (Eds.). (1996). Oral History: An Interdisciplinary Anthology (2nd Ed.). Walnut Creek, CA, USA: AltaMira Press.
Fisher, W. (1987). Human Communication as Narration. Columbia, SC, USA: South Carolina University Press.
(1991). Respecification: Evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order*, logic, reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential haecceity of immortal ordinary society, (I) – an announcement of studies. In G. Button (Ed.), Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences (pp. 10–19). Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
(2002). Ethnomethodology’s Program: Working Out Durkheim’s Aphorism (Edited by Anne Warfield Rawls). Lanham, MD, USA: Rowman & Littlefield.
Garfinkel, H., & Sacks, H. (1970). On Formal Structures of Practical Actions. In J. C. McKinney & E. A. Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical Sociology: Perspectives and Developments (pp. 338–366). New York, NY, USA: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
Genette, G. (1983). Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method. Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell University Press.
González-Martínez, E. (2011). Just telling what is going to happen: The initial phase of a judicial social investigation interview. Nottingham French Studies, 50(2), 154–176.
Goodwin, Ch. (1984). Notes on story structure and the organization of participation. In J. Heritage & P. Atkinson (Eds.), Structures of Social Action (pp. 225–246). Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Hasan, R. (1984). Coherence and cohesive harmony. In J. Flood (Ed.), Understanding Reading Comprehension (pp. 181–219). Delaware, DE, USA: International Reading Association.
Heritage, J. (1985). Analyzing news interviews: Aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of Discourse Analysis Vol. 3 (pp. 95–117). London, United Kingdom: Academic Press.
Heritage, J., & Watson, D. R. (1979). Formulations as Conversational Objects. In G. Psathas (Ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology (pp. 123–162). New York, NY, USA: Irvington Publishers.
(1980). Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversations: Some instances analysed. Semiotica, 30(3/4), 245–262.
Heritage, J., & Clayman, S. (2010). Talk in Interaction: Interactions, Identities and Institutions. Chichester, NH, USA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hester, S. & Francis, D. (1994). Doing data: the local organization of a sociological interview. British Journal of Sociology, 45(4), 675–695.
Jefferson, G. (1978). Sequential Aspects of Storytelling in Conversation. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction (pp. 219–248). New York: Academic Press.
(2004). Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In G. H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the first generation (pp. 13–31). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.
Kasper, G., & Prior, M. T. (2015). Analyzing Storytelling in TESOL Interview Research. TESOL Quarterly, 49(2), 226–255.
Labov, W., & Waletzky, J. (1967). Narrative analysis: Oral versions of personal experience. In J. Helm (Ed.), Essays on the Verbal and Visual Arts. Seattle, WA, USA: University of Washington Press.
Leudar, I., & Nekvapil, J. (2011). Practical historians and adversaries: 9/11 revisited. Discourse & Society, 22(1), 66–85.
Lynch, M. (2017). Garfinkel, Sacks and Formal Structures: Collaborative origins, divergences and the vexed unity of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis. Keynote address at
IIEMCA 2017: A Half-Century of Studies, International Institute for Ethnomethodology and Conversation Analysis
, Westerville, OH, USA, 10.–13. 7. 2017. Available from: [URL] (accessed on 11. 11. 2017)
McAdams, D. P. (1993). The Stories We Live By: Personal Myths and the Making of the Self. New York, NY, USA / London, United Kingdom: Guilford Press.
Mlynář, J. (2015). Malach Center for Visual History. In J. Hlaváčová (Ed.), Sborník Semináře o digitálních zdrojích a službách ve společenských a humanitních vědách (WDH 2015) (pp. 83–89). Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University.
Mondada, L. (2006). Video recording as the reflexive preservation and configuration of phenomenal features for analysis. In H. Knoblauch, J. Raab, J. H.-G. Soeffner & B. Schnettler (Eds.), Video Analysis (pp. 51–68). Bern: Peter Lang.
Mondada, L., Svensson, H., & Van Schepen, N. (2015). ‘Why that not now’: participants’ orientations towards several organizational layers in social interaction. Bulletin suisse de linguistique appliquée, (101), 51–71.
Olick, J. K., & Robbins, J. (1998). Social Memory Studies: From ‘Collective Memory’ to the Historical Sociology of Mnemonic Practices. Annual Review of Sociology, 241, 105–140.
Ryave, A. L. (1978). On the achievement of a series of stories. In J. Schenkein (Ed.), Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction (pp. 113–132). New York, NY, USA: Academic Press.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking in Conversation. Language, 50(4, 1), 696–735.
Schegloff, E. A. (1990). On the organization of sequences as a source of ‘coherence’ in talk-in-interaction. In B. Dorval (Ed.): Conversational organization and its development (pp. 51–78). Norwood, NY, USA: Ablex.
(1997). ‘Narrative analysis’ thirty years later. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 97–106.
(2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Volume 11. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Chichester, United Kingdom: Wiley-Blackwell.
Silverman, D. (1998). Harvey Sacks: Social science and conversation analysis. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Polity Press.
Stokoe, E., & Edwards, D. (2006). Story formulations in talk-in-interaction. Narrative Inquiry, 16(1), 56–65.
Thomson, A. (2007). Four Paradigm Transformations in Oral History. The Oral History Review, 34(1), 49–70.
USC Shoah Foundation. (2012). Interviewer Guidelines. Available from: [URL] (accessed on 19. 2. 2018)
Watson, R. (2008). Comparative Sociology, Laic and Analytic: Some Critical Remarks on Comparison in Conversation Analysis. Cahiers de praxématique, 501, 203–244.
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Li, Leslie Huishan
Mlynář, Jakub, Jiří Kocián, Hryhorii Maliukov & Karin Roginer Hofmeister
Pfänder, Stefan, Philipp Freyburger, Daniela Marzo & Ignacio Satti
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 november 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.
