Cover not available

Article published In: Pragmatics
Vol. 10:2 (2000) ► pp.247–269

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

Are transcripts reproducible?

Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.
Published online: 1 June 2000
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.2.05con
The research reported here is part of a larger psycholinguistic project on transcribing and the use of transcripts. It is hypothesized that reproducing transcripts originally prepared on the basis of current transcription systems overloads the capability of those who carry out transcript reproduction and therefore occasions an excessive error rate. Ten reproduced transcripts were taken from (a) three current textbooks (Duranti 1997; Garman 1990; Whitney 1998), and from (b) an earlier textbook (Levinson 1983); and (c) six versions were taken from a German transcript (Keppler 1987). Additions, deletions, substitutions, and relocations of notations were identified according to five categories: Verbal, prosodie, paralinguistic, extralinguistic, and format components. The hypothesis is supported: The overall rate of change is 6.6 syllables per change (2032/308) across all 41 comparisons. Factors underlying this excessive amount of change are discussed. The proposal is made that only those notations be made which are to be used for analyses in keeping with the purposes of the research in question.
References (49)
Altmann, G.T.M. (1997) The ascent of Babel: An exploration of language, mind, and understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bergmann, J. (1987) Klatsch: Zur Sozialform der diskreten Indiskretion. Berlin: de Gruyter.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993) Discreet indiscretions: The social organ-zation of gossip. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Briggs, C.L. (1986) Learning how to ask: A sociolinguistic appraisal of the role of the interview in social science research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burman, E., & I. Parker (1993) (eds.) Discourse analytic research: Repertoires and readings of texts in action. London: Routledge.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chafe, W. (1980) (ed.) The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, H.H. (1994) Discourse in production. In M.A. Gernsbacher (ed.), Handbook ofpsycholinguistics. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, pp. 985–1021.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crystal, D. (1987) The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crystal, D., & D. Davy (1975) Advanced conversational English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denes, P.B., & E.N. Pinson (1963) The speech chain. Nutley, NJ: Bell Laboratories.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duranti, A. (1997) Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Edwards, D. (1996) Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fine, E.C. (1984). The folklore text: From performance to print. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Garman, M. (1990) Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1979) The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington Publishers, pp. 97–121.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1981) Conversational interaction: Interaction be-tween speakers and hearers. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, C. & M.H. Goodwin (1992) Assessments and the construction of context. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (eds.), Rethinking context: Language as interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambridge Univerity Press, pp. 147–189.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herrmann, T., & J. Grabowski (1994) Sprechen: Psychologie der Sprachproduktion. Heidelberg: Spektrum Akademischer Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirsch, E.D. (1976) The aims of interpretation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnson, CE. (2000) What you see is what you get: The importance of transcription for interpreting children’s morphosyntactic development. In L. Menn & N. B. Ratner (eds.), Methods for studying language production. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 181–204.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keppler, A. (1987) Der Verlauf von Klatschgesprächen. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 161: 288–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kitzinger, C. (1998) Inaccuracies in quoting from data transcripts: Or inaccuracy in quotations from data transcripts. Discourse & Society 91: 136–143.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kowal, S., & D.C. O’Connell (in press a) Datenerhebung und Transkription. In T. Herrmann & J. Grabowski (eds.), Sprachproduktion. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
Kowal, S., & D.C O’Connell (in press b) Psycholinguistische Aspekte der Transkription: Zur Notation von Pausen in Gesprächstranskripten. Linguistische Berichte.
Kulick, D. (1992) Language shift and cultural reproduction: Socialization, self, and syncretism in a Papua New Guinean village. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, W. & D. Fanshel (1977) Therapeutic discourse: Psychotherapy as conversation. New York: Academic Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levinson, S.C. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lindsay, J., & D.C. O’Connell (1995) How do transcribers deal with audio recordings of spoken discourse? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 241: 101–115. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
The New Encyclopedia Britannica. (1985) International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica, 51: 353.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Connell, D.C, & S. Kowal (1994) The transcriber as language user. In G. Bartelt (ed.), The dynamics of language processes: Essays in honor of Hans W. Dechert. Tübingen: Gunter Narr, pp. 119–142.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Connell, D. C, & S. Kowal (1999) Transcription and the issue of standardization. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 281: 103–120. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A. (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 57–101.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Posner, R. (1986) Zur Systematik der Beschreibung verbaler und nonverbaler Kommunikation: Semiotik als Propädeutik der Medienanalyse. In H.-G. Bosshardt (ed.), Perspektiven auf Sprache. Interdisziplinäre Beiträge zum Gedenken an Hans Hörmann. Berlin: de Gruyter, pp. 267–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Potter, R., G. Koop, & H. Green (1947) Visible speech. New York: Van Nostrand Rheinhold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Preston, D.R. (1982) ‘Ritin’fowklower daun’rong: Folklorists’failures in phonology. Journal of American Folklore 951: 304–326. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ramer, N.B., & L. Menn (2000) In the beginning was the wug: Forty years of language-elicitation studies. In L. Menn & N.B. Ratner (eds.), Methods for studying language production. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 1–26.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, H., EA. Schegloff, & G. Jefferson (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language 501: 696–735.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sacks, H., EA. Schegloff, & G Jefferson (1978) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. In J. Schenkein (ed.), Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press, pp. 7–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, EA. (1976) On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. Pragmatics Microfiche 2.2, D8-G1.
. (1979) Identification and recognition in telephone conversation openings. In G. Psathas (ed.), Everyday language: Studies in ethnomethodology. New York: Irvington, pp. 23–78.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E A. (1984) On some questions and ambiguities in conversation. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 28–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E.A. & H. Sacks (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica 71: 289–327.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schegloff, E.A., G. Jefferson, & H. Sacks (1977) The prefe-rence for self-correction in the organization of repair in conversation. Language 531: 361–382.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schenkein, J. (ed.) (1978) Studies in the organization of conversational interaction. New York: Academic Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sherzer, J. (1983) Kuna ways of speaking: An ethnographic perspective. Austin: University of Texas Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Svartvik, J. (ed.) (1990) The London-Lund corpus of spoken English: Description and research. Lund, Sweden: Lund University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Svartvik, J., & R. Quirk (eds.) (1980) A corpus of English conversation. Lund, Sweden: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Urban, G. (1996) Entextualization, replication, and power. In M. Silverstein & G. Urban (eds.), Natural histories of discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 21–44.  BoPGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Whitney, P. (1998) The psychology of language. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Anguera, M. Teresa
2020. Is It Possible to Perform “Liquefying” Actions in Conversational Analysis? The Detection of Structures in Indirect Observations. In The Temporal Structure of Multimodal Communication [Intelligent Systems Reference Library, 164], ► pp. 45 ff. DOI logo
Allard-Poesi, Florence & Hervé Laroche
2018. "This is serious": enacting authority during managerial conversations. M at n at gement 21:1 ► pp. 611 ff. DOI logo
Schmidt, Thomas
2016. Good practices in the compilation of FOLK, the Research and Teaching Corpus of Spoken German. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 21:3 ► pp. 396 ff. DOI logo
Bucholtz, Mary
2007. Variation in transcription. Discourse Studies 9:6 ► pp. 784 ff. DOI logo
Hamo, Michal
2004. From Observation to Transcription and Back: Theory, Practice, and Interpretation in the Analysis of Children's Naturally Occurring Discourse. Research on Language & Social Interaction 37:1 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Myers, Greg
2004. Matters of Opinion, DOI logo
Traverso, Véronique
2002. Transcription et traduction des interactions en langue étrangère. Cahiers de praxématique :39 ► pp. 77 ff. DOI logo
O’Connell, Daniel C. & Sabine Kowal
1995. Transcription systems for spoken discourse. In Handbook of Pragmatics, ► pp. 646 ff. DOI logo
O’Connell, Daniel C. & Sabine Kowal
2022. Transcription systems for spoken discourse. In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 1839 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.

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