The concept of turn-taking covers a wide range: it is not just a theoretical construction in the linguistic field of discourse analysis, but an omnipresent pattern in communicative events, governing speech-acts and defining social roles as it establishes and maintains social relationships. Turn-taking is considered to play an essential role in structuring people’s social interactions in terms of control and regulation of conversation. Therefore the system of turn-taking has become object of analyses both for linguists and for sociologists. The starting point of the analysis was to show regularities of conversational structure by describing the ways in which participants take turns in speaking. The first important approach to turn-taking was made by Duncan in 1972. From then on turn-taking has been accepted as one of the standard tasks “which must
be managed if interaction is to occur”1. The most influential work in the area of turn-taking is the study by Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson ( SS&J ) from 1974. They embody the so called ‘American approach of conversation analysis’. Their theoretical approach has to be seen as standard work for further discussions, although there have been several objections against it. SS&J regarded informal conversational settings and analysed the conventions which regulate turn-taking in there. They found out that there is an existence of
rules the participants are aware of. SS&J say that the central principle in conversation is that speakers follow in “taking turns to avoid gaps and overlaps in conversation” 2 If gaps occur they are short. SS&J propose a simplest system for the organisation of turn-taking in conversation. The model consists of two components: the turn-construction and the turn-taking component. [...] 1 Leeds-Hurwitz, Wendy. Communication in Everyday Life – A Social Interpretation. Norwood: Ablex Publ., 1989. 112.
2 Jaworski, Adam / Coupland, Nikolas (ed.) . The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge, 1999. 20.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Turn-Taking Mechanism
2.1. Speaker and hearer roles
2.2 Turn-taking: Ways of speaker change
2.3 Defining a “turn”
2.4 Social functions of the Turn-taking system
3. Conclusion
4. Bibliography
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines the mechanisms governing turn-taking in spoken interaction, contrasting the rule-based "American approach" (Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson) with alternative perspectives that emphasize the role of the hearer and communicative context. The primary objective is to analyze how speaker change is managed in different communicative settings, from formal institutional exchanges to informal collaborative conversations.
- The theoretical foundations of turn-taking and conversational structure.
- The roles and communicative responsibilities of primary speakers, secondary speakers, and hearers.
- The identification and function of discourse markers and back-channels.
- The distinction between single-floor and collaborative-floor dynamics.
- The role of adjacency pairs and sequences in regulating discourse.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1. Speaker and hearer roles.
Turn-taking is based on the participation of diverse speakers, nevertheless there is a hierarchy dividing them. According to Bublitz, who focussed on conversations with more than two participants, we should divide the role of participants into a primary speaker, a secondary speaker and a hearer in everyday communications. Speaker and hearer roles are defined along their communicative actions – meaning speaking, hearing, giving the hearer signals and making him a major or minor speaker contribution. Although everybody has the possibility to comment, to speak or just to listen ( in informal situations ), there is one primary speaker who offers the first topic. He launches the conversation, but he is not forced to keep the leading role throughout the whole talk. The role of the primary speaker can be defined with in performing speech acts such as telling, reporting, arguing etc. There can be communicative acts where we found more than one primary speaker.
The secondary speaker makes a minor speaker contribution to the topic, typically by performing speech acts such as agreeing, supporting, approving, doubting, inquiring, thus stating a position and manifesting an attitude, and who typically refrains from performing topical actions. The role of the hearer is firstly defined by more passive communicative actions, but it is the special character of the turn-taking system that active participation of each participant in certain ways is required. The hearer can not only be defined by a role just as listener, but also as speaker in a sense that he signals the speaker his attentiveness. This happens by the use of hearer-signals or back-channels, small syntactical units, words like “Yes” ( in many variants: ‘yeah’, ’yep’ etc. ) or “Mmh”. Its task is to signal the speaker that the hearer agrees with that what has just been said.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Outlines the significance of turn-taking as a fundamental pattern in communicative events and introduces the contrasting theoretical approaches to discourse analysis.
2. The Turn-Taking Mechanism: Analyzes the structural rules of speaker change, including the roles of participants, definitions of turns, and the social functions of turn-taking in various environments.
2.1. Speaker and hearer roles: Defines the hierarchical distribution of communicative roles and the importance of feedback signals in maintaining interaction.
2.2 Turn-taking: Ways of speaker change: Discusses the mechanisms for managing transition-relevant places and the influence of discourse markers on speaker-hearer exchanges.
2.3 Defining a “turn”: Examines the difficulties of establishing an unambiguous definition of a "turn" in the context of continuous, dynamic conversations.
2.4 Social functions of the Turn-taking system: Explores how turn-taking structures facilitate social relationships and regulatory control, specifically comparing single and collaborative floors.
3. Conclusion: Summarizes the key findings, reiterating that turn-taking is a flexible, context-dependent process rather than a purely rigid rule-based system.
4. Bibliography: Lists the academic literature and corpora used to support the analysis of conversational structure.
Keywords
Turn-taking, Discourse Analysis, Conversation Analysis, Speaker Roles, Hearer Signals, Back-channels, Adjacency Pairs, Collaborative Floor, Discourse Markers, Communicative Events, Social Interaction, Syntax, Pragmatics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this paper?
The paper focuses on the "turn-taking mechanism," analyzing how speakers and hearers manage the exchange of conversational turns and how these mechanisms structure social interaction.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The paper covers the theoretical "American approach" to turn-taking, the definitions of speaker/hearer roles, the use of discourse markers, and the difference between single and collaborative conversational floors.
What is the core research question or objective?
The objective is to describe how the turn-taking system functions and to evaluate how different linguistic approaches account for the complexities of real-world, often non-linear, conversational interaction.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author uses a qualitative analysis approach, examining conversational data from the "A Corpus of English Conversation" and evaluating theoretical frameworks (like those of Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson) against observed interactional patterns.
What is covered in the main body of the text?
The main body details the definitions of turns, the division of speaker roles, the function of adjacency pairs and insertion sequences, and the distinction between formal and collaborative communication environments.
Which keywords best describe this research?
The work is characterized by terms such as Turn-taking, Discourse Analysis, Back-channels, Adjacency Pairs, and Collaborative Floor.
How does the author define a "turn" in the context of this study?
The author concludes that a static definition is difficult; a "turn" is better conceptualized as a time-bound process where a speaker manages communicative goals, though it is often difficult to distinguish from mere "back-channel" signals.
What is the significance of the "collaborative floor" concept?
The "collaborative floor" describes informal interactions, often among friends, where overlaps and interruptions are not viewed as destructive, but rather as signs of group involvement and shared social interest.
- Quote paper
- Bernd Evers (Author), 2001, The Turntaking-System, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/20803
