2009
DOI: 10.1177/1461445609102443
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The facework of unfinished turns in French conversation

Abstract: In this article, I consider the notion of facework in the context of unfinished turns in French conversation. Unfinished turns in French conversation normally occur in the environment of talk that can be characterized as delicate or problematic. They provide a mechanism for dealing with such talk in a way that both manages misalignment and divergence between the participants and minimizes possible threats to the participants' face. They provide a subtle avoidance or minimization mechanism in that they enable t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
12
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
3
12
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This reinforces the routine administrative and organizational nature of the task and so protects the appraiser’s face because the appraiser does not have to ask the potentially face-threatening “delicate” question. A similar phenomenon is seen by Chevalier (2009) who notes that the use of unfinished turns allows participants to avoid doing actions that might threaten face. Similarly here, as an interactional accomplishment, the appraiser projects a delicate action that could threaten face.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…This reinforces the routine administrative and organizational nature of the task and so protects the appraiser’s face because the appraiser does not have to ask the potentially face-threatening “delicate” question. A similar phenomenon is seen by Chevalier (2009) who notes that the use of unfinished turns allows participants to avoid doing actions that might threaten face. Similarly here, as an interactional accomplishment, the appraiser projects a delicate action that could threaten face.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 63%
“…Furthermore, some researchers (e.g., Chevalier, 2009; Ferenčík, 2005; Heritage, 1984; Lerner, 1996) have pointed out that CA’s notion of preference is inextricably linked to notions of face. One of the cornerstones of CA is the assertion that talk is sequentially ordered in adjacent pairs that are produced by different speakers, ordered as a first part and a second part, and designed so that a particular first requires a particular second (Schegloff & Sacks, 1973).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For instance, in the current data-set the 'trail-off' conjunction "but" seems to typically occur immediately after talk which runs counter to a line or stance taken earlier in the interaction; 'trail-off' "and" often occurs where a spelling out of particulars is interactionally relevant and ongoing. Second, other sorts of 'unfinished' turns in interaction have been analyzed for some of their interactional properties and usages (e.g., Chevalier, 2007), but nothing reported in detail about their phonetic design or their visible performance in face-to-face interaction.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It might appear, then, at first glance, that in placing an increased emphasis on interaction, we are advocating a shift towards an approach to face grounded in ethnomethodology or conversation analysis in this issue. Indeed, face or face-threats have been mentioned in passing by conversation analysts, including in the context of preference organisation (Heritage, 1984: 268;Heritage and Raymond, 2005: 16;Lerner, 1996: 303), turn-taking (Chevalier, 2009;Hutchby, 2008: 226-227), repair (Robinson, 2006: 155;Svennevig, 2008: 347), epistemic authority (Heritage and Raymond, 2005), and social actions such as "getting acquainted" (Svennevig, 1999). The fact that conversation analysts have invoked either Brown and Levinson's (1987) or Goffman's (1955) notions of face thus far, however, is in our view problematic, as on closer analysis it becomes apparent that the epistemological and ontological assumptions underlying both these conceptualisations of face are not consistent with those to which conversation analysts or ethnomethodologists are explicitly committed (Arundale, 2009;Schegloff, 1988).…”
Section: Face Politeness and Interactionmentioning
confidence: 99%