MLA SAMPLE III The Structure And Function Of Conversations

Surname 1

Name of Author:

Professor:

Course:

Date of Submission:

The Structure and Function of Conversations

The Longman Student Grammar of Spoken and Written English by Biber, Geoffrey, and

Susan is perhaps one of the most relevant books in the study of written and spoken English.

Besides drawing the structures of conversations, the book defines the most important elements of

conversations and the organizational structures that define everyday talk in the society. This is

one clear proof that everyday talk is not disorganized and chaotic, rather, it is structured to

comply with various linguistic rules and expectations. In her issue of conversational analysis,

Perakyla

confirms this by explaining that all conversations occurring in everyday dialogue have

underpinning features and structures like speech acts, which distinctively define the rules for

initiating conversations, interrupting the speeches of others, asking questions, issuing responses

and ending conversations (111). These can be classified through the structures of openings,

closings, turn taking, gaps of silence, overlaps, adjacency pairs, and repairs.

Characteristics of Everyday Talk

In their basic formats, most everyday conversations in socialization circles begin without any

form of planning. On the other hand, institutionalized conversations that guide group dialogues

in educational, religious, and social events are highly planned and structured. In all cases, the

conversations display various characteristics that remain part of everyday talk (Bourdieuand

John 38). An individual will start by greeting, ordering, or requesting another. The other(s) will

Surname 2

return the greeting, raise a question, or refuse to perform whatever they have been requested

verbally. These patterns display organization trends that can be predicted.

The first characteristic of all conversations in everyday talk is the involvement of at least

two individuals for a conversation to take place. Notably, no single individual has the ability to

commence a conversation on their own without the participation of a second party. Even when

individuals make exclamations on their own, they do it in response to communications they have

heard from other sources (Patterson 1). Taking this into account, one can plan his conversation in

advance and predict some of “must” elements of each talk depending on the counterpart.

Secondly, everyday conversations involve both the exchange of ideas and the

establishment of mutual understanding. While the former established the basis for everyday talk

and origination for everyday talk, the latter remains relevant for continuation and sustenance of

conversations. In the absence of ideas, everyday conversations cannot be initiated. Similarly, the

absence of understanding among the communicators will end a conversation. Mostly

characterized by face-to-face relations, everyday talks occur in a continuous context and involve

the use of words as well as symbols.

As expressed by Perakyla

, other elements that characterize everyday talk may encompass

actions, structural organization, and inter-subjectivity with each of these features functioning to

aid the other (117). Examples of conversational actions may include openings and closings of

speech, or assessments occurring at specific points within the conversations. Inter-subjectivity

defines the intentions of the speakers in a conversation, their situational awareness, the processes

of relations they employ, and the positions they adopt in relation to the subjects of discussion.

The last element is created, maintained, negotiated, or changed depending on the direction of the

conversation (Sidnell and Tanya 229). In the end, the greatest characteristic of every

Surname 3

conversation is the delivery of the expected messages. Considering the occurrences in everyday

talk, this is made possible by a number of factors. Diction, expressiveness, and opportunism also

define everyday talk where anybody seizes an opportunity and commences a discussion.

Overall, numerous other trends characterize conversations in everyday talk. Audibility

and clarity of diction enable involved parties to hear their communicating partners. Because of

wavering emotions, characters must use varied intonations to express anger, disgust, joy, and

other moderate emotions. Again, the absence of structural guidance for conversational

contributions lead to many odd forms in everyday talk. These include omissions of some words,

the use of short forms, and repetitive trends that go almost unnoticed by those involved in the

conversations.

Rules Defining the Structure and Function of Talk with Examples

The basic structures of conversations are defined by order and organization of communiques in a

conversation. Although many perspectives express the idea that order in such conversations pre-

exists and is traditional, Rodina indicates otherwise by showing that the order in these settings is

produced from internalized language patterns by the speakers. To a large extent, the participants

in these conversations depend on situational and occasional elements to generate this orderliness

intrinsically (Rodina 304). The major structures of this kind of talk include openings, closings,

turn taking, gaps of silence, overlaps, adjacency pairs, and repairs.

Opening Conversations: The commencements of conversations functionally perform the

structural role of initiations. Typically, they are characterized by three part conversational

structures that include summons, answers, and the reasons for conversation initiations as shown:

Father: Son? Summons

Son: Yes, Dad. Answer

Surname 4

Father: Where is John? Reason for summons

Closing Conversations: At the end of every conversation, one individual must realize the need to

terminate communication. Various trends exist for doing such with brief cases in common use as

opposed to longer structures. In everyday talk, the most common conversation terminators

include “okay, bye, alright, see you, and yes” among many others.

Turn-taking: As expressed by Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson, turn-taking guides conversations

by defining for every participant when to seize the occasion and when to let others contribute. In

sum, the rule functions through a give and take process where one speaks and then listens to

others before they speak again (697). Turn taking involves turn construction and turn allocation.

The rules defined by Sacks, Schegloff and Jefferson in turn-taking involve:

a) A speaker who is currently contributing should select the next speaker by posing to

them a question or using another approach.

b) In the event that the next speaker is not selected, any potential speaker may self-select

to fulfil the role.

c) If option b) fails, the currently contributing speaker may choose to go on with the

talk.

Gaps of Silence: Gaps of silence also occur in conversations involving two or more people.

Sometimes they occur in the middle of conversations while at other times they occur at the shifts

of turns. In all the cases, they may involve the comprehension of who the next speaker will be as

well as speakers thinking about their subject matters of contribution.

Overlaps:Structurally, overlaps define instantaneous or simultaneous attempts by more than one

speaker to speak at the same time. When they occur, they are treated as speech interruptions

Surname 5

because neither of the speaking individuals communicates. The first speaker normally assumes

the role of the mediator to give direction for subsequent communications.

Joe : Did you see Betty?

Willis : Yeah – at the fashion show

Joe : Oh my God // she was so gorgeous

Willis : // she was so elegant

Liddicoat also indicated that overlaps can be used to portray conversational competition

among turn-taking participants (79).

Adjacency Pairs: Adjacency pairs define related but separate utterances by different speakers,

which occur in a way that the second can be tagged as an expected follow up to the first one.

They are used in the opening, continuation and closing of conversations (Paltridge 115). For

example:

Caller : Hello

Receiver : Hi

Caller : How are you?

Receiver : I am fine

Repairs: Categorized into self-repair and other-repair, these structural features define the

individuals consciousness in relation to mistakes made while speaking. Thus, they make attempts

to correct the mistakes in varied ways. In the first repair, an individual attempts to correct a

mistake they made themselves. Contrarily, the second involves correcting speech errors for

others (Lerner 295.

William: I saw her tearing the book belonging to the teacher. I mean I saw her standing

near those who were tearing the book belonging to the teacher.

Surname 6

John: Did you bring me the money? I told you I needed to visit the ATM. Sorry, I mean,

did you bring the card?

Conclusion

In conclusion, considerations of different authors reveal everyday talk as highly organized with

distinctive functions and structures. The use of sociolinguistics and cultural establishments

define these rules that govern individual interactions and the use of language. They initiate

conversations, prompt people to respond, define viable interruptions, draw intonational graphs,

and establish the expected or initiated ends of conversations. The structural rules responsible for

these determinations include openings, closings, turn taking, gaps of silence, overlaps, adjacency

pairs, and repairs. They enable social interactions and transactions to run smoothly by the use of

everyday talk.

Surname 7

Works Cited

Biber, Douglas, Geoffrey Neil Leech, and Susan Conrad. Student Grammar of Spoken and

Written English. Harlow: Longman, 1999. Print.

Bourdieu, Pierre, and John B. Thompson. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge, Mass:

Harvard University Press, 1991. Print.

Lerner, G.H. Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. Philadelphia: John

Benjamin Publishing Company, 2004. Print.

Liddicoat, A.J. Introduction to Conversation Analysis. New York: Continuum Books. Print.

Paltridge, B. Discourse Analysis 3rd Edition. Maiden, USA: Continuum Books, 2008. Print

Patterson, Kerry. Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High, Second

Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012. Print

Perakyla

, Anssi. Conversation Analysis and Psychotherapy. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 2008. Print.

Rodina, Herta. "An Introduction to Conversation Analysis" by Liddicoat, Anthony.The Modern

Language Journal 93.2 (2009): 304-304. Web.

Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson. "A Simplest Systematics for the

Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation". Language 50.4 (1974): 696-735. Web.

Sidnell, Jack, and Tanya Stivers. The Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester, West

Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."

MLA SAMPLE III The Structure and Function of Conversations

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

Ian McGregor

Shannon Williams