Article published In:
Australian Review of Applied LinguisticsVol. 16:1 (1993) ► pp.83–108
On the analyzability of conversational fabrication
A conceptual inquiry and single case example
This paper sets out to clarify the nature of fabrication in relation to conversational interaction. Drawing upon work in the conversation analysis tradition, the paper argues that two dimensions to talk-in-interaction can be distiguished which permit a clearer understanding of the idea of fabrication. Fabrication involves questions of content or substance where the functional end is one of deception, but it can also be seen as referring to practices involved in the production of talk in institutional settings – courtrooms, news interviews, etc. -where a degree of rehearsal of what is to be said is deemed necessary. The paper then explores these dimensions of fabrication in the context of an examination of a tape recorded exchange between a police officer and his informer, an encounter which has been alleged to have been an ‘artifical facade’.
References (19)
Atkinson, J.M. and P. Drew (1979) Order in court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. London, Macmillan. 
Davidson, J. (1984) Subsequent versions of invitations, offers, requests and proposals dealing with potential or actual rejection. In J.M. Atkinson and J.C. Heritage (eds) Structures of social action. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Drew, P. (1985) Analysing the use of language in courtroom interaction. In T.A. van Dijk (ed).
(1990) Strategies in the contest between lawyer and witness in cross-examination. In J. Levi and A. Walker (eds) Language in the judicial process. New York, Plenum Press
Drew, P. and J. Heritage (1992) Talk at work: Interaction in institutional settings. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Emmison, M. (1989) A conversation on trial: The case of the Ananda Marga conspiracy tapes. Journal of Pragmatics 131:363–380.
Garfinkel, H. (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall.
Garfinkel, H. and H. Sacks (1970) On formal structures of practical actions. In J.C. Mckinney and E.A. Tiryakian (eds) Theoretical sociology. New York, Appleton Century Crofts.
Goffman, E. (1974) Frame analysis. Harmondsworth, Penguin Books.
Heritage, J.C. (1985) Analysing news interviews: Aspects of the production of talk for an overhearing audience. In T.A. van Dijk (ed).
Heritage, J. and Watson, D (1980) Aspects of the properties of formulations in natural conversation: Some instances analysed. Semiotica 301:245–262.
Heritage, J.C., S. Clayman and D. Zimmerman (1988) Discourse and message analysis: The micro-structure of mass media messages. In R. Hawkins, J. Wiemann and S. Pingree (eds) Advancing communication science: Merging mass and interpersonal processes. (Sage annual reviews of Communication Research 16) Newbuey Park, Sage.
McHoul, A.W. (1987) Why there are no guarantees for interrogators. Journal of Pragmatics 111:455–471
Molomby, T. (1986) Spies, bombs and the path of bliss. Sydney, Potoroo Press.
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A., and Jefferson, G., (1974) A simplest systematics for the organisation of turn-taking for conversation. Language 50,4:696–735.
Schegloff, E.A., G. Jefferson and H Sacks (1977) The preference for self-correction in the organisation of repair in conversation. Language 531:361–382.
Schegloff, E.A., (1987) Between micro and macro: Contexts and other connections. In J.C. Alexander, B. Giesen, R. Munch and N. Smelser (eds) The macro-micro link. Berkley, University of California Press.
Van Dijk, T.A. (ed.) (1985) Handbook of discourse analysis, vol 31. London, Academic Press.
Wootton, A. (1981) The management of grantings and rejections by parents in request sequences. Semiotica 371:59–89.
Cited by (9)
Cited by nine other publications
Li, Min & Yan Xiao
2024. Do Sitcom Conversations Fully Depict Those in Natural Settings: A Corpus-Based Lexical Analysis. Sage Open 14:2 
Chepinchikj, Neda
2020. Gaze as a resource in initiating and completing sequences of interaction in Woody Allen's cinematic discourse. Ampersand 7 ► pp. 100067 ff.
Chepinchikj, Neda & Celia Thompson
2016. Analysing cinematic discourse using conversation analysis. Discourse, Context & Media 14 ► pp. 40 ff.
Dynel, Marta
2011. Stranger than Fiction? A Few Methodological Notes on Linguistic Research in Film Discourse. Brno Studies in English 37:1
Emmison, Michael & Susan Danby
2007. Who’s the friend in the background?. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 30:3 ► pp. 31.1 ff.
Emmison, Michael & Susan Danby
2007. Who’s the friend in the background?. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 30:3 ► pp. 31.1 ff.
Nevile, Maurice & Johanna Rendle-Short
2007. Language as action. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 30:3 ► pp. 30.1 ff.
Nevile, Maurice & Johanna Rendle-Short
2007. Language as action. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics 30:3 ► pp. 30.1 ff.
Emmison, Michael & Laurence Goldman
1996. What's that you said Sooty? Puppets, parlance and pretence. Language & Communication 16:1 ► pp. 17 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 october 2024. 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.