Article published In:
Spoken Interaction Studies in AustraliaEdited by Rod Gardner
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Series S 11] 1994
► pp. 97–118
Edited by Rod Gardner
[Australian Review of Applied Linguistics. Series S 11] 1994
► pp. 97–118
Conversation analysis
Some thoughts on its applicability to applied linguistics
The first part of this paper presents the view that ordinary conversation is the most basic form of talk, and that Conversation Analysis (CA) in the ethnomethodological tradition, whilst widely known in Australian applied linguistics, has been very little used here as a set of research tools. The distinctiveness of the CA approach is presented, and it is argued that CA has the potential to make a more substantial contribution to applied linguistic research than it has hitherto. Second, the paper considers how some basic CA research – into receipt tokens such as mm, yeah, oh and others in Australian English – might be applied to a language teaching, and specifically into the development of teaching materials in an adult ESL context. It is argued that CA has the potential for wider application in Australian applied linguistics alongside some of the more widespread and better known qualitative research methods.
References
Adelsward, V., Aronsson, K., Jonsson, L. and Linell, P.
(1987) The unequal distribution of interactional space: dominance and control in courtroom interaction. Text 71:313–346. 
Atkinson, J. M. and Drew, P.
(1979) Order in court: The organisation of verbal interaction in judicial settings. London: Macmillan.
Atkinson, J.M. and J. Heritage
eds. Structures of social action Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Beach, W.
(1993) Transitional regularities for ‘casual’ #x0022;Okay#x0022; usages. Journal of Pragmatics, 191:325–352.
Bilmes, J.
(1988) The concept of preference in conversation analysis. Language in Society, 171:161–181.
Boden, D and D. Zimmerman
eds. Talk and social structure Cambridge Polity Press
Button, G. & J. Lee
(eds.) (1987) Talk and social organization. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Drew, P.
(1990) Conversation analysis: who needs it? Text, 10, 1–2, 27–35.
Drummond, K. & R. Hopper
1993 Back channels revisited: acknowledgement tokens and speakership incipiency. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 2:157–177.
Emmison, M.
(1988) Victors and vanquished: the social organization of ceremonial congratulations and commiserations.Language and Communication 71:95–110.
Gardner, R.
in prep). Notes on the effect of intonation contour on the function of mm and some other receipt tokens.
Heritage, J.
(1984a) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
(1984b) A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In J. Atkinson, & J. Heritage (eds.), 299–345.
(1989) Current developments in conversation analysis. In Roger & Bull (eds).
Moerman, M.
(1988) Talking culture: ethnography and conversation analysis. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Psathas, G.
(1990) The organization of talk, gaze and activity in a medical interview. In G. Psathas (ed.) Interaction competence. Lanham, Md: University Press of America.
Jefferson, G.
(1973) A case of precision timing in ordinary conversation: overlapped tag-positioned address terms in closing sequences. Semiotica, 91:47–96.
(1983) Two explorations of the organization of overlapping talk in conversation: notes on some orderliness in overlap onset. Tilburg Papers in Language and Literature.
(1984a) On the organization of laughter in talk about troubles. In J. M. Atkinson and J. Heritage (eds.), 346–369.
(1984b) Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens ‘yeah’ and ‘mm hm’. Papers in Linguistics, 17, 2:197–216.
(1986) Notes on ‘latency’ in overlap onset. Human Studies, 91:153–183.
(1993) Caveat speaker: preliminary notes on recipient topic-shift implicature. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 26, 1:1–30.
Jefferson, G., H. Sacks & E. Schegloff
(1987) Notes on laughter in the pursuit of intimacy. In Button & Lee (eds), 152–205.
Liberman, K.
(1985) Understanding interaction in Central Australia: an ethnomethodological study of Australian Aboriginal people. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Moerman, R.
(1988) Talking culture: Ethnography and conversation analysis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Roger, D. and P. Bull.
(eds.) (1989) Conversation: an interdisciplinary perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, H., E. Schegloff & G. Jefferson
(1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 501:696–735.
Schegloff, E.
(1982) Discourse as an interactional achievement: some uses of ‘uh huh’ and other things that come between sentences. In D. Tannen (ed). Analyzing discourse: text and talk. Washington: Georgetown University Press.
(1987) Analyzing single episodes of interaction: an exercise in conversation analysis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50, 2:101–114.
ten Have, P.
(1991) Talk and institution: a reconsideration of the ‘asymmetry’ of doctor-patient interaction. In D. Boden and D. Zimmerman (eds.), 138–163.
West, C.
(1983) “Ask me no questions...”: an analysis of queries and replies in physician-patient dialogues. In S. Fisher and A.D. Todd (eds.) The social organization of doctor-patient communication. Washington DC: Center for Applied Linguistics, 75–106.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Burns, Anne
1998. Teaching Speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 18 ► pp. 102 ff. 
Mullan, Kerry
2015. Taking French interactional style into the classroom. System 48 ► pp. 35 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 september 2023. 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.