Understanding ‘clause’ as an emergent ‘unit’ in everyday conversation
Linguists generally assume ‘clause’ to be a basic unit for the analysis of grammatical structure. Data from
natural conversations, however, suggests that ‘clause’ may not be grammaticized to the same extent across languages. Understanding
‘clause’ as a predicate (plus any arguments, inferred or expressed), we can show that participants do indeed organize their talk
around ‘clauses’. I argue that English-speaking participants in everyday interaction do indeed orient to clausal units as so
defined, by building their turns around predicates, and that these turns do key interactional work. The data further reveal that
these units must be understood as emergent structures, recurrent patterns in a given language that emerge from humans pursuing
their ordinary interactional business of communicating information, needs, identities, attitudes, and desires.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Problematizing ‘social action’
- 3.Problematizing ‘clause’: ‘Clause’ as ‘predicate-plus’
- 4.Clauses as vehicles for social action
- 4.1Directive-commissive actions
- 4.2Assessments
- 4.3Informings
- 4.4Assertions
- 4.5Requests for information
- 5.Social actions not done by clauses
- 6.Scaffolding
- 7.Conclusion and outlook
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
References
-
Appendix