Article published in:
Studies in Language
Vol. 41:3 (2017) ► pp. 638–659

Morphological self-repair

Self-repair within the word

| University of Colorado, Boulder
| University of Auckland
| SIL
| Nagoya University
| University of Helsinki
| University of Haifa
| University of Payame Noor
| University of Helsinki
| University of Wuppertal
| University of West Virginia
In this study we explore patterns of same-turn self-repair within the word, across ten typologically and areally diverse languages. We find universal processes emerging through language-specific resources, namely: recycling is used to delay a next item due, while replacement is used to replace an inappropriate item. For example, most of our languages with prefixes or proclitics recycle those elements to delay production of the root/host, while languages with suffixes tend not to recycle just suffixes without their roots/hosts, since that would not serve to delay the production of the root/host; rather, the whole word is recycled. Replacement of affixes and clitics is rare, regardless of position. We provide several possible explanations for these facts, all based on the nature of replacement.
Keywords: repair, typology, morphological structure
Published online: 25 October 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.41.3.04fox
References

References

Dingemanse, Mark & Nick Enfield
2015 Other-initiated repair across languages: Towards a typology of conversational structures. Open Linguistics 1. 98–118. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Egbert, Maria
2002 Der Reparatur-Mechanismus in deutschen and interkulterellen Gesprachen. Habilitation. Universität Oldenburg.Google Scholar
Fincke, Steven
1999 The syntactic organization of repair in Bikol. In Barbara Fox, Daniel Jurafsky, & Laura Michaelis (eds.), Cognition and function in language, 252–267. Stanford, CSLI.Google Scholar
Floyd, Simeon, Elizabeth Manrique, Giovanni Rossi & Francisco Torreira
2016 Timing of visual bodily behavior in repair sequences: Evidence from three languages. Discourse Processes 53(3). 175–204. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara & Robert Jasperson
1995 A syntactic exploration of repair in English conversation. In P. Davis (ed.), Descriptive and theoretical modes in the alternative linguistics, 77–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara, Makoto Hayashi & Robert Jasperson
1996 A cross-linguistic study of syntax and repair. In Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and grammar, 185–237. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara, Fay Wouk, Makoto Hayashi, Steven Fincke, Liang Tao, Marja-Leena Sorjonen, Minna Laakso & Wilf Flores Hernandez
2009 A cross-linguistic perspective on site of initiation of self-repair. In Jack Sidnell (ed.), Comparative studies in conversation analysis, 60–103. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara, Yael Maschler & Susanne Uhmann
2010 A cross-linguistic study of self-repair: Evidence from English, German, and Hebrew. Journal of Pragmatics 42. 2487–2505. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara & Fay Wouk
In preparation. A cross-linguistic study of self-repair. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gomez de Garcia, Jule
1994 Communicative strategies in conversational Kickapoo. Boulder: University of Colorado, Boulder PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2011 The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45 (1). 31–80. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
[ p. 659 ]
Hayashi, Makoto
1994 A comparative study of self-repair in English and Japanese conversation. In Noriko Akatsuka (ed.), Japanese/Korean linguistics IV, 77–93. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail
1974 Error correction as an interactional resource. Language in Society, 3(2). 181–199. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kärkäinnen, Elise, Marja-Leena Sorjonen, & Marja-Liisa Helasvuo
2007 Discourse structure. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, 301–371. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Massam, Diane
2012 Count and mass across languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mirzayan, Armik
2008 A preliminary study of same-turn self-repair initiation in Wichita conversation. In David Harrison, David Rood & Arienne Dwyer (eds.), Lessons from documented endangered languages, 317–354. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rieger, Caroline
2003 Repetitions as self-repair strategies in English and German conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 35. 47–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel
1979 The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation. In Talmy Givon (ed.), Syntax and semantics, vol. 12. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2013 Ten operations in self-initiated, same-turn repair. In Makoto Hayashi, Geoff Raymond & Jack Sidnell (eds.), Conversational repair and human understanding, 41–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack
2007 Comparative studies in conversation analysis. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 36. 229–44 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wouk, Fay
2005 The syntax of repair in Indonesian. Discourse Studies 7. 237–258 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Kazemi, Ali
2020. Same-turn self-repairs in Farsi conversation: On their initiation and framing. Journal of Pragmatics 170 ► pp. 4 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 april 2021. 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.