This chapter investigates the use of the Danish particle
altså in turn-initial position. Turn-initial
altså can be employed for prefacing a wide
range of actions, including self- and other-initiated repair,
questions, second stories and answers to both yes/no and
wh-questions. We show that across these actions, participants in
interaction produce altså to indicate (1) that the
action they will produce departs from progressivity, (2) that it
will expand on something prior, (3) that the departure is,
therefore, justified, and (4) that it will contribute to
reinstalling the progression of the larger on-going activity. Some
of the actions that altså prefaces can also be
prefaced by phrases that function like ‘you know’ or ‘I mean’, which
seem to do at least some of the work that altså
does, but altså is used more frequently and across
a wider range of actions. In our discussion, we raise the
possibility that the usefulness of altså is due to
the fact that it allows its producer to indicate that no one party
in the interaction was accountable or at fault for the
departure.
2011 “Proposing Shared Knowledge as a Means of Pursuing
Agreement.” In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, ed. by Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada, and Jakob Steensig, 207–234. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Den Danske Ordbog. Moderne dansk
sprog
The Danish dictionary. Modern Danish
language]. Url: [URL], visited on August 28,
2016.
DDO, altså
2016 “altså.” In Den danske ordbog [The Danish dictionary]. Url: [URL], visited on August 28,
2016
Deppermann, Arnulf, and Henrike Helmer
2013 “Zur Grammatik des Verstehens im
Gespräch: Inferenzen anzeigen und Handlungskonsequenzen
ziehen mit ‘also’ und ’dann’ [On the grammar of understanding in
talk: Showing inferences and drawing action-consequences
with ‘also’ and ‘dann’].” Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 32 (1):1–39.
Drew, Paul
1997 “’Open’ Class Repair Initiators in Response to
Sequential Sources of Troubles in
Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 28:69–101.
Emmertsen, Sofie, and Trine Heinemann
2010 “Realization as a Device for Remedying Problems of
Affiliation in Interaction.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 43 (2):109–132.
Eriksson, Mats
1988 “Ju, väl, då, alltså. En studie av
talaktsadverbial i stockholmskt talspråk [Ju, väl, då, alltså.A study of speech
act adverbials in Stockholm spoken language].” Studier i stockholmsspråk 1. (MINS) 27:75–120.
Fox, Barbara A., and Sandra A. Thompson
2010 “Responses to Wh-Questions in English
Conversation.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 43 (2):133–156.
Goodwin, Charles
1986 “Gesture as a Resource for the Organization of
Mutual Orientation.” Semiotica 62:29–49.
Hakulinen, Auli, and Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen
2015 “Insisting on ‘My Side’:
Siis-prefaced Utterances in
Finnish.” Journal of Pragmatics 75:111–130.
Hansen, Erik, and Lars Heltoft
2011Grammatik over det Danske Sprog [Grammar of the Danish
Language]. Copenhagen: Det Danske Sprog-og Litteraturselskab.
2009 “Two Answers to Inapposite
Inquiries.” In Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives, ed. by Jack Sidnell, 159–186. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heinemann, Trine
2015 [2003]Negation in Interaction, in Danish
Conversation. Skrifter om samtalegrammatik 2:12. Url: [URL], visited on August 28,
2016. Originally [2003]: PhD thesis, University of York, UK.
Heinemann, Trine
2016a “From ‘Looking’ to ‘Seeing’: Indexing Delayed
Intelligibility of an Object with the Danish Change-of-State
Token n↑å↓:.” Journal of Pragmatics 104:108–132.
2000Danske sætningsadverbialer og topologi i
diakron belysning [Danish clausal adverbs and topology
in a diachronic perspective]. PhD thesis, Copenhagen University, Denmark.
Keevallik, Leelo
2003From Interaction to Grammar. Estonian Finite Verb Forms
in Conversation. PhD thesis, University of Uppsala, Sweden.
Kim, Hye Ri Stephanie
2013 “Reshaping the Response Space with ‘kulenikka’ in
Beginning to Respond to Questions in Korean
Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 57:303–317.
2015 “’O(↑)kay(?), ↑Ohkay’ – En
Prosodiafhængig ytringspartikel? [’O(↑)kay(?), ↑Ohkay’ – A prosodically
dependent utterance particle?].” Skrifter om samtalegrammatik 2(1). Url: [URL], visited on August 28,
2016.
Laakso, Minna, and Marja-Leena Sorjonen
2010 “Cut-off or Particle: Devices for Initiating
Self-Repair in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 42:1151–1172.
Lee, Seung-Hee
2009 “Extended Requesting: Interaction and
Collaboration in the Production and Specification of
Requests.” Journal of Pragmatics 41:1248–1271.
Maynard, Douglas W.
2013 “Defensive Mechanisms: I-Mean-Prefaced Utterances
in Complaint and Other Conversational
Sequences.” In Conversational Repair and Human Understanding, ed. by Makoto Hayashi, Geoffrey Raymond, and Jack Sidnell, 198–233. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mazeland, Harrie
2007 “Parenthetical Sequences.” Journal of Pragmatics 39:1816–1869.
Nielsen, Mie Femø
2002 “Nå! en skiftemarkør med mange
funktioner [Nå! a change-of-state token with many
functions].” Studier i nordisk 2000–2001:52–67.
Pedersen, Henriette Folkmann
2015 “’Jamen’ som svarindleder efter
hv-spørgsmål [’Jamen’ as a response-initiator after
wh-questions].” Skrifter om samtalegrammatik 2(2). Url: [URL], visited on August 28,
2016.
Raymond, Geoffrey
2000The Structure of Responding: Type-Conforming and
Nonconforming Responses to YNIs. PhD thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
Raymond, Geoffrey
2003 “Grammar and Social Organization: Yes/No
Interrogatives and the Structure of
Responding.” American Sociological Review 68 (6):939–967.
Robinson, Jeffrey D.
2006 “Managing Trouble Responsibility and Relationships
during Conversational Repair.” Communication Monographs 73 (2):137–161.
Rosenthal, Benjamin M.
2008 “A Resource for Repair in Japanese
Talk-in-Interaction: The Phrase TTEYUU KA.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 41 (2):227–240.
Ruusuvuori, Johanna
2005 “”Empathy” and “Sympathy” in Action: Attending to
Patients’ Troubles in Finnish Homeopathic and General
Practice Consultations.” Social Psychology Quarterly 68 (3):204–222.
Ryave, A. Lincoln
1978 “On the Achievement of a Series of
Stories.” In Studies in the Organization of Conversational
Interaction, ed. by Jim N. Schenkein, 113–132. New York: Academic Press.
Sacks, Harvey
1987 “On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity
in Sequences in Conversation.” In Talk and Social Organisation, ed. by Graham Button, and J. R. E. Lee, 54–69. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Sacks, Harvey
1992aLectures on Conversation. Vol 1, ed. by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sacks, Harvey
1992bLectures on Conversation. Vol 2, ed. by Gail Jefferson with introductions by Emanuel A. Schegloff. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of
Turn taking for Conversation.” Language 50:696–735.
Schachtenhaufen, Ruben
2013Fonetisk reduktion i dansk [Phonetic Reduction in
Danish]. PhD thesis, Copenhagen University, Denmark.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1972 “Notes on a Conversational Practice: Formulating
Place.” In Studies in Social Interaction, ed. by David Sudnow, 75–119. New York: Free Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1979 “The Relevance of Repair to
Syntax-for-Conversation”. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol.12: Discourse and
Syntax, ed. by Talmy Givon, 261–288. New York: Academic Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1988 “Goffman and the Analysis of
Conversation.” In Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order, ed. by Paul Drew, and Anthony Wootton, 89–135. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1992 “Repair After Next Turn: The Last Structurally
Provided Defense of Intersubjectivity in
Conversation.” American Journal of Sociology 97 (5):1295–1345.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1996 “Turn Organization: One Intersection of Grammar
and Interaction.” In Interaction and Grammar, ed. by Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff, and Sandra A. Thompson, 52–133. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
1997 “Third Turn Repair.” In Towards a Social Science of Language 2, ed. by Gregory R. Guy, Crawford Feagin, Deborah Schiffrin, and John Baugh, 31–40. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Schegloff, Emanuel A.
2007Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in
Conversation Analysis, vol 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schegloff, Emanuel A., Gail Jefferson, and Harvey Sacks
1977 “The Preference for Self-correction in the
Organization of Repair in Conversation.” Language 53: 361–382.
Schegloff, Emanuel A., and Gene H. Lerner
2009 “Beginning to Respond: Well-prefaced Responses to
Wh-Questions.” Research on Language & Social Interaction 42 (2):91–115.
2023. Self-Reformulation as a Preemptive Practice in Talk Addressed to L2 Users. Research on Language and Social Interaction 56:3 ► pp. 250 ff.
Svennevig, Jan, Paweł Urbanik & Aafke Diepeveen
2024. How police investigators seek to secure that suspects speaking a second language understand their rights in investigative interviews. Police Practice and Research 25:3 ► pp. 324 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 march 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.