Cover not available
Part of
The ‘Noun Phrase’ across Languages: An emergent unit in interaction
Edited by Tsuyoshi Ono and Sandra A. Thompson
[Typological Studies in Language 128] 2020
► pp. 43–70

Chapter 3
Emergent complex noun phrases

On-line trajectories of ‘relativized’ NPs in French talk-in-interaction

| University of Neuchâtel
| University of Neuchâtel
| University of Neuchâtel
In this paper, we document the temporal and contingent nature of noun phrases (NPs). Focusing on relativized NPs, we show that they are produced as an interactional accomplishment, emerging from how participants adapt to each other’s verbal and non-verbal conduct. Based on 20 hours of French conversation, we identify two types of emergent complex NPs, and document their interactional working: Those resulting from a current speaker’s adding on a relative clause increment to his/her preceding turn; and those resulting from a next speaker’s production of such an increment, yielding jointly constructed NPs. We discuss implications for our understanding of the NP as an emergent unit, of the subordinate (or not) status of relative clauses, and of the notion of increment.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Formal properties of on-line emergent relativized NPs
    • 2.1Relativized NPs resulting from self-incrementation
    • 2.2Relativized NPs resulting from other-incrementation
  • 3.The interactional workings of on-line emergent relativized NPs
    • 3.1Self-incrementing an NP by means of an RC: Pursuing uptake and repairing reference
    • 3.2Other-incrementing an NP by means of an RC: Initiating referential repair and accomplishing a disaligning action
  • 4.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 15 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.128.03sto
References (51)
References
Auer, Peter. 1996. On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. In Prosody in Conversation: Interactional Studies, Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Margret Selting (eds), 57–100. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Syntax als Prozess. InLiSt – Interaction and Linguistic Structures 41. <[URL]>
. 2009. On-line syntax: Thoughts on the temporality of spoken language. Language Sciences 31: 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, Peter & Pfänder, Stefan (eds). 2011. Constructions: Emerging and Emergent. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beeching, Kate. 2002. Gender, Politeness and Pragmatic Particles in French [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 104]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2007. Grammar in time: The non-restrictive ‘which’-clause as an interactional resource. Essex Research Reports in Linguistics 55: 51–82.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth & Ono, Tsuyoshi (eds). 2007. Turn Continuation in Cross-linguistic Perspective. Special issue of Pragmatics 17.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. 2012. Some truths and untruths about final intonation in conversational questions. In J. P. de Ruiter (ed.), Questions: Formal, functional and interactional perspectives. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Deppermann, Arnulf & Günthner, Susanne (eds). 2015. Temporality in Interaction [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 27]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Drew, Paul. 1987. Po-faced receipts of teases. Linguistics 25: 219–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1996. Interactional units in conversation: Syntactic, intonational, and pragmatic resources for the management of turns. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 134–185. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Fox, Barbara A. & Thompson, Sandra A. 2002. Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In The Language of Turn and Sequence, Cecilia E. Ford, Barbara A. Fox & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 14–38. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Fox, Barbara A. & Thompson, Sandra A. 1990. A discourse explanation of the grammar of relative clauses in English conversation. Language 66: 297–316. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2007. Relative clauses in English conversation. Relativizers, frequency, and the notion of construction. Studies in Language 31: 293–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, T. 1984. Syntax. A Functional-typological Introduction, Vol. I. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Charles. 1987. Forgetfulness as an interactive resource. Social Psychology Quarterly 50: 115–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Groupe de Fribourg. 2012. Grammaire de la période. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa. 2001. Syntax in the Making: The Emergence of Syntactic Units in Finnish Conversational Discourse [Studies in Discourse and Grammar 9]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Free NPs as units. Studies in Languag 43: 301–328. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, John. 1984. A change-of-state token and aspects of its sequential placement. In Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis, J. Maxwell Atkinson & John Heritage (eds), 299–345. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1987. Emergent grammar. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. General Session and Parasession on Grammar and Cognition, John Aske, Natasha Beery, Laura Michaelis & Hana Filip (eds), 139–157. Berkeley CA: BLS.Google Scholar
. 2011. Emergent grammar and temporality in interactional linguistics. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 22–45. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Thompson, Sandra A. 2008. Projectability and clause combining in interaction. In Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining. The Multifunctionality of Conjunctions [Typological Studies in Language 80], Ritva Laury (ed.), 99–124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie. 2015. La dislocation à droite revisitée. Une approche interactionniste. Louvain-la-Neuve: De Boeck. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie & Pekarek Doehler, Simona. 2014. ‘Pivotage’ in French talk-in-interaction: On the emergent nature of [clause-NP-clause] pivots. Pragmatics 24: 593–622. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (Ed.), Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 125], 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keenan, Edward L. & Comrie, Bernard. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8: 63–99.Google Scholar
Laury, Ritva & Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa. 2015. Detached NPs with relative clauses in Finnish conversations. In Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Crosslinguistic Perspective, M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest & Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (eds), 149–166. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luke, Kang Kwong, Thompson, Sandra A. & Ono, Tsuyoshi. 2012. Turns and increments: A comparative perspective. Discourse Processes 49(3–4): 155–162. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maschler, Yael. 2011. On the emergence of adverbial connectives from Hebrew relative clause constructions. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 293–331. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mertens, Piet. 2004. The prosogram: Semi-automatic transcription of prosody based on a tonal perception model. In Proceedings of Speech Prosody, Bernard Bel & Isabelle Marlien (eds), 443–446, Nara, Japan, 23–26 March.Google Scholar
Ono, Tsuyoshi & Thompson, Sandra A. 1994. Unattached NPs in English conversation. Berkeley Linguistics Society 20: 402–419. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona. 2011a. Emergent grammar for all practical purposes: The on-line formatting of dislocated constructions in French conversation. In Constructions: Emerging and Emergent, Peter Auer & Stefan Pfänder (eds), 45–88. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011b. Clause-combining and the sequencing of actions: projector constructions in French conversation. In Subordination in Conversation: A Crosslinguistic Perspective [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 24], Ritva Laury & Ryoko Suzuki (eds), 103–148. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pekarek Doehler, Simona, De Stefani, Elwys & Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie. 2015. Time and Emergence in Grammar. Dislocation, Topicalization and Hanging Topic in French Talk-in-interaction [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Persson, Rasmus. 2015. Registering and repair-initiating repeats in French talk-in-interaction. Discourse Studies 17: 583–608. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel A. 1996. Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In Interaction and Grammar, Elinor Ochs, Emanuel A. Schegloff & Sandra A. Thompson (eds), 52–134. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2001. Conversation analysis: A project in progress – ‘increments’. Forum lecture delivered at the LSA Linguistic Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara.
2016. Increments. In Accountability in Social Interaction, Jeffrey D. Robinson (ed.), 239–263. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Enfield, Nicholas J. & Levinson, Stephen C. 2007. Person reference in interaction. In Person Reference in Interaction: Linguistic, Cultural, and Social Perspectives, Nicholas J. Enfield & Tanya Stivers (eds), 1–20. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya & Rossano, Federico. 2010. Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction 43: 3–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, Tanya, Mondada, Lorenza & Steensig, Jakob. 2011. Knowledge, morality and affiliation in social interaction. In The Morality of Knowledge in Conversation, Tanya Stivers, Lorenza Mondada & Jakob Steensig (eds), 1–31. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria. 2014. Répétition et différenciation dans les reprises structurelles intégrant des relatives. In La parole reprise: Formes, processus et fonctions. Actes du 12e colloque de logopédie – 16–17 novembre 2012, Stefano Rezzonico (ed.). TRANEL 60: 209–220.Google Scholar
. 2016. Grammaire-en-interaction: Le potentiel praxéologique des relatives dans les conversations en français. Bulletin Suisse de Linguistique Appliquée 104: 87–103.Google Scholar
. 2020. Actions et conduites mimo-gestuelles dans l’usage conversationnel des relatives en français [Sciences pour la communication 128]. Berne: Peter Lang.[URL]. DOI logo
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria & Pekarek Doehler, Simona. 2020. Relative-clause increments and the management of reference. A multimodal analysis of French talk-in-interaction. A multimodal analysis. In Emergent Syntax for Conversation: Clausal Patterns and the Organization of Action. [Studies in Language and Social Interaction 32], Yael Maschler, Simona Pekarek Doehler, Jan Lindström & Leelo Keevallik (eds), 303–329. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tanaka, Hiroko. 1999. Turn-Taking in Japanese Conversation: A Study in Grammar and Interaction [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 56]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tao, Hongyin. 1996. Units in Mandarin Conversation: Prosody, Discourse, and Grammar [Studies in Discourse and Grammar 5]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tao, Hongyin & McCarthy, Michael J. 2001. Understanding non-restrictive which-clauses in spoken English, which is not an easy thing. Language Sciences 23: 651–677. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A., Fox, Barbara A. & Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 2015. Grammar in Everyday Talk: Building Responsive Actions. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, Gareth. 2004. On some interactional and phonetic properties of increments to turns in talk-in-interaction. In Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen & Cecilia E. Ford (eds), Sound Patterns in Interaction. Cross-Linguistic Studies from Conversation [Typological Studies in Language 62], 147–169. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Gardelle, Laure, Elise Mignot & Julie Neveux
2024. Why the Morphosyntax/Semantics Interface Matters for Nouns. In Nouns and the Morphosyntax / Semantics Interface, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Horlacher, Anne-Sylvie, F. Neveu, S. Prévost, A. Montébran, A. Steuckardt, G. Bergounioux, G. Merminod & G. Philippe
2024. Les si-indépendantes dans l’interaction : un continuum d’insubordination. SHS Web of Conferences 191 ► pp. 01016 ff. DOI logo
Mushin, Ilana & Simona Pekarek Doehler
2021. Linguistic structures in social interaction. Interactional Linguistics 1:1 ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Rönnqvist, Sara & Jan Lindström
2021. Turn Continuations and Gesture: “And Then”-Prefacing in Multi-Party Conversations. Frontiers in Communication 6 DOI logo
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria & Simona Pekarek Doehler
2020. Chapter 11. Relative-clause increments and the management of reference. In Emergent Syntax for Conversation [Studies in Language and Social Interaction, 32], ► pp. 303 ff. DOI logo
Stoenica, Ioana-Maria & Simona Pekarek Doehler
2021. Fonctionnement macro-syntaxique et dimension anaphorique des relatives produites post hoc  : une analyse interactionnelle et multimodale. Langue française N° 210:2 ► pp. 101 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 september 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.