Jack Sidnell
Table of contents

In conversation, actions are not arranged serially, one-after-the-other, like so many marching penguins but rather come grouped together in various ways. An answer, for instance, responds to a question and the two form together a paired unit. Some of the ways in which actions are grouped together and related to one another so as to form sequences are discussed in what follows. This leads to a consideration of the distinctive way in which understanding is achieved and sustained in conversation. It also leads to an examination of “preference” – a set of biases which operate across a wide range of sequence types.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price.


Clift, R.
2005Discovering Order. Lingua 115: 1641– 1665 DOI: DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, J.
1984Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals  BoPGoogle Scholar
Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.) Structures of Social Action 102 128 Cambridge University Press DOI logo
Drew, P.
1981Adults’ Corrections of Children’s Mistakes. In P. French & M. Maclure (eds.) Adult-Child Conversations: 244–267. Croom Helm.Google Scholar
1984Speakers’ Reportings in Invitation Sequences. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.) Structures of Social Action: 152–164. Cambridge University Press  BoPGoogle Scholar
1985Analyzing the Use of Language in Courtroom Interaction. In T.A. Dijk (ed.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis, vol. 3: 133–148. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Drew, P. & E. Holt
1988Complainable Matters: The Use of Idiomatic Expressions in Making Complaints. Social Problems 35(4): 398–417. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrlich, S. & J. Sidnell
2006’I think that’s not an assumption you ought to make’: Challenging presuppositions in inquiry testimony. Language in Society 35(5): 655–676. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. & M.H. Goodwin
1987Concurrent Operations on Talk: Notes on the Interactive Organization of Assessments. IPrA Papers in Pragmatics 1(1): 1–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. & J. Heritage
1990Conversation Analysis. Annual Review of Anthropology 19: 283–307. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J.
1984Garfinkel and ethnomethodology. Polity Press.Google Scholar
2005Cognition in discourse. In H. Te Molder & J. Potter (eds.) Conversation and Congnition: 184–202. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. & G. Raymond
2005The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1): 15–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heritage, J. & S. Sefi
1992Dilemmas of Advice: Aspects of the Delivery and Reception of Advice in Interactions Between Health Visitors and First Time Mothers. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.) Talk at Work: 359–417. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Jefferson, G.
1988On the Sequential Organization of Troubles-Talk in Ordinary Conversation. Social Problems 35(4): 418–441. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kitzinger, C.
2000Doing feminist conversation analysis. Feminism and Psychology 10(2): 163–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lerner, G.
2004Collaborative turn sequences. In G. Lerner (ed.) Conversation analysis : studies from the first generation: 225–256. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S.C.
1983Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
1992Activity types and language. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.) Talk at Work: 66–100. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2006On the human “interactional engine”. In N.J. Enfield & S.C. Levinson (eds.) Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition and Interaction. Berg.Google Scholar
Maynard, D.
1991Interaction and institutional assymetry in clinical discourse. American Journal of Sociology 97(2): 448–495. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992On clinicians co-implicating recipients’ perspective in the delivery of diagnostic news. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.) Talk at Work: 331–358. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pomerantz, A.
1978Compliment Responses: Notes on the Co-operation of Multiple Constraints. In J. Schenkein (ed.) Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction: 79–112. Academic Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
1984aAgreeing and Disagreeing with Assessments: Some Features of Preferred/Dispreferred Turn Shapes. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.) Structures of Social Action: Studies in Conversation Analysis: 57–101. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1984bPursuing a Response. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.) Structures of Social Action: 152–164. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1986Extreme Case Formulations: A Way of Legitimizing Claims. Human Studies 9: 219–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, R.
1985A Comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Raymond, G.
2000The Structure of Responding: Type-conforming and noncornforming responses to yes/no type interrogatives. UCLA: Unpublished dissertation.Google Scholar
2003Grammar and social organization: Yes/No interrogatives and the structure of responding. American Sociological Review 68: 939–967. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H.
1975Everyone Has to Lie. In M. Sanches & B.G. Blount (eds.) Sociocultural Dimensions of Language Use: 57–80. Academic Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1987[1973] On the Preferences for Agreement and Contiguity in Sequences in Conversation. In G. Button & J.R.E. Lee (eds.) Talk and Social Organisation: 54–69. Multilingual Matters.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1995Lectures on Conversation ( 2 vols.). Blackwell. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
1995[1971] Spouse Talk. In G. Jefferson (ed.) Lectures on Conversation, vol. 2: 437–443. Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995[1965] Rules of conversational sequence. In G. Jefferson (ed.) Lectures on Conversation, vol. 1: 3–11. Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995[1966] An introduction sequence. In G. Jefferson (ed.) Lectures on Conversation, vol. 1: 281–291. Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H., E.A. Schegloff & G. Jefferson
1974A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-Taking for Conversation. Language 50: 696–735. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A.
1968Sequencing in Conversational Openings. American Anthropologist 70: 1075–1095. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
1972Notes on a Conversational Practice: Formulating Place. In D. Sudnow (ed.) Studies in Social Interaction: 75–119. Free Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1979Identification and Recognition in Telephone Openings. In G. Psathas (ed.) Everyday Language: 23–78. Erlbaum.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1984On Some Questions and Ambiguities in Conversation. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.) Structures of Social Action: 28–52. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1986The Routine as Achievement. Human Studies 9 (2/3): 111–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988aGoffman and the Analysis of Conversation. In P. Drew & A. Wootton (eds.) Erving Goffman: Exploring the Interaction Order: 89–135. Polity Press.Google Scholar
1988bPresequences and Indirection: Applying Speech Act Theory to Ordinary Conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 12 (1): 55–62. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992Repair after next turn: the last structurally provided for place for the defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 95(5): 1295– 1345.Google Scholar
1995Introduction. In G. Jefferson (ed.) Harvey Sacks: Lectures on Conversation I: ix–lxii. Blackwell.Google Scholar
1996Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology 104(1): 161–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002Reflections on Research on Telephone Conversation: Issues of Cross-Cultural Scope and Scholarly Exchange, Interactional Import and Consequences. In K.K. Luke & T.-S. Pavlidou (eds.) Telephone Calls: Unity and Diversity in Conversational Structure Across Languages and Cultures: 249–281. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005On complainability. Social Problems 52(4): 449–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis I. Cambridge University Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E.A. & H. Sacks
1973Opening up closings. Semiotica 8(4): 289–327. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, J.
2004There’s risks in everything: Extreme case formulations and accountability in inquiry testimony. Discourse and Society 15(6): 745–766. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
forthcoming) The design and positioning of questions in Inquiry testimony. In S. Ehrlich & A. Freed (eds.) “Why Do You Ask?”: The Function of Questions in Institutional Discourse Oxford University Press DOI logo
Siverman, D., R. Bor, R. Miller & R. Goldman
1992’Obviously the advice is then to keep to safer sex’: Advice giving and advice reception in AIDS counselling. In P. Aggleton, P. Davies & G. Hart (eds.) AIDS: Rights, Risk and Reason: 174–191. Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Stivers, T.
2001Negotiating who presents the problem: Next speaker selection in pediatric encounters. Journal of Communication 51(2): 1–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002’Symptoms only’ and ’Candidate diagnoses’: Presenting the Problem in Pediatric Encounters. Health Communication 14(3): 299–338. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stivers, T. & J.D. Robinson
2006A Preference for Progressivity in Interaction. Language in Society 35: 367–392. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Terasaki, A.K.
2004[1976] Pre-announcement sequences in conversation. In G. Lerner (ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation: 171–223. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wootton, A.
1997Interaction and the development of mind. Cambridge University Press. DOI logo  BoPGoogle Scholar