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.


Davidson, J.
1984Subsequent Versions of Invitations, Offers, Requests, and Proposals.  BoPGoogle Scholar
1984Dealing with Potential or Actual Rejection. In J.M. Atkinson & J. Heritage (eds.), Structures of Social Action: 102–128. Cambridge University Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
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
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
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 logo  BoPGoogle Scholar
Levinson, S.C.
1983Pragmatics. 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
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
1984Pursuing 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
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
1988Presequences 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. DOI logoGoogle 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
2007Sequence 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
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