Why are increments such elusive objects? An afterthought

Peter Auer

Abstract

It is argued that the type of unit expansions called ‘increments’ by Schegloff 1996 is too narrowly focused on English. While the structure of English makes it particularly suited for this kind of expansion, a typologically more satisfactory approach to unit expansion runs into problems if it remains on the syntactic plane alone. A full typology will have to take into account, not only prosody and semantics, but also action structure and pragmatics at large.

Keywords:
Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Auer, Peter
(1991) Vom Ende deutscher Sätze. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 19.2: 139-157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1992) The neverending sentence: Rightward expansion in spoken language. In M. Kontra, and T. Váradi (eds.), Studies in Spoken Languages: English, German, Finno-Ugric. Budapest: Linguistic Institute at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, pp 41-59.Google Scholar
(1996) On the prosody and syntax of turn-continuations. In E. Couper-Kuhlen and M. Selting (eds.), Prosody in Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 51-100. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ford, Cecilia E., Barbara A. Fox, and Sandra A. Thompson
(2002) Constituency and the grammar of turn increments. In eaedem (eds), The Language of Turn and Sequence. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press, pp 14-38.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, Emanuel
(1996) Turn organization: One intersection of grammar and interaction. In: E. Ochs, E.A. Schegloff, and S.A. Thompson (eds.), Interaction and Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 52-133. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Uhmann, Susanne
(1997) Grammatische Regeln und Konversationelle Strategien. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vorreiter, Susanne
(2003) Turn continuations. Towards a cross-linguistic classification. INLIST 39 (http://​www​.rz​.uni​-potsdam​.de​/u​/inlist)