Schegloff and Sacks - Opening Up Closings - 1973

EMANUELA.
SCHEGLOFF
ANDHARVEYSACKS
Openi ng up
Cl osi ngs*
Our ai mi n t hi s
paper
i s t o
report
i n a
prel i mi nary
f ashi on
on
anal yses
wehave
been
devel opi ng
of
cl osi ngs
of
conversat i on.
Al t hough
i t
may
be
apparent
t o i nt ui t i on
t hat t he uni t ' a
si ngl e
coxi versat i on'
does
not
si mpl y
end, but i s
brought
t o a cl ose, our i ni t i al
t ask
i s
t o
devel op
a
t echni cal basi s f or a
cl osi ng
probl em.
Thi s we
t ry
t o deri ve f roma
consi derat i on of somef eat ures of t he
most basi c
sequent i al organi zat i on
of conversat i on we knowof
-
t he
organi zat i on
of
speaker
t urns.
A
part i al
sol ut i on of t hi s
probl em
i s
devel oped, empl oyi ng
resources drawn
f romt hesameorder of
organi zat i on.
The
i ncompl et eness
of t hat sol ut i on
i s shown, and
l eads t o an el aborat i on of t he
probl em,
whi ch
requi res
ref erence
t o
qui t e
di f f erent orders of
i nconversa-
t i on
-
i n
part i cul ar,
t he
organi zat i on
of
t opi c
t al k, and t he
overal l
st ruct ural
organi zat i on
of
t he
uni t ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' . The
ref ormu-
l at ed
probl em
i s usedt o l ocat ea
much broader
range
of dat aas rel evant
t o t he
probl em
of
cl osi ngs,
andsome of t hat
dat a
i s
di scussed
i n
det ai l .
Fi nal l y,
an
at t empt
i s
madet o
speci f y
t he
domai nf or whi ch t he
cl osi ng
probl ems,
as we
have
posed
t hem, seem
apposi t e.
Thi s
proj ect
i s
part
of a
program
of
work undert aken several
years ago
t o
expl ore
t he
possi bi l i t y
of
achi evi ng
a
nat ural i st i c
observat i onal di sci -
pl i ne
t hat coul d
deal wi t h
t he det ai l s of soci al act i on( s)
ri gorousl y,
*
Thi s
i s an
expanded versi on
of
a
paper
ori gi nal l y
del i vered at t heannual
meet i ng
of t he
Ameri can
Soci ol ogi cal
Associ at i on, San Franci sco,
Sept ember,
1969. Thi s
research was
support edby
t heAdvanced Research
Proj ect s Agency
of t he
Depart ment
of
Def ense and was
moni t ored
by
t he Ai r Force
Of f i ce of Sci ent i f i c Research under
Cont ract
Nos. AF49
( 638) -1761
and
F44620-68-0040. Al l
t ranscri pt s
were
produced
by
Gai l J ef f erson.
Schegloff's homepage
Click for sound excerpts
290

EMANUEL
A. SCHEGLOFF
ANDHARVEY
SACKS
empi ri cal l y,
and
f ormal l y. '
For a
vari et y
of reasons t hat need not be
spel l ed
out here, our
at t ent i on has f ocused onconversat i onal mat eri al s;
suf f i ce i t t o
say
t hat t hi s
i s
not becauseof a
speci al
i nt erest i n
l anguage,
or
any
t heoret i cal
pri macy
we accord
conversat i on. Nonet hel ess, t he
charact er of our mat eri al s as
conversat i onal has
at t ract ed our
at t ent i ont o
t he
st udy
of conversat i onas an
act i vi t y
i n i t s own
ri ght ,
and
t hereby
t o
t he
ways
i n whi ch
any
act i ons
accompl i shed
i n
conversat i on
requi re
ref erence t o t he
propert i es
and
organi zat i on
of
conversat i on
f or t hei r
underst andi ng
and
anal ysi s,
bot h
by
part i ci pant s
and
by prof essi onal
i nvest i gat ors.
Thi s l ast
phrase requi res
emphasi s
and
expl i cat i on. 2
Wehave
proceeded
under t he
assumpt i on ( an assumpt i on
borne out
by
our
research) t hat i nsof ar as t he mat eri al s we worked wi t h exhi bi t ed
orderl i ness,
t hey
di dso not
onl y
f or us, i ndeednot i n
t he
f i rst
pl ace
f or us,
but f or t he
copart i ci pant s
who had
produced
t hem. I f t he
mat eri al s
( records
of nat ural conversat i ons) were
orderl y, t hey
wereso because
t hey
had been
met hodi cal l y
produced by
members of t he
soci et y
f or one
anot her, andi t
was
a
f eat ureof t heconversat i ons t hat wet reat ed as dat a
t hat
t hey
were
produced
so as t o al l owt he
di spl ay by
t he
copart i ci pant s
t o each ot her
of t hei r orderl i ness, andt o al l owt he
part i ci pant s
t o
di spl ay
t o
each ot her t hei r
anal ysi s,
appreci at i on,
and use of t hat
orderl i ness.
Accordi ngl y,
our
anal ysi s
has
sought
t o
expl i cat e
t he
ways
i n whi ch t he
mat eri al s are
produced by
members i n
orderl y ways
t hat exhi bi t t hei r
orderl i ness, have t hei r
orderl i ness
appreci at ed
and used, and have t hat
appreci at i on di spl ayed
and
t reat ed as t he basi s f or
subsequent
act i on.
I nt he
ensui ng
di scussi on, t heref ore, i t
shoul d
be
cl earl y
underst ood
t hat
t he
' cl osi ng probl em'
we are
di scussi ng
i s
proposed
as
a
probl em
f or
conversat i onal i st s; weare not
i nt erest ed
i n
i t as
a
probl em
f or
anal yst s
except
i nsof ar as, and i n t he
ways,
i t i s a
probl em
f or
part i ci pant s.
( By ' probl em'
we do
not
i nt end
puzzl e,
i n t he sense t hat
part i ci pant s
needt o
ponder
t hemat t er of howt o cl oseaconversat i on. Wemeant hat
cl osi ngs
aret o be seen as
achi evement s,
as
sol ut i ons t o cert ai n
probl ems
of conversat i onal
organi zat i on.
Whi l e, f or
many peopl e, cl osi ng
acon-
versat i on
may
be a
pract i cal probl em
i nt hesenset hat
t hey
f i nd i t di f f i cul t
t o
get
out of a
conversat i on
t hey
are i n, t hat
probl em
i s di f f erent f rom
t he
probl em
of
cl osi ng
t hat weare concerned wi t h. The
probl em
weare
'
Product s of t hat
ef f ort
al ready publ i shed
or i n
press
or
preparat i on
i ncl ude: Sacks
( 1972a;
1972b;
f ort hcomi ng) , Schegl of f ( 1968; 1972;
f ort hcomi ng) ,
J ef f erson
( 1972) ,
Schenkei n
( f ort hcomi ng) ,
Moerman
( 1967; 1970) .
2
Hereour debt s t o t he work of Harol d
Garf i nkel surf ace. El sewhere,
t hough t hey
cannot be
pi npoi nt ed,
t hey
are
pervasi ve.
OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

291
concerned wi t h set s
up
t he
possi bi l i t i es
of a
pract i cal probl em
but does
not
requi re
t hat
such
pract i cal probl ems
occur. Our di scussi on shoul d
t hen be
abl e t o f urni sh
bases f or
t he
exi st ence
of
pract i cal probl ems
of
cl osi ngconversat i ons. )
Themat eri al s wi t hwhi chwehaveworked
are
audi ot apes
and
t ranscri pt s
of
nat ural l y occurri ng
i nt eract i ons
( i . e. ,
ones not
producedby
research
i nt ervent i on such as
experi ment
or i nt ervi ew) wi t h
di f f eri ng
numbers of
part i ci pant s
and di f f erent combi nat i ons
of
part i ci pant
at t ri but es.
3
Therei s a
danger at t endi ng
t hi s
way
of
charact eri zi ng
our mat eri al s,
name-
l y,
t hat we be heard as
proposi ng
t he assured rel evance of numbers,
at t ri but es of
part i ci pant s,
et c. ,
t o t he
way
t he
dat a are
produced,
i nt er-
pret ed,
or
anal yzed by i nvest i gat ors
or
by
t he
part i ci pant s
t hemsel ves.
Such
avi ewcarri es consi derabl e
pl ausi bi l i t y,
but f or
preci sel y
t hat reason
i t shoul dbe
t reat ed
wi t h
ext reme
caut i on, andbei nt roduced
onl y
where
warrant
canbe
of f ered f or
t he rel evance of such charact eri zat i ons of t he
dat af romt hedat at hemsel ves. 4Weof f er somesuch warrant edcharact eri -
Consi derat i ons of
spaceprecl ude
t heext ensi veci t at i onof dat ai nt he t ext . Nonet he-
l ess, wei nt end our
anal ysi s
t o be
t horoughl y
empi ri cal ; t hroughout
i t charact eri zes
and
anal yzes
conversat i onal mat eri al s wehavecol l ect ed over t he l ast several
years,
and
wei nvi t ei t s assessment onnat ural conversat i onal mat eri al s readers
may
col l ect .
Af urt her
reason
f or l i mi t at i ons
on
dat a ci t at i on
may
bement i oned, whi ch
ref l ect s
on t he nat ure of t he
probl em
wi t h
whi ch
weare
deal i ng. I nvest i gat i ons
of
greet i ngs
( Sacks, ms. )
or summons-answer
sequences ( Schegl of f , 1968) appear
t o
sat i sf y
dat a
ci t at i on
requi rement s
wi t h af ewcases, such as "hel l o",
"hel l o". I t woul d beredundant
t o ci t e
mul t i pl e
i nst ances of such
exchanges,
or mi nor vari ant s
of
t hem
( t hough
some
vari ant s woul d
requi re separat e
t reat ment ) . Fai l uret o dosuch
mul t i pl e
ci t at i on woul d
not
represent
as
pauci t y
of
empi ri cal
evi dence. But , whi l e conversat i onal
openi ngs
regul arl y empl oy
acommon
st art i ngpoi nt
-
wi t h
greet i ngs,
et c.
-
and t hen
di verge
over a
range
of
part i cul ar
conversat i ons, conversat i onal
cl osi ngs converge
f roma
di verse
range
of conversat i ons-i n-t hei r-course t o a
regul ar
common cl osure wi t h
"byebye"
or
i t s vari ant s.
Mul t i pl e
ci t at i ons of
"bye bye"
woul d beas redundant
as
mul t i pl e
ci t at i ons
of
"hel l o". However,
as
wi l l beseenbel ow, wef i nd
anal ysi s
of t ermi -
nal
"byebye"
exchanges
i nadequat e
as an
anal ysi s
of
cl osi ngs,
i n a
way
t hat
greet i ng
exchanges
or
summons-answer
sequences
arenot
i nadequat e
f or
openi ngs. Consequent -
l y,
wef i nd wehavet o deal
wi t h
t he
di vergent
sources out of whi ch conversat i onal i st s,
i n
t hei r
respect i ve
conversat i ons, col l aborat e i n
arri vi ng
at f arewel l
exchanges.
Whi l e
a
si ngl e
"hel l o" ci t at i on canst and
proxy
f or a
host
of act ual occurrences because
of
i t s st andardi zed
usage,
t he same i s not t rue f or t he
range
of
goi ngs-on
f romwhi ch
conversat i onal i st s
may
undert ake t o movet oward
cl osi ng.
I t i s here t hat
space
l i mi t a-
t i ons
precl ude reproduct i on
of t he
range
of mat eri al s we
hope
t o be
gi vi ng
anaccount
of .
( J oan
Sacks
brought
someof t hese
poi nt s
t o our
at t ent i on. )
For
exampl e,
t hat al l t heconversat i ons arei n ' Ameri can
Engl i sh'
i s
no
warrant f or
so
charact eri zi ng
t hem. For t here are
many
ot her charact eri zat i ons whi ch are
equal l y
' t rue' ,
e.
g. ,
t hat
t hey
are ' adul t ' ,
' spoken' ( not yel l ed
or
whi spered) ,
et c. That t hemat e-
ri al s are al l ' Ameri can
Engl i sh'
does not ent ai l t hat
t hey
are RELEVANTLY' Ameri can
Engl i sh' ,
or
rel evant l y
i n
any l arger
or smal l er domai n t hat
mi ght
be i nvoked t o
charact eri ze
t hem.
Al l such
charact eri zat i ons must be warrant ed,
and
except
f or
t he
292

EMANUELA.
SCHEGLOFF
ANDHARVEYSACKS
zat i on of our mat eri al
at t he end of t hi s
paper.
Theconsi derat i ons
j ust
adduced, however, rest rai nus f romf urt her
charact eri zi ng
i t here.
I n
addressi ng
t he
probl em
of
cl osi ngs,
weare
deal i ng
wi t h one
part
of
what
mi ght
bet ermedt heoveral l
st ruct ural
organi zat i on
of
si ngl e
conver-
sat i ons. Whi l eonecan
cert ai nl y
address ot her
cl osi ng
or
compl et i on
l oci ,
e. g. ,
ut t erance
compl et i on, t opi c
cl osure,
et c. ,
t he uni t whose
cl osi ng
i s
of concernhere i s ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' . Whi l e
t heref ore
i n one
sense
weare
deal i ng
wi t h
cl osi ng,
i n
anot her
weare
deal i ng
wi t h
one
aspect
of
t he st ruct ure of t he uni t ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' , ot her
aspect s
of whi ch
i ncl ude
' openi ngs' ,
and
t opi cal
st ruct ure. As we shal l see,
deal i ng
wi t h
t he one
aspect
of t he overal l st ruct ural
organi zat i on
of conversat i on wi l l
requi re
ref erence t o ot her
orders
of
conversat i on' s
organi zat i on.
And
because an
adequat e
account of t he order of
organi zat i on,
' overal l
st ruct ural
organi zat i on' ,
woul d
requi re space
f ar
beyond
t hat
avai l abl e
t o us,
and
knowl edge beyond
t hat i n hand
( as
wel l as
ref erence
t o
ot her
orders
of
organi zat i on,
such as t he
organi zat i on
of
t he uni t
' a
t opi c' ,
about whi ch not
enough
i s
nowknown) , our account wi l l remai ni n
many
respect s
i ndi cat i verat her t han
compl et e.
I t i s i n
t hat
sensea
prel i mi nary
account of howt o
deal wi t h
' cl osi ngs' ,
and aneven more
rudi ment ary
account of overal l
st ruct ure i n
general .
Not al l
conversat i onal
act i vi t y
i s bounded and col l ect ed i nt o cases of
t heuni t ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' . That uni t , andt he st ruct uret hat charac-
t eri zes and const i t ut es i t , i s
t heref ore
not
necessari l y
rel evant
wherever
conversat i onal
act i vi t y
occurs.
Ont heot her hand, ot her orders
of
organi -
zat i on, most
not abl y
t hose
organi zi ng
ut t erances and t he
speaker
t urns
i nwhi ch
t hey
occur, are
cot ermi nous wi t h, and i ndeed
may
be t akenas
def i ni ng,
conversat i onal
act i vi t y ( t hough
not al l t al k; not , f or
exampl e,
f ormal
l ect uri ng) .
Ont hat account ,
t hey may
be
regarded
as f undament al
( f or
more
compel l i ng
reasons f or so
regardi ng
t hem, see Sacks, f ort h-
comi ng) .
Wewi l l ret urnt o t het heme of conversat i onal
act i vi t y
t hat does
not seemt o const i t ut e i nst ances of t heuni t ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on'
at
t he
end of t hi s
paper.
I n vi ewof
t he
precedi ng argument ,
however,
i t
seems
usef ul t o
begi nby f ormul at i ng
t he
probl em
of
cl osi ngt echni cal l y
i nt erms
of t he more
f undament al order of
organi zat i on,
t hat of t urns. El se-
account we of f er i n t he
f i nal sect i on of t he
paper,
we cannot warrant t hemnow.
Et hni c,
nat i onal , or
l anguage
i dent i f i cat i ons di f f er f rom
many
ot hers
onl y
i n t hei r
pri ni af aci e
pl ausi bi l i t y, especi al l y
t o t hosei nt het radi t i onof
ant hropol ogi cal l i ngui st i cs.
Thebasi s f or t hi s
posi t i onmay
be
f ound i n Sacks
( 1972a) ;
adi scussi onof unwarrant ed
et hni c
charact eri zat i ons of mat eri al s and
f i ndi ngs may
bef ound i n Moerman
( 1967) .

293
I
where
( Sacks, f ort hcomi ng) ,
t wo basi c f eat ures of conversat i on are
proposed
t o
be:
( 1)
at l east , and no more t han, one
part y speaks
at
a t i me
i n a
si ngl e
conversat i on;
and
( 2) speaker change
recurs. The
achi evement
of
t hese f eat ures
si ngl y,
and
especi al l y
t he achi evement
of t hei r cooccurrence, i s
accompl i shed
by
coconversat i onal i st s
t hrough
t he use of a
' machi nery'
f or
orderi ng speaker
t urns
sequent i al l y
i n
conversat i on. The
t urn-t aki ng machi nery
i ncl udes as one
component
a
set of
procedures
f or
organi zi ng
t he sel ect i on
of ' next
speakers' ,
and,
as anot her, aset of
procedures
f or
l ocat i ng
t he occasi ons
on
whi ch t ransi -
t i ont o anext
speaker may
or shoul d occur. The
t urn-t aki ng
machi nery
operat es
ut t erance
by
ut t erance. That i s t o
say:
i ncont rast t o concei vabl e
al t ernat i ve
organi zat i ons ( e. g. ,
i n whi ch t he occasi ons of
speaker
t ransi -
t i on and t hemodeor
out come
of
next
speaker
sel ect i ons woul dbe
pre-
det ermi ned f or t he whol e conversat i on, f rom
i t s out set ,
by
mappi ngs
i nt o
ot her
at t ri but es of t he
part i es;
see Al bert ,
1965) ,
i t i s wi t hi n
any
current ut t erance t hat
possi bl e
next
speaker
sel ect i on i s
accompl i shed,
and
uponpossi bl ecompl et i on
of
any
current ut t erance
t hat such
sel ect i on
t akes ef f ect andt ransi t i ont o anext
speaker
becomes rel evant . Weshal l
speak
of t hi s as t he' t ransi t i onrel evance' of
possi bl e
ut t erance
compl et i on.
I t i s i n
part
t he
consequence
of an ori ent at i on t o t he f eat ure,
' speaker
change
REcurs' , whi ch
provi des
f or t heRECURRENTrel evance of t ransi t i on
t o
a next
speaker
at
any possi bl e
ut t erance
compl et i on poi nt ( except
where
speci al t echni ques
havebeen
empl oyed
t o
modi f y
t hat rel evance) .
These basi c f eat ures of conversat i on, t he
probl em
of
achi evi ng
t hei r
cooccurrence, and t he
addressed t o t he sol ut i on
of t hat
probl em
arei nt ended, i nt hi s account , not as
anal yst s'
const ruct s,
but
as
descri pt i ons
of t heori ent at i ons of conversat i onal i st s i n
produci ng
proper
conversat i on. Conversat i onal i st s const ruct conversat i ons i n t hei r
course, andi n
doi ng
so
t hey
areori ent ed t o
achi evi ng
t hecooccurrence of
t hef eat ures ci t ed above, and
empl oy
t he
t o
do
so.
We
cannot here
present
adet ai l ed demonst rat i onof t hi s cl ai m
( cf .
Sacks,
f ort hcomi ng) ,
but
an
i ndi cat i on of onedi rect i on
i nwhi ch such ademon-
st rat i on
mi ght
be
pursued may
be of f ered. I f t he
f eat ures
are normat i ve,
i . e. ,
are
ori ent edt o
by
conversat i onal i st s, t hen
t he
machi nery
f or
achi evi ng
t hei r
cooccurrenceshoul di ncl ude
procedures
f or
deal i ng
wi t h
vi ol at i ons,
and
i ndeedshoul dl ocat e f ai l ure t o achi evet hef eat ures,
si ngl y
and
j oi nt l y,
as ' vi ol at i ons' , as i nneedof
repai r.
Ami ni mal
requi rement
f or t hi s woul d
bet hat t he
machi nery
l ocat es
as ' event s'
cases
of t he nonachi evement of
294

EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFFANDHARVEYSACKS
t he f eat ures. That i t does so
may
be
suggest ed
by
such mat t ers as t he
occurrence
of conversat i onal i st s' observat i ons
about ' someone' s si l ence'
whenno
onei na
set t i ng
i s
t al ki ng.
The
not i ceabi l i t y
of si l ence
ref l ect s an
ori ent at i on
by
conversat i onal i st s t o t he ' at l east
. . . oneat at i me' f eat ure;
t he f eat ure must be ori ent ed t o
by
conversat i onal i st s,
and not
merel y
be
an
anal yt i c
const ruct , i f conversat i onal i st s do
accompl i sh
and
report
t he
not i ci ng.
The
at t ri but abi l i t y
of t hesi l enceref l ect s anori ent at i ont o t he
next -speaker-sel ect i on component
of t he
t hat
canhave
generat ed
a' some
speaker' s
t urn'
at a
gi venpoi nt
i nt he course
of t he conversat i on, so t hat
a si l ence at t hat
poi nt may
be at t ri but abl e
t o t hat
' speaker' .
E: Hehadt uh comeout t uh San Franci sco.
So hecal l ed hhh f romt hei r
pl ace,
out here t o t he
prof essors,
en set
up,
t he, t i me,
and hh asked t hemt o hh-i f
t hey' d
make a reservat i on f or hi mwhi ch
t hey
di d cuz
t hey pai d
f or
i z
roomen
et cet eraenheaskedt hemt uh: : makeareservat i on
f or i z
parent s.
Ent here was
a
deep
si l ence she sai d at t he ot her end ' e sez "Oh
wel l
t hey' l l pay
f or t hei r own
uh"
-
hhh
-
"room
and'
accommodat i ons. "
( What
i s
report ed
seems t o i nvol ve t hat t hesi l ence t hat was not ed was
deal t wi t h
by appendi ng
acl ari f i cat i on t o t he
request ,
t he si l ence
bei ng
heard
by
t he
speaker
as not hi s, andt hen
bei ng
t ransf ormed
i nt o hi s own
pause by
hi s
produci ng
such a cont i nuat i on as
t hey mi ght
t hen
repl y
t o
appropri at el y.
That t he si l ence
i s
heard
as t he ot her' s, but t reat ed as
one' s ownf or t al k
purposes
i s a
del i cat el y i nt erest i ngmat t er. )
Si mi l arl y,
t here are avai l abl e and
empl oyed
devi ces f or
l ocat i ng
cases
of
' more
t han one
at at i me' as event s, and f or
resol vi ng
t hem, or war-
rant edl y t reat i ng
t hemas
vi ol at i ons.
Agai n,
t hat such devi ces areavai l abl e
t o, and
empl oyed by,
requi res
t reat ment of t hef eat ure
' no more t han one at at i me' as normat i ve, as
ori ent ed t o
by
conversa-
t i onal i st s, rat her t han as t heori st s' devi ces f or
i mposi ng
order
on t he
mat eri al s.
I t
may
be not ed t hat whereas t hese basi c
f eat ures wi t h whi ch we
began ( especi al l y
t he f eat ure of
speaker change
recurrence) ,
and t he
ut t erance
by
ut t erance
operat i on
of t he
as a
f undament al
generat i ng
f eat ureof conversat i on, deal wi t haconversat i on' s
ongoi ng
orderl i ness,
t hey
make
no
provi si on
f or t he
cl osi ng
of conversa-
t i on. A
machi nery
t hat i ncl udes t he t ransi t i onrel evance of
possi bl e
ut t er-
ance
compl et i on recurrent l y
f or
any
ut t erance i n t he conversat i on
generat es
an
i ndef i ni t el y
ext endabl e
st ri ng
of t urns t o t al k. Then, an
i ni t i al
probl emconcerni ngcl osi ngs may
bef ormul at ed: HOWTOORGANI ZE
THESI MULTANEOUSARRI VALOFTHECOCONVERSATI ONALI STS
AT APOI NT

295
WHEREONESPEAKER' SCOMPLETI ONWI LLNOTOCCASI ON
ANOTHERSPEAKER' S
TALK, ANDTHATWI LLNOT
BEHEARDASSOMESPEAKER' SSI LENCE. The l ast
qual i f i cat i on
i s
necessary
t o
di f f erent i at e
cl osi ngs
f romot her
pl aces
i n
conversat i onwhereone
speaker' s compl et i on
i s not f ol l owed
by
a
possi bl e
next
speaker' s
t al k, but where,
gi ven
t he
cont i nui ng
rel evance of t hebasi c
f eat ures
and
t he
t urn-t aki ng
machi nery,
what i s heardi s not t ermi nat i on
but at t ri but abl e si l ence, a
pause
i n t he l ast
speaker' s
ut t erance, et c.
I t shoul d
suggest whysi mpl y
t o
st opt al ki ng
i s
not asol ut i ont o t he
cl osi ng
probl em:
any
f i rst
prospect i ve
speaker
t o do so woul d
be hearabl e as
' bei ng
si l ent ' i n t erms of t he
t urn-t aki ng machi nery,
rat her t han as
havi ng suspended
i t s rel evance.
At t empt s
t o ' cl ose' i n t hi s
way
woul d
be
i nt erpret abl e
as an' event -i n-t he-conversat i on' , rat her
t han as out si de,
or
marki ng,
i t s boundari es, and
woul d be
anal yzed
f or act i ons
bei ng
accompl i shed
i n t he conversat i on,
e. g. , anger, brusqueness, pi que,
et c.
Agai n,
t he
probl em
i s HOWTOCOORDI NATETHESUSPENSI ON
OFTHE
TRANsm0NRELEVANCEOFPOSSI BLEUTTERANCE
COMPLETI ON, NOT HOW
TODEALWI THI TSNONOPERATI ONWHI LESTI LLRELEVANT.
I I
How
i s t he
t ransi t i on rel evance
of
possi bl e
ut t erance
compl et i on
l i f t ed?
A
proxi mat e
sol ut i oni nvol ves
t heuseof a' t ermi nal
exchange' composed
of convent i onal
part s, e. g. ,
an
exchange
of
' good-byes' .
I n
descri bi ng
how
at ermi nal
exchange
can
serve
t o l i f t t he t ransi t i onrel evance of
possi bl e
ut t erance
compl et i ons,
wenot e f i rst t hat t he t ermi nal
exchange
i s acase
of acl ass of
ut t erance
sequences
whi ch
wehave been
st udyi ng
f or some
years, namel y,
t he ut t erance
pai r,
or,
as we
shal l ref er t o i t hencef ort h,
t he
adj acency pai r. 5
Whi l e t hi s cl ass of
sequences
i s
wi del y
operat i ve
i n
conversat i on,
our concern here i s wi t h t he work
t hey
do i n t ermi nat i ons, and our
di scussi onwi l l bel i mi t ed t o t hose
aspect s
of
adj acency pai rs
t hat f i t t hem
f or t hi s work.
Bri ef l y,
t hen,
adj acency pai rs
consi st of
sequences
whi ch
properl y
havet he
f ol l owi ng
f eat ures:
( 1)
t wout t erance
l engt h, ( 2) adj acent
posi t i oni ng
of
component
ut t erances,
( 3)
di f f erent
speakers produci ng
each ut t erance.
The
component
ut t erances of such
sequences
have
an
achi eved
rel at ed-
5
Ervi ng
Gof f man has
gi ven
at t ent i on t o a
range
of members
of
t hi s cl ass f roma
somewhat di f f erent
perspect i ve,
most
recent l y
i n
hi s
chapt ers
on
"Support i ve
I nt er-
changes"
and "Remedi al
I nt erchanges"
i n
Rel at i ons
i n Publ i c ( 1971) .
296

EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFF
ANDHARVEYSACKS
ness
beyond
t hat whi ch
may
ot herwi se
obt ai nbet ween
adj acent
ut t erances.
That
rel at edness i s
part i al l y
t he
product
of t he
operat i on
of
a
t ypol ogy
i n t he
speakers' product i on
of t he
sequences.
The
t ypol ogy
operat es
i n
t wo
ways:
i t
part i t i ons
ut t erance
t ypes
i nt o ' f i rst
pai r part s' ( i . e. ,
f i rst
part s
of
pai rs)
and second
pai r part s;
and i t
af f i l i at es af i rst
pai r part
and
a second
pai r part
t o f orma
' pai r
t ype' .
' Quest i on-answer' . ' greet i ng-
greet i ng, '
' of f er-accept ance/ ref usal '
are i nst ances of
pai r t ypes.
A
gi ven
sequence
wi l l t hus be
composed
of anut t erance t hat i s a f i rst
pai r part
produced by
one
speaker
di rect l y
f ol l owed
by
t he
product i on
by
a
di f f erent
speaker
of an ut t erance whi ch i s
( a)
a second
pai r
part ,
and
( b)
i s f romt he same
pai r t ype
as t he f i rst ut t erance i n t he
sequence
i s
a
member of .
Adj acency pai r sequences,
t hen, exhi bi t t he f urt her f eat ures
( 4)
rel at i ve
orderi ng
of
part s
( i . e. ,
f i rst
pai r part s
precede
second
pai r part s)
and
( 5)
di scri mi nat i ve rel at i ons
( i . e. ,
t he
pai r t ype
of whi ch af i rst
pai r
part
i s amember i s rel evant t o t he sel ect i on
among
second
pai r part s) .
The
achi evement
of
such orderl i ness i n
adj acencypai r sequences
requi res
t he
recogni zabi l i t y
of f i rst
pai r part
st at us f or
some ut t erances. That
probl em
i s handl edi nvari ous
ways;
const ruct i onal l y,
as when
t he
synt ax
of anut t erancecanbeusedt o
recogni ze
t hat a
quest i on
i s
bei ng
produced,
or
t hrough
t heuse of convent i onal
component s,
as when"hel l o" or "hi "
i s used
t o i ndi cat e
part i al l y
t hat a
greet i ng
i s
bei ng produced,
t o ci t e but
t wo
procedures.
Abasi c rul e of
adj acency pai r operat i on
i s:
gi ven
t he
recogni zabl e
product i on
of af i rst
pai r part ,
oni t s f i rst
possi bl e compl et i on
i t s
speaker
shoul d
st op
andanext
speaker
shoul d
st art and
produce
asecond
pai r
part
f romt he
pai r t ype
of whi ch t he
f i rst i s
recogni zabl y
amember.
Twosort s of uses of
adj acency pai rs
may
benot i ced.
Wearei nt erest ed
i n
onl y
one of t hemhere, and ment i on t he ot her f or
f l avor. Fi rst , f or
f l avor: wherever one
part y
t o a conversat i on
i s
speci f i cal l y
concerned
wi t h t he cl ose order
sequent i al i mpl i cat i veness
of
anut t erance he has a
chancet o
produce,
t heuse of af i rst
pai r part
i s a
way
hehas of met hodi -
cal l y provi di ng
f or such
i mpl i cat i veness. 6
So, i f he i s concerned t o have
anot her t al k
di rect l y
about some
mat t er he i s about t o t al k about ,
he
may
f ormhi s ownut t erance as
a
quest i on,
anext
speaker bei ngt hereby
i nduced t o
empl oy
t he chance t o t al k t o
produce
what i s
appreci abl e
as
an answer. Such uses of
adj acency pai rs
occur
f reel y
i n conversat i on.
6
By ' sequent i al i mpl i cat i veness'
i s meant t hat an
ut t erance
proj ect s
f or t he
sequent i al -
l y f ol l owi ng
t urn( s) t herel evanceof adet ermi nat e
range
of occurrences
( be t hey
ut t er-
ance
t ypes,
act i vi t i es,
speaker
sel ect i ons,
et c. ) .
I t t hus has
sequent i al l y organi zed
i mpl i cat i ons.

297
Secondl y,
wherever,
f or
t he
operat i on
of
someTYPEOF
ORGANI ZATI ON,
cl ose
orderi ng
of
ut t erances
i s
usef ul or
requi red,
wef i nd t hat
adj acency
pai rs
are
empl oyed
t o achi eve
such cl ose
orderi ng.
So, i nt he caseof t hat
t ype
of
organi zat i on
whi chweare
cal l i ng
' overal l
st ruct ural
organi zat i on' ,
i t
may
be not edt hat at l east
i ni t i al
sequences ( e. g. ,
greet i ng exchanges) ,
and
endi ng sequences ( i . e. ,
t ermi nal
exchanges) empl oy
adj acency pai r
f ormat s. I t i s t he recurrent ,
i nst i t ut i onal i zed
use of
adj acency pai rs
f or
such
t ypes
of
organi zat i on probl ems
t hat
suggest s
t hat t hese
probl ems
have, i n
part ,
a
commoncharact er, andt hat
adj acency pai r
organi zat i on
i s
speci al l y
f i t t ed t o t he
sol ut i on o
probl ems
of t hat charact er.
( Li f t i ng
t he t ransi t i on rel evance
of
possi bl e
ut t erance
compl et i on
bei ng
t hat
sort
of
probl em, adj acency pai r
organi zat i on
woul dbe
speci al l y adapt ed
t o i t s
sol ut i on,
i nt hef ormof t het ermi nal
exchange. )
The
t ype
of
probl emadj acency
pai rs
are
speci al l y
f i t t ed f or, and t he
wayt hey
are
speci al l y
sui t ed f or i t s sol ut i on,
mayvery bri ef l y
be charac-
t eri zed as f ol l ows. Gi ven t he
ut t erance
by
ut t erance
organi zat i on
of
t urn-t aki ng,
unl ess cl ose
orderi ng
i s
at t empt ed
t herecan
be no met hodi c
assurance t hat a moreor l ess
event ual l y
ai med-f or
successi ve ut t erance
or ut t erance
t ype
wi l l ever
be
produced.
I f a
next
speaker
does not do i t ,
t hat
speaker mayprovi de
f or af urt her
next t hat shoul d
not do i t
( or
shoul d
do
somet hi ng
t hat i s not
i t ) ; and, i f what f ol l ows
t hat next i s ' f ree' and
does not do t he
ori gi nal l y
ai med-f or ut t erance,
i t
( i . e. ,
t he ut t erance
pl aced
t here)
may
provi de
f or a t f urt her
next t hat does not
do i t , et c.
Cl ose
orderi ng
i s, t hen, t he
basi c
general i zed
means f or
assuri ng
t hat some
desi red event wi l l ever
happen.
I f i t cannot be made
t o
happen
next , i t s
happeni ng
i s not
merel y del ayed,
but
may
never
come about . The
adj acency
pai r t echni que,
i n
provi di ng
a det ermi nat e ' when'
f or i t t o
happen,
i . e. ,
' next ' ,
has
t henmeans f or
handl i ng
t hecl ose
order
probl em,
wheret hat
probl em
has i t s
i mport ,
t hrough
i t s cont rol of t he assurance
t hat
some
rel evant
event wi l l be madet o
occur.
But ,
i t
may
be wondered,
why
are t wo ut t erances
requi red
f or ei t her
openi ng
or
cl osi ng?
I t
i s
pl ai n, perhaps, why
adj acency pai rs
are rel evant
t o
get t i ng
answers t o ever
happen
f or
quest i ons;
f or one
t hi ng,
t he
part s
of
quest i on-answer
pai rs
are rat her di f f erent
sort s of
obj ect s.
I t
mi ght
appear,
however,
t hat
t he
probl em
of
cl osi ng
coul d
be handl ed wi t h
j ust
one ut t erance. That i s, i f
t wo ut t erances areneeded, t hen
a
pai r
f ormat i s
underst andabl e; but
why
aret wo
ut t erances needed?
What t wo ut t erances
produced
by
di f f erent
speakers
can do t hat
one
ut t erance cannot do i s:
by
an
adj acent l y posi t i oned
second, a
speaker
can showt hat he underst ood what a
pri or
ai med at , and
t hat he i s
298

wi l l i ng
t o
go al ong
wi t h t hat . Al so,
by
vi rt ue of t he occurrence of an
adj acent l y produced
second, t he doer of a f i rst can see t hat what he
i nt ended was i ndeed
underst ood,
and
t hat
i t
was or
was
not
accept ed.
Al so, of course, a
secondcanassert hi s f ai l ure t o underst and, or
di sagree-
ment , and
i nspect i on
of asecond
by
a f i rst can al l owt he f i rst
speaker
t o see t hat whi l e
t hesecond
t hought
heunderst ood, i ndeedhe mi sunder-
st ood. I t i s t hen
t hrough
t heuseof
adj acent posi t i oni ng
t hat
appreci at i ons,
f ai l ures, correct i ons, et cet eracanbet hemsel ves
underst andabl y
at t empt ed.
Wherever,
t hen,
t here i s reason t o
bri ng
at t ent i on t o t he
appreci at i on
of some
i mpl i cat i veness,
' next ut t erance' i s t he
proper pl ace
t o do t hat ,
anda
t wo-ut t erance
sequence
canbe
empl oyed
as ameans f or
doi ng
and
checki ng
some
i nt endedl y sequent i al l y i mpl i cat i ve
occurrence i n a
way
t hat a one-ut t erance
sequence
can not .
( Thef oregoi ng
i s not at
al l
excl usi ve,
t hough
i t i s suf f i ci ent . For exam-
pl e,
i n t he
caseof i ni t i al
sequences,
t hei r
pai red
st at us al so
permi t s
t he
use
of t hei r assert i ont o be
i nspect ed,
i n
t hecaseof
t el ephone
cal l s i n
part i cu-
l ar, f or who i s
t al ki ng
or whet her who
i s
t al ki ng
i s
recogni zabl e
f rom
j ust
t hat
present at i on. )
Weare t hen
proposi ng:
I f WHEREt ransi t i on rel evance i s t o be l i f t ed
i s a
syst emat i c probl em,
an
adj acency
pai r
sol ut i on
canwork because:
by
provi di ng
t hat t ransi t i on rel evance i s t o be l i f t ed af t er t he
second
pai r part ' s
occurrence, t he occurrence of t he second
pai r part
can t hen
reveal an
appreci at i on
of , and
agreement
t o, t hei nt ent i onof
cl osi ng
NOW
whi ch a
f i rst
part
of at ermi nal
exchange
reveal s i t s
speaker
t o
propose.
Now,
gi ven
t he
i nst i t ut i onal i zat i on
of t hat sol ut i on, a
range
of
ways
of
assuri ng
t hat i t be
empl oyed
have been
devel oped,
whi ch make drast i c
di f f erencebet ween
one
part y sayi ng "good-bye"
andnot
l eavi ng
a
sl ot f or
t he
ot her t o
repl y,
and one
part y sayi ng "good-bye"
and
l eavi ng
asl ot
f or t he ot her t o
repl y.
Thef ormer becomes a di st i nct sort of
act i vi t y,
expressi ng anger,
brusqueness,
andt he l i ke, and avai l abl e t o such ause
by
cont rast wi t h
t he l at t er. I t i s t hi s
consequent i al i t y
of
al t ernat i ves t hat
i s t he hal l mark of
an i nst i t ut i onal i zed sol ut i on. The t ermi nal
exchange
i s no
l onger
a
mat t er of
personal
choi ces; but onecannot
expl ai n
t he
use
of a
t wo-ut t erance
sequenceby
ref erri ng
t o t he
way
t hat
si ngl e
ut t erance
cl osi ngs
are
vi ol at i ve, f or t he
quest i on
of
whyt hey
aremadet o bevi ol at i ve
i s
t henl ef t
unexami ned.
I n
ref erri ng
t o t he
component s
of t ermi nal
exchanges,
wehave so f ar
empl oyed
"good-bye"
as an
excl usi ve i nst ance. But ,
i t
pl ai nl y
i s
not
excl usi vel y
used.
Suchot her
component s
as "ok", "see
you",
"t hank
you",
"you' re
wel come", and
t he l i ke are al so used. Si nce t he l at t er i t ems are

299
used
i not her
ways
as
wel l , t hemeref act of t hei r use does not mark t hem
as
unequi vocal part s
of
t ermi nal
exchanges.
Thi s f act , t hat
possi bl e
t er-
mi nal
exchanges
do not
necessari l y, by
t hei r
component s
al one,
i ndi cat e
t hei r t ermi nal
exchange
st at us, i s one source f or our
proposal
t hat t he
use of t ermi nal
exchanges
i s but a
proxi mat e
sol ut i on t o t he
i ni t i al l y
posed
probl em
of t hi s
paper.
Wet urnnowt o asecond
probl em,
whose
exami nat i onwi l l
suppl y
some
requi red
addi t i ons.
i f i
I nt hel ast sect i onwe
f ocused
onone
t ype
of
pl aci ng
consi derat i onrel evant
t o
cl osi ng
conversat i on: t he cl ose order
organi zat i on
of t ermi nal ex-
changes.
By
t heuseof an
adj acency pai r
f ormat , a
pl ace
coul dbemarked
i na
si zi ng
of ut t erances i nsuch a
way
t hat oni t s
compl et i on
t het ransi t i on
rel evance of ut t erance
compl et i on
mi ght
be l i f t ed. Thesecond
part
of a
t ermi nal
exchange
was
proposed
t o besuch
a
pl ace.
Thesecond
part
of a
t ermi nal
exchange
had i t s
posi t i oned
occurrence
provi ded
f or
by
t he
occurrenceof af i rst
part
of suchan
exchange.
No di scussi onwas of f ered
about t he
pl acement
of t hef i rst
part
of t ermi nal
exchanges.
Herewe
begi n
t o t ake
up
t hat i ssue, andt o
devel op
what sort s of
probl ems
arei nvol ved
i ni t s
usage.
Whi l e i t shoul d be
experi ent i al l y
obvi ous t hat f i rst
part s
of t ermi nal
exchanges
arenot
f reel y
occurrent , weshal l here
t ry
t o
devel op
a
consi der-
at i on of t hesort s of
pl aci ngprobl ems
t hei r use does i nvol ve. Fi rst , t wo
prel i mi nary
comment s arei norder.
( 1)
Past andcurrent work has i ndi ca-
t ed t hat
pl acement
consi derat i ons are
general
f or ut t erances. That i s:
a
pervasi vel y
rel evant i ssue
( f or part i ci pant s)
about ut t erances i nconver-
sat i oni s
' why
t hat now' , a
quest i on
whose
anal ysi s may( 2)
al soberel evant
t o
f i ndi ng
what ' t hat ' i s. That i s t o
say,
some ut t erances
may
deri vet hei r
charact er as act i ons
ent i rel y
f rom
pl acement
consi derat i ons. For
exampl e,
t here do not seemt o be cri t eri a ot her t han
pl acement ( i . e. , sequent i al )
ones t hat wi l l
suf f i ci ent l y
di scri mi nat e t he st at us of an ut t erance as a
st at ement , assert i on,
decl arat i ve,
proposi t i on,
et c. ,
f romi t s st at us as an
answer.
Fi ndi ng
an ut t erance t o be an answer,
t o
be
accompl i shi ng
answeri ng,
cannot be achi eved
by
ref erence t o
phonol ogi cal , synt act i c,
semant i c, or
l ogi cal
f eat ures of t heut t erancei t sel f , but
onl y by consul t i ng
i t s
sequent i al pl acement , e. g. ,
i t s
pl acement
af t er
a
quest i on.
I f t ermi nal
exchanges
are not
necessari l y
marked as such
by
t hei r
component s
( as
was
suggest ed
above) , wearewel l advi sedt o consi der t hecont ri but i on
of
t hei r
pl acement
t o t hei r achi evement of t hat st at us.
Addressi ng
consi derat i ons of
pl acement
rai ses t he i ssue: what order of
organi zat i on
of conversat i on i s t he rel evant one,
by
ref erence t o
whi ch
pl acement
i s t o be
consi dered.
We
deal t earl i er wi t honeki ndof
pl acement
i ssue,
i . e. ,
t he
pl acement
of SECOND
part s
of t ermi nal
exchanges,
andt here
t he order
of
organi zat i on
by
ref erence t o whi ch
pl acement
was done and
anal yzed
was t he
adj acency pai r,
whi ch i s oneki ndof ' l ocal ' ,
i . e. ,
ut t eran-
ce,
organi zat i on.
I t
does NOT
appear
t hat FI RST
part s
of t ermi nal
exchanges,
whi ch i s what we are
nowconcerned wi t h, are
pl aced
by
ref erence t o
t hat order of
organi zat i on.
Whi l e
t hey,
of course, occur af t er someut t er-
ance,
t hey
arenot
pl acedby
ref erencet o a l ocat i ont hat
mi ght
be f ormu-
l at ed
as
'
' next ' af t er some ' l ast ' ut t eranceor cl ass of ut t erances' .
Rat her,
t hei r
pl acement
seems t o be
organi zedby
ref erencet o a
properl y
i ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
SECTI ON, and i t i s
by
vi rt ue of t he l ack of a
properl y
i ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
sect i ont hat t heuni l at eral
droppi ng
i nof t he
f i rst
part
of a
t ermi nal
exchange
i s
onl y
part
of
t he sol ut i on t o t he
cl osi ng probl em.
Weshal l
need, t heref ore, t o
concernoursel ves wi t h t he
proper
i ni t i at i onof
cl osi ng
sect i ons. To
do so
adequat el y,
andt o underst andt he basi s f or t hi s order
of
organi zat i on
as t he
rel evant one f or
cl osi ng,
we wi l l
expl ore
some
aspect s
of overal l
conversat i onal
organi zat i on
as t he
background
f or a
subsequent
consi derat i on of t he
pl acement
i ssue. I n vi ewof t he back-
ground
charact er of our
purpose,
t he di scussi on i s
necessari l y
mi ni mal
and somewhat
schemat i c.
The
aspect
of overal l conversat i onal
organi zat i on di rect l y
rel evant
t o t he
present probl em
concerns t he
organi zat i on
of
t opi c
t al k.
( The
l ast
phrase
i s
ambi guous, bei ng
underst andabl e bot h as t he
organi zat i on
of
t he uni t ' a
t opi c' ,
and as t he
organi zat i on
of aset of such uni t s
wi t hi n
t he
l arger
uni t ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' . Whi l e
t he
f ormer
of
t hesei s al so
rel evant t o
cl osi ngs,
i t i s t hel at t er t hat
wei nt endi nt he
present cont ext . )
I f we
may
ref er
t o what
get s
t al ked about i n a conversat i on as ' men-
t i onabl es' , t hen
we can not e t hat t here are consi derat i ons rel evant f or
conversat i onal i st s i n
orderi ng
and
di st ri but i ng
t hei r t al k about men-
t i onabl es i n a
si ngl e
conversat i on. There i s, f or
exampl e,
a
posi t i on
i n a
si ngl e
conversat i on f or ' f i rst
t opi c' .
Wei nt end t o mark
by
t hi s t ermnot
t he
si mpl e
seri al f act t hat some
t opi c
get s
t al ked about
t emporal l y pri or
t o ot hers, f or some
t emporal l y pri or t opi cs
such as, f or
exampl e,
ones
pref acedby
"Fi rst , I
j ust
want t o
say. . . ",
or
t opi cs
t hat aremi nor
devel op-
ment s
by
t he
recei ver of t he conversat i onal
openi ng
of "howare
you"
i nqui ri es,
are
not heard or t reat ed
as ' f i rst
t opi cs' .
Rat her, we want t o
not et hat t o makeof
a
t opi c
a ' f i rst
t opi c'
i s t o accordi t acert ai n
speci al
st at us i n t he
conversat i on. Thus,
f or
exampl e,
t o
make a
t opi c
' f i rst
OPENI NG
UP CLOSI NGS

301
t opi c' mayprovi de
f or i t s
anal yzabi l i t y ( by
copart i ci pant s)
as ' t he reason
f or' t he conversat i on, t hat
bei ng,
f urt hermore,
a
preservabl e
and
report -
abl e f eat ure of t he conversat i on. 7 I n addi t i on,
maki ng
a
t opi c
' f i rst
t opi c'
may
accord i t a
speci al i mport ance
ont he
part
of i t s i ni t i at or
( a
f eat ure
whi ch
may,
but need not , combi newi t h i t s
bei ng
a' reason f or t hecon-
versat i on' ) .
Thesef eat ures of ' f i rst
t opi cs' maypose
a
probl em
f or conversat i onal i st s
who
may
not wi sh t o have
speci al i mport ance
accorded some ' men-
t i onabl e' , andwho
may
not want i t
preserved
as ' t he reason f or t he con-
versat i on' .
I t
i s
by
ref erence t o such
probl ems
af f i l i at ed wi t h t he
use of
f i rst
t opi c posi t i on
t hat
we
may appreci at e
such
exchanges
at t he
begi n-
ni ngs
of conversat i ons i nwhi ch news
i s
l at er
report ed,
as:
A: What ' s
up.
B: Not much. What ' s
up
wi t h
you?
A:
Not hi ng.
Conversat i onal i st s, t hen, can have ment i onabl es
t hey
do not want t o
put
i n
f i rst
t opi c posi t i on,
andt here are
ways
of
t al ki ng
past
f i rst
t opi c
posi t i on
wi t hout
put t i ng
t hemi n.
Af urt her f eat ure of t he
organi zat i on
of
t opi c
t al k seems t o i nvol ve
' f i t t i ng'
as a
pref erred procedure.
That i s, i t
appears
t hat
a
pref erred
way
of
get t i ng
ni ent i onabl es ment i onedi s t o
empl oy
t he resources of t he
l ocal
organi zat i on
of ut t erances i n t he course of t he conversat i on.
That i nvol ves
hol di ng
of f t hement i onof ament i onabl eunt i l
i t
can
' occur
nat ural l y' ,
t hat i s, unt i l i t can be f i t t ed t o anot her conversat i onal i st ' s
pri or
ut t erance,
al l owi ng
hi s ut t erance t o serve as asuf f i ci ent source f or
t he
ment i oni ng
of t he ment i onabl e
( t hereby achi evi ng
asol ut i on t o t he
pl acement quest i on,
t he
' why
t hat now' , whose
pervasi ve
rel evance was
not edearl i er, f or
t he i nt roduct i on
of t he
t opi c) .
( At
56 mi nut es i nt o t he conversat i on)
( 15. 0)
Ken: Wel l , wewere on adi scussi on uh bef ore East er t hat we never
f i ni shedonuh on
why
t hese
guys
are
raci ng
ont hest reet ?
( 1)

( 3. 0)
Ken:

Youknow.
D' you
remember t hat ?
Roger:
Oh, I was i n abad acci dent l ast
ni ght .
My l egs
are al l cut
up.
I was uh-
speaki na raci ng
ont he st reet s,
pi cki ng up
t he
subj ect .
By "preservabl e
and
report abl e"
we meant hat i n
a
subsequent
conversat i on,
t hi s
f eat ure,
havi ng
been
anal yzed
out of t heearl i er
conversat i on and
preserved, may
be
report ed
as "hecal l edt o t el l met hat ... ". Wet hi nkt hat such ref erences t o
pri or
conver-
sat i onare
orderl y,
andcanbemadeavai l abl ef or cri t eri al
use,
but
t he
argument
cannot
be
devel oped
here.
302
EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFF
ANDHARVEYSACKS
Wewere
doi n t h' Mul hol l and st ret ch
agai n
andone
guy
made
a
gross
error an' we l anded i n-i n t he
wrong
si ( hh) de
of t he
mount ai nhehh I was weari n abel t but
my
knees an'
everyt hi ng
got
al l
bangedup.
( at
one
hour, 13 mi nut es i nt o conversat i on)
( ( Ken
i s
t al ki ng
about
peopl e
l i ki ng
t o do
t hi ngs,
but
havi ng
t o work hard at
maki ng
i t
happen) )
Ken:
Al l i kes t o uh t -t o ri de sai l boat s or-or somet hi ng
/
/ ( )
Roger:
Not
any
morehah hehhhah
hah heh
Ken:
Why?
What
happened?
Roger:
She' s
gone
hehh
( 2)
Al : Shei s sol d. She' s
gonna
besol d.
Ken: Oh. Wel l , he used t o.
Al :
1Mm
hm,
Ken: Or-he-hest i l l does
i n-i nt heback of hi s
mi nd
probl y.
Roger:
Nowhe
/ I
l i kes t o dri ve/ / f ast Aust i n
Heal ey' s
now.
*
Ken: Or-
Ken: Or he-he!
/ he
Al : NOTANYMORE.
Roger:
What
happened?
Al : I T BLEWUP.
Roger: Di dj u real l y?!
( 1. 0)
Roger: Whadj u
do t o i t ?
Al : The uh
engi ne
bl ew-
-
I don' t know, t heval ves
an'
everyt hi ng
went
-
phooh!
( 1. 0)
Roger:
Are
youki ddi ng?
Al :
There' s t hreehundredan'
f i f t y
dol l ars
wort h of work
t o bedone
ont he
engi ne
now.
*Roger
has sol d Al t he Aust i n
Heal ey.
What wehave, t hen,
i s
t hat
some ment i onabl es
ought
not or need not
be
pl aced
i n
f i rst
t opi c posi t i on,
and
may
or
are t o be hel d of f i n t he
ensui ng
conversat i on unt i l
t hey
can
be f i t t ed t o some
l ast ut t erance.
Therei s, however, no
guarant ee
t hat t hecourse of t he
conversat i on wi l l
provi de
t heoccasi onf or
anypart i cul ar
ment i onabl et o
' come
up
nat ural -
l y' . 8
Thus, t he el ement s
of
t opi cal organi zat i on
so f ar
di scussed l eave
8
Thi s i s soevenwhent heoccasi onf or t he
conversat i on was
arranged
i n t hei nt erest s
of t hat
t opi c.
For
exampl e,
t herewas
a
report
several
years
ago
i n
t hest udent
newspaper
of t heSchool of
Engi neeri ng
at Col umbi a
Uni versi t y
about a
meet i ngarranged
wi t h
t heDeant o ai r st udent
compl ai nt s.
No
compl ai nt s
were
ai red. I nanswer t o a
report er' s
quest i on
about
why
t hi s
happened,
ast udent
who hadbeenat
t he
meet i ng
repl i ed,
"The conversat i onnever
got
around t o t hat . "

303
open
t he
possi bi l i t y
t hat f or some
ment i onabl e whi ch
a
conversat i onal i st
bri ngs
t o
t he conversat i on, no
pl ace
f or i t s occurrence wi l l have been
f ound at
any poi nt
i n t he
devel opi ng
course of t hat conversat i on. Thi s
can be seri ous because some
ment i onabl es,
i f not ment i oned i n some
' t hi s conversat i on' , wi l l l ose
t hei r
st at us as ment i onabl es, or as
t he ki nd
of ment i onabl e
t hey
are,
e. g. , t hey may
l ose t hei r st at us as ' news. '
B: I saw
you
wi t h
your
uh
f i l l i ng
out a
t hi ng
f or t he U. of -book-
st ore.
Does t hat mean
you' regoi ng
t here?
A: Oh
yes. Sorry.
I di dn' t
know
I
hadn' t t ol d
you.
B: Wel l , oh
you
never t el l me
anyt hi ng.
Whenwel l !
/
A:
Wel l I t el l
you
i f I t al k t o
you
when
somet hi ng
has
j ust happened.
B: I
su-pose
A:

But I don' t
al ways
remember
how
l ong
i t ' s
been
si nce
I ' ve seen
peopl e
Thi s
bei ng
t he case, i t woul d
appear
t hat an
i mport ant
vi rt ue
f or a
cl osi ng
st ruct ure
desi gned
f or
t hi s
ki nd of
t opi cal
st ruct ure woul d
i nvol ve t he
provi si on
f or
pl acement
of hi t hert o unment i oned
ment i on-
abl es.
The t ermi nal
exchange by
i t sel f makes no such
provi si on.
By
expl oi t i ng
t he
cl ose
organi zat i on
resource of
adj acency
pai rs,
i t
provi des
f or ani mmedi at e
( i . e. ,
next t urn)
cl osi ng
of t he conversat i on. That t hi s
cl ose-orderi ng
t echni que
f or
t ermi nat i ng
not
excl ude t he
possi bi l i t y
of
i nsert i ng
unment i oned
ment i onabl es can be achi eved
by pl acement
rest ri ct i ons ont hef i rst
part
of
t ermi nal
exchanges,
f or
exampl e, by requi r-
i ng
' advance not i ce' or
somef ormof
f oreshadowi ng.
These
consi derat i ons about
t opi cal
st ruct ure l eadus backt ooneel ement
of t he
pl acement
consi derat i ons f or
cl osi ngs
ment i oned bef ore,
t o wi t ,
t he
not i on of
a
properl y
i ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
sect i on. Onecent ral
f eat ure of
proper
i ni t i at i ons
of
cl osi ng
sect i ons i s t hei r
rel at i onshi p
t o hi t hert o
unment i oned ment i onabl es,
and some met hods f or
i ni t i at i ng cl osi ngs
seem
desi gnedpreci sel y
f or such
probl ems
as wehave been
di scussi ng.
I v
The f i rst
proper way
of
i ni t i at i ng
a
cl osi ng
sect i ont hat wewi l l
di scuss i s
one ki ndof
( what
we
wi l l cal l )
' pre-cl osi ng' .
Theki nd of
pre-cl osi ng
we
have i n
mi nd t akes one of t he
f ol l owi ng
f orms, "We-el l . . .
",
"O. K. . . ",
"So-oo", et c.
( wi t h
downward
i nt onat i on cont ours) , t hese f orms const i -
t ut i ng
t heent i re
ut t erance. These
pre-cl osi ngs
shoul d
properl y
be
cal l ed
' POSSI BLE
pre-cl osi ng' ,
because
provi di ng
t he rel evance of t he
i ni t i at i on
of a
cl osi ng
sect i oni s
onl y
one of t heuses
t hey
have. Onef eat ureof t hei r
304

operat i on
i s t hat
t hey occupy
t he f l oor f or a
speaker' s
t urn wi t hout
usi ng
i t t o
produce
ei t her
a
t opi cal l y
coherent ut t erance or t he i ni t i at i on
of anew
t opi c.
Wi t h t hema
speaker
t akes at urn whose busi ness seems
t o bet o
' pass, ' i . e. ,
t o i ndi cat e t hat hehas not now
anyt hi ng
more or new
t o
say,
andal so t o
gi ve
a
' f ree' t urnt oanext , who,
becausesuchanut t er-
ance can be t reat ed as
havi ng
brokenwi t h
any pri or
t opi c,
can wi t hout
vi ol at i ngt opi cal
coherencet aket he
occasi ont oi nt roduceanew
t opi c,
e. g. ,
some
heret of ore unment i oned
ment i onabl e.
AFTERsuch a
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ng
i s
speci f i cal l y
a
pl ace
f or
new
t opi c begi nni ngs.
Whent hi s
opport uni t y, provi ded by possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs
of t he sort
weare
di scussi ng,
i s
expl oi t ed,
t hat i s, whenanot her
t hereupon
ment i ons
ahi t hert o unment i oned
ment i onabl e, t hen
t he l ocal
organi zat i on
ot her-
wi se
operat i ve
i nconversat i on,
i ncl udi ng
t he
f i t t i ng
of
t opi cal
t al k,
al l ows
t he same
possi bi l i t i es
whi chobt ai ni n
anyt opi cal
t al k. The
openi ng
t hat a
possi bl e pre-cl osi ng
makes f or anunment i oned ment i onabl e
may
t hus
resul t i n much more
ensui ng
t al k t han t he i ni t i al
ment i onabl e t hat i s
i nsert ed;
f or
t hat
mayprovi de
t he occasi onf or
t he ' nat ural occurrence'
of someoneel se' s
ment i onabl es
i naf i t t ed manner. I t i s t hus not
negat i ve
evi dence f or t he st at us of ut t erances such as "We-el l ", et c.
as
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ngs
t hat ext ensi veconversat i onal
devel opment s may
f ol l owt hem.
( I n
one
t wo-part y
conversat i on of whi ch wehave a
t ranscri pt
runni ng
t o
ei ght y-f i ve pages,
t he f i rst
occurs on
page t went y. )
The
ext endabi l i t y
of conversat i on t o
great l engt hs past
a
possi bl e pre-
cl osi ng
i s not a
si gn
of t he
l at t er' s def ect s
wi t h
respect
t o
i ni t i at i ngcl osi ngs,
but of i t s vi rt ues i n
provi di ng opport uni t i es
f or f urt her
t opi c
t al k t hat
i s f i t t ed t o t he
t opi cal
st ruct ureof conversat i on.
Wehave consi deredt he case i n
whi ch
t he
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ng' s pro-
vi si on f or f urt her
t opi c
t al k i s
expl oi t ed.
The ot her
possi bi l i t y
i s t hat
coconversat i onal i st s decl i ne an
opport uni t y
t o i nsert unment i onedmen-
t i onabl es. I n t hat ci rcumst ance, t he
pre-cl osi ngmay
beansweredwi t h an
acknowl edgement ,
aret urn
' pass' yi el di ng
a
sequence
such as:
A:

O. K.
B:

O. K.
t hereby
set t i ng up
t he rel evance of f urt her
col l aborat i ng
on a
cl osi ng
sect i on. Whent he
i s
responded
t o i n t hi s manner,
i t
may
const i t ut et he f i rst
part
of t he
cl osi ng
sect i on.
Wehave ref erred t o
ut t erances of t he f orm"O. K. ",
"We-el l ", et c. as
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs, i nt endi ngby
t hat t ermt o
poi nt
t o t he
use of such
ut t erances not
onl y possi bl y
t o i ni t i at e a
cl osi ng
sect i on, but al so,
by

305
i nvi t i ng
t he
i nsert i on of unment i oned
ment i onabi es, t o
provi de
f or t he
reopeni ng
of
t opi c
t al k.
On t hei r occurrence,
t hey
are
onl y
POSSI BLE
pre-cl osi ngs
because of t hi s
speci f i c
al t ernat i ve
t hey provi de
f or. 9 But
t here
i s anot her sensei nwhi ch
t hey
are
onl y
POSSI BLE
pre-cl osi ngs. Cl earl y,
ut t erances such as "O. K. ", "We-el l ",
et c.
( where,
t hose f orms are t he
whol e
of t heut t erance) , occur i nconversat i oni n
capaci t i es
ot her
t hant hat
of
' pre-cl osi ng' .
I t i s
onl y
ansome occasi ons of uset hat t heseut t erances
are
t reat ed as
pre-cl osi ngs,
as wehave been
usi ng
t hat t erm. To recom-
mend t hat t he
t ermi nal
exchange
sol ut i on
i ni t i al l y
sket ched must be
suppl ement ed
by
an
anal ysi s
of t he
pl acement
of t ermi nal
exchanges;
t hat
t he
pl acement
beseeni nt erms of
properl y
i ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
sect i ons;
t hat
cl osi ng
sect i ons canbe
properl y
i ni t i at ed
by possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs;
and t hat ut t erances of t he f orm"We-el l " can be
pre-cl osi ngs
i s not of
great hel p
unl ess i t canei t her
be
shown
( 1)
t hat
ut t erances of t hef orm"we-
el i " are
i nvari abl y pre-cl osi ngs,
whi ch. i s
pat ent l y
not t hecase,
or
( 2)
some
i ndi cat i on can be
gi ven
of
t he
anal ysi s
t hat can
yi el d
ut t erances of t he
f orm
"we-el l "
t o be
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs.
One consi derat i on
rel evant
t o
sucha
f i ndi ng( bypart i ci pant s
i nt heconversat i on; i t i s t hei r
procedures
weseek t o descri be) i s t he
pl acement
of ut t erances of t hef orm"we-el i "
i nt he conversat i on.
One
way
of
di scri mi nat i ng
t he occasi ons onwhi ch. such ut t erances are
f ound t o const i t ut e
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs
t urns ont hei r
pl acement
wi t h
respect
t o
t opi cal organi zat i on ( not
i n t he sense of t he
organi zat i on
of
ment i onabl es over t hecourseof t heconversat i onwhi ch wehavehi t hert o
i nt ended, but i nt he sense of ' t he
organi zat i on
of t al k ona
si ngl e t opi c' ) .
I nbri ef , ut t erances of t hef orm"we-el l ", "O. K. ",
et c. ,
operat e
as
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ngs
when
pl aced
at t he
anal yzabl e( once agai n,
TOPARTI CI PANTS)
endof a
t opi c.
To do
j ust i ce
t oadi scussi onof t hi s
pl acement
woul d
requi re
an
anal ysi s
of
t he
organi zat i on
of ' t al k about a
t opi c'
whi ch. cannot
be
devel oped
here
( work
onsuch
anal ysi s
i s i n
progress) .
But wecanat l east not et hef ol l ow-
i ng.
Not al l
t opi cs
have an
anal yzabl e
end. One
procedure whereby
t al k moves of f a
t opi c mi ght
be cal l ed
' t opi c
shadi ng' ,
i nt hat i t i nvol ves
no
speci f i c
at t ent i on t o
endi ng
a
t opi c
at
al l , but rat her t he
f i t t i ng
of
di f f erent l y
f ocused but rel at ed t al k t o somel ast ut t erance i n a
t opi c' s
devel opment .
But coconversat i onal i st s
may speci f i cal l y
at t end
t o accom-
pl i shi ng
a
t opi c boundary,
andt herearevari ous mechani sms f or
doi ng
so;
t hese
may yi el d
what wehave ref erred t o above as
' anal yzabl e
ends, '
Weret urn t o t he i deaof
' speci f i c
al t ernat i ves' i nsect i onVI , wherei t i s more
f ul l y
di scussed.
306

t hei r
anal yzabi l i t y
t o
part i ci pant s bei ngdi spl ayed
i nt heef f ect i ve col l ab-
orat i on
requi red
t o achi eve t hem.
For
exampl e,
t herei s a
t echni que
f or
' cl osi ng
downa
t opi c'
t hat
seems
t o be af ormal
t echni que
f or acl ass of
t opi c t ypes,
i n
t he sense t hat f or
t opi cs
t hat are of t he
t ypes
t hat are members of t hecl ass, t he
t echni que
operat es
wi t hout
regard
t o what t he
part i cul ar t opi c
i s. I t does not , t hen,
operat e
by
t he det ermi nat e,
subst ant i vel y
f i t t ed
devel opment
of t he on-
goi ng t opi c
t al k as a
way
of
bri ngi ng
t hat
t opi c
t al k t o anend, but i s
usabl e
i ndependent
of what ever
ot her
t echni que
woul dbe
t opi c speci f i c.
Wehave i nmi ndsuch
exchanges
as:
A:

Okay?
B:

Ai ri ght .
Such
an
exchange
canserve, i f
compl et ed,
t o
accompl i sh
acol l aborat i on
ont he
shut t i ng
downof a
t opi c,
and
may
t hus mark t henext sl ot i n t he
conversat i onal
sequence
as one
i n whi ch,
i f
anut t erance
of
t he f orm
"We-el l ", "O. K. ", et c. shoul d occur, i t
may
be heard as a
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ng. '
Anot her
' t opi c-bOundi ng'
t echni que ( whi ch
wecan
here
merel y gl oss)
i nvol ves one
part y' s of f eri ng
of a
proverbi al
or
aphori st i c
f ormul at i onof
convent i onal wi sdomwhi chcanbeheardas t he ' moral ' or ' l esson' of t he
t opi c bei ng t hereby
possi bl y
cl osed. Such f ormul at i ons are
' agreeabl e
wi t h' . Whensuch af ormul at i oni s of f ered
by
one
part y
and
agreed
t o
by
anot her, a
t opi c
may
be seen
( by
t hem) t o havebeen
brought
t o acl ose.
10
Al t hough,
as
argued
i n t he t ext , t hi s ki nd of
' shut t i ng
downa
t opi c' operat es
i ndependent
of t he
part i cul ar t opi c
t al k i n
progress,
i t cannot beusedat
any pl ace
i n
t hat
t opi c
t al k wi t hout , once
agai n, bei ng
seen t o
accompl i sh
ot her act i vi t i es as
wel l ,
such as
' avoi di ng
t he i ssue' , embarrassment ,
brusqueness,
et c. Whi ch i s t o
say
t hat
t here
may
bea
pl acement
i ssuef or
t opi c cl osi ng,
as t herei s f or conversat i onal
cl osi ng.
That i ssue
properl y bel ongs
i nt he
anal ysi s
of
t opi cal organi zat i on,
however, andcannot
be
devel oped
here.
Whi l e
' shut t i ng
down
a
t opi c' operat es
i n amanner
i ndependent
of t he
part i cul ar
t opi c
i n
progress,
i t i s not t he
' normal ' ,
i . e. ,
unmarked,
way
f or t al k t o moveof f
any
t opi c
what soever. Wement i oned earl i er t hat t al k
may
bemovedof f a
t opi c
wi t hout
speci al
at t ent i ont o
endi ng
i t . To undert aket he
shut t i ng
downof a
t opi c by
t hesort
of
exchange
di scussed i n t he t ext
may
mark t hat
t opi c
as a
possi bl y
l ast one, t hat
marki ngconf erri ngupon
t he
f ol l owi ng
conversat i onal sl ot i t s di st i nct i ve rel evancef or
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs.
Such avi ewi s
support ed by not i ng
t hat t he cl ass of
t ypes
of
t opi cs
f or whi ch t he
t echni que operat es
f ormal l y
i ncl udes
' maki ng arrangement s'
as a
t opi c t ype,
and t hat
t opi c t ype
we
i ndependent l y
f i nd t o be
' cl osi ng-rel evant '
( see
sect i on VI I ) . Ot her
t ypes
t hat are members of t he cl ass
appear
t o be
' request -
sat i sf act i on
t opi cs' ,
and
' compl ai nt -remedy t opi cs' .
For
t opi cs
of t hese
t ypes,
"O. K.:
O. K. " can
operat e
as a
shut t i ng
down
t echni que
f ormal l y.
Bot h
may
havesome
speci al
rel at i onshi p
t o
' expect abl y monot opi cal '
conversat i on, di scussed bel ow.

307
Agai n,
an
i mmedi at el yf ol l owi ng
"We-el l " or "O. K. "
may
be
anal yzedby
i t s
pl acement
as
doi ng
t he
al t ernat i ve t asks a
possi bl epre-cl osi ng
cando.
Dorri nne:

Uh-you
know, i t ' s
j ust
l i ke
bri ngi n
t he-
bl ood
up.
Theresa:

Yeah wel l , TI J I NGSTJ HALWAYSWORK
OUT FORTHE
I /
BEST
Dorri nne:

Oh
cert ai nl y. Al ri ght / /
Tess.
( I )
Theresa:

Uh huh,
Theresa:
Okay,
Dorri nne:
G' bye.
Theresa:
000dni ght ,
( 2)
J ohnson: anduh, uh we' re
gonna
seei f we
can' t uht i e i n our
pl ans
al i t t l e bet t er.
Bal dwi n:
Okay/ I
f i ne.
J ohnson: ALRI GHT?
Bal dwi n: RI GHT.
J ohnson:
Okay
boy,
Bal dwi n:
Okay
J ohnson:
Bye/ / bye
Bal dwi n:
G' ni ght .
Therei s a
t ype
of overal l conversat i onal
organi zat i on
i nwhi ch bound-
i ng
a
t opi c ( rat her
t han
' t opi c
shadi ng' )
i s
especi al l y
rel evant , andi n
whi ch a
sequence
made
up
of a
t opi c
cl osi ng exchange
f ol l owed
by
a
i s
speci al l y promi nent ,
whi ch we shal l cal l ' mono-
t opi cal
conversat i on' . Wi t h t he t erm
' monot opi cal '
we i nt end not an
ex
post f act o f i ndi ng
t hat
a
si ngl e t opi c
was t al ked about ,
especi al l y
i n
vi ewof t he
compl exi t y
wi t h whi ch
t opi c
t al k i s done,
wherei neach succes-
si ve ut t erancecanrevi se what t he
t opi c
has been
' al l
al ong' .
We
have i n
mi nd, rat her, conversat i ons
produced
f romt hei r
begi nni ngs
wi t h an
ori ent at i ont o t hei r
expect abl emonot opi cal i t y. "
That such conversat i ons
do occur can be seen i n t he
t echni ques
empl oy
t o
adapt
t o t hat st ruct ureor ci rcumvent i t whi l e
ret ai ni ng
i t s rel evance. Thus,
conversat i ons whose i ni t i at or
begi ns
wi t h t he announcement "Two
t hi ngs:
... "
( as
a
st udent
mi ght
say
as he seat s hi msel f
duri ng
ani nst ruc-
t or' s of f i ce hours)
may
serve t o count er an
ot herwi se
expect abl e
const ruc-
t i onof t he conversat i onaroundone
t opi c,
i . e. ' t he reason' f or hi s
appear-
ance
( a
const ruct i on
possi bl y
i nvol vi ng
ont he
part
of t he ot her a
f i ndi ng
11
Thi s i s not t he
pl ace
t o el aborat eont hebases f or
expect at i ons
of
monot opi cal i t y.
I t
appears
t o
be
rel at edt o t he art i cul at i onof t heuni t ' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' t o f eat ures
' ext ernal ' t o t hat uni t , such
as
composi t i onal
f eat ures of t he
i nt eract i on,
anal ysi s
of
rel at i ve i nt eract i onal st at es of t he
part i ci pant s
( e. g. ,
i nvol vement i n ot her courses
of act i on of
compet i ngpri ori t y) ,
andt he
pl acement
of t heconversat i on i n t he course
of a
hi st ory
of i nt eract i onof t he
part i es,
andi nt hei nt eract i onal occasi on onwhi ch i t
occurs.
The
l ast
of
t heseweret urn t o
bri ef l y
at t heendof t hi s
paper.
308 EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFFANDHARVEYSACKS

as t o wherehei s
i n
t hest ruct ureof t heconversat i on
by f i ndi ng
wherehei s
i n t he
devel opi ng
st ruct ure of
t he
f i rst
t opi c) .
Ot her devi ces
may
make
room
f or some t al k about
mat t ers ot her t hana
si ngl e t opi c
whi l e
preserv-
i ng
an ori ent at i on t o
monot opi cal i t y,
f or
exampl e,
"Bef ore I come
t o
what I cal l ed about . . . ". I f
by
' monot opi cal '
we mean,
procedural l y,
t heuseof af i rst
t opi c
end as t he occasi on
f or
i ni t i at i ng
a
cl osi ng
sect i on,
t hent heuseof some
pref ace
l i ke t hi s l ast
may
servet o
exempt
t hat whi ch
i t
pref aces
f rom
bei ng
count ed as i ni t i al
t opi c.
For conversat i ons
producedby
ref erencet o
expect abl emonot opi cal i t y,
t hecl ose
of t he
t opi c ( or
t hef i rst
nonexempt ed
t opi c) properl y
serves as t he
occasi onf or t he i ni t i at i on of t he
cl osi ng
sect i on. I nsuch
ci rcumst ances,
t opi cs
wi l l
regul arl y
be
bounded, rat her t han
bei ng
shaded i nt o ot her
t opi cs. Topi c boundi ng may
be
accompl i shed by any
of t he
range
of
t echni ques
avai l abl e,
i ncl udi ng
t he
aphori st i c t echni que
and
t he
' shut t i ng
down'
t echni que gl ossed
earl i er, and an
anal yzabl e possi bl e pre-cl osi ng
by
t he i ni t i at or, when
pl aced
where a
t opi c cl osi ng t echni que mi ght
be
pl aced,
may
i t sel f showt he
sat i sf act ory ( t o
t he
part y
so
act i ng)
resol ut i on
of t he
t opi c,
a
resol ut i on
( and cl osi ng)
whi ch
may
t hus not have t o be
separat el y
accompl i shed.
Conversel y,
where a
cl osi ng
i ni t i at i on
at t empt
by
a
cal l ed-uponpart y
f ai l s
t o achi evecol l aborat i onf romani ni t i at or of a
conversat i on, t hi s
may
i ndi cat e di ssat i sf act i on
by
t he i ni t i at or wi t h t he
put at i ve
resol ut i on of t he
t opi c.
Thedi scussi on
i n t hi s sect i on, i t shoul dbe not ed, has deal t wi t h
onl y
one ki nd of
possi bl e pre-cl osi ng,
and t he
suggest i ons
we have of f ered
concerni ng
t he
pl acement
t hat al l ows t he
anal ysi s
of an ut t erance as a
has ref erence
onl y
t o t hat f orm. Wewi l l deal wi t h
ot hers
short l y.
I n
regard
t o t he f ormwehave beenconcerned wi t h, we
shoul d not et hat t he
t echni ques
of
t opi c boundi ng
wehave di scussed are
not
speci f i ed
f or t he
pl ace
of a
t opi c
i nt he seri al
organi zat i on
of
t opi cs.
They
arenot
t echni ques
f or f i rst
t opi c,
f i f t h
t opi c,
i nt endedl y
l ast
t op
i C, 12
et c. ,
but f or
any
t opi c ( i n
t erms of seri al
organi zat i on) .
That makes al l
t he more
f i t t i ng
t he
charact er of
as
speci f i cal l y
i nvi t i ng
t he
reopeni ng
of
t opi c
t al k. For,
gi ven
t hat t heuse of an"O. K. "
or a"we-el l "
af t er t hecl oseof a
t opi c
canbe
anal yzed ( by
copart i ci pant s)
as a
wi t hout
regard
t o whi ch seri al
t opi c
i naconver-
sat i on has
beencl osed, t he absence
of
t he
reopeni ng
al t ernat i ve
mi ght
12
The
rel at i onshi p
bet ween
' shut t i ng
down'
t echni ques
and
acl ass of
t opi c t ypes
i s no
except i on.
For whi l e
' shut t i ng
down'
may
be
speci al l y
usabl ewi t ht he
t opi ct ype' maki ng
arrangement s' ,
and t hat
t opi c t ypemay
be
cl osi ng-rel evant ,
i t i s not
by
vi rt ue
of t he
l at t er f eat ure of
' maki ng
arrangement s'
t hat
' shut t i ng
down'
i s
speci al l y
usabl e
t o end
i t .
OPENI NG
UP
CLOSI NGS

309
havet he
consequence
of
syst emat i cal l y
excl udi ng
f rom
possi bl e
usei nt he
present
conversat i on t he whol e
range
of unment i oned ment i onabl es
whi ch t he
part i ci pant s mi ght
havet o cont ri but e.
I n t hei r use of t he
et i -
quet t e
of
i nvi t at i on, t hat i s, t he
of f eri ng
of
t he
f l oor t o anot her,
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ngs operat e
t o al l owa di st ri but i on of
t he
opport uni t i es
and
responsi bi l i t i es
f or
i ni t i at i ngt opi c
t al k and
usi ng
unment i onedment i on-
abl es
among
vari ous
part i ci pant s
i n t he conversat i on, i t i s when t he
part i ci pant s
t o a
conversat i on
l ay
no f urt her cl ai mt o t hese
opport uni t i es
and
responsi bi l i t i es
t hat t he
pot ent i al
of t he
f or
i ni t i at i ng
a
cl osi ng
sect i on
may
be real i zed.
V
What t he
precedi ng
di scussi on
suggest s
i s t hat a
cl osi ng
sect i oni s i ni t i at ed,
i . e. ,
t urns out t o have
begun,
whennone
of
t he
part i es
t o a
conversat i on
care or choose t o cont i nue i t . Nowt hat i s a WARRANT f or
cl osi ng
t he
conversat i on, and we
may
nowbe i n a
posi t i on
t o
appreci at e
t hat t he
i ssue of
pl acement ,
f or
t he
i ni t i at i on of
cl osi ng
sect i ons as f or t ermi nal
exchanges,
i s t hei ssue of
warrant i ng
t he
pl acement
of suchi t ems as wi l l
i ni t i at e t he
cl osi ng
at
some ' hereand
now' i nt heconversat i on. 13Theki nd
of
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ng
wehavebeen
di scussi ng
-
"O. K. ", "we-el l ", et c.
-
i s a
way
of
est abl i shi ng
oneki nd
of
warrant f or
undert aki ng
t o cl osea
conversat i on.
I t s ef f ect i veness canbeseen
i n
t hef eat urenot edabove, t hat
i f t hef l oor
of f eri ng
i s decl i ned, i f t he"O. K. " i s answered
by
anot her, t hen
t oget her
t heset wo
ut t erances canconst i t ut e
not a
possi bl e,
but anact ual
f i rst
exchange
of t he
cl osi ng
sect i on. The
pre-cl osi ng
ceases t o be
' pre-'
i f
accept ed,
f or t he
accept ance
est abl i shes
t he warrant f or
undert aki ng
a
cl osi ng
of t he
conversat i onat some ' here' .
Havi ng
seen
t hat t hi s ki nd of
pre-cl osi ng
est abl i shes
a
part i cul ar
warrant f or
undert aki ng
t he
cl osi ng
of a conversat i on, we
may
now
exami ne ot her ki nds of
pre-cl osi ngs
and t he ki nds of warrant s
t hey may
i nvoke f or
i ni t i at i ng
t he
begi nni ng
of a
cl osi ng
sect i on. To
provi de
a
cont rast wi t h t he
ensui ng
di scussi on, l et
us makeonef urt her observat i on
ont heki nd of
pre-cl osi ng
wehave
j ust
been
di scussi ng.
The
f l oor-of f eri ng-
exchange
devi cei s onet hat canbei ni t i at ed
by any
part y
t o aconversat i on.
I ncont rast t o
t hi s, t here aresome
devi ces whose
use
13
The earl i er not ed
at t ri but i ons of
brusqueness, anger, pi que,
et c. cannowbe
ap-
preci at ed
as al t ernat i ve
possi bl e
warrant s f or
cl osi ngat t empt s,
when. a
cl osi ng
i ni t i at i on
has not avai l ed i t sel f of t he
sequent i al l y organi zedpossi bi l i t i es
f or warrant s.
310

i s rest ri ct ed t o
part i cul ar
part i es.
The
t erms i n
whi ch such
part i es may
be
f ormul at edvari es wi t h conversat i onal cont ext . ' 4For now, wecanof f er
someobservat i ons about
t el ephone
cont act s, where
t hef ormul at i onof t he
part i es
can be
speci f i ed
i n
t erms of t he
speci f i c
conversat i on,
i . e. ,
cal l er
-
cal l ed. ' 5 What
we
f i nd i s t hat t hereare, so t o
speak,
' cal l er' s t echni -
ques'
and ' cal l ed' s
t echni ques'
f or
i nvi t i ng
t he i ni t i at i on of
cl osi ng
sec-
t i ons. Bef ore
det ai l i ng
t hese, we
may
maket he
general poi nt ( i n pursui t
of t he cl ai mat t he
begi nni ng
of t hi s
paper
about t he
rel at i onshi p
of
cl osi ngs
t o overal l st ruct ural
organi zat i on)
t hat i t i s of i nt erest t hat
cl osi ng
sect i ons
of
suchconversat i ons
may
be
produced
i n
ways
whi ch
speci f i cal l y
empl oy,
as rel evant , f eat ures of t hei r
begi nni ngs ( namel y,
who
i ni t i at ed
t hem) , t hus
gi vi ng
support
t o
t he
proposal
t hat t heuni t ' a
si ngl e
conver-
sat i on' i s one t o
whi ch
part i ci pant s
ori ent THROUGHOUTi t s course.
Whi l e t here
are
speci f i c component s
whoseuse
may
be
rest ri ct ed
t o
cal l ers or cal l ed
part i es
i n
i nvi t i ng
t he
i ni t i at i on
of
conversat i onal
cl osi ngs,
we
may
not e one f eat ure t hat
many
of
t hemhave i n common,
namel y,
t hat
t hey empl oy
as t hei r
warrant f or
i ni t i at i ng
t he
cl osi ng
at some ' here'
t hei nt erest s of t he
ot her
part y.
I t i s i n t he
speci f i cat i on
of t hosei nt erest s
t hat t he
t echni ques
become
assi gned
t o one or anot her
part y.
Thus, t he
f ol l owi ng
i nvi t at i on t o a
cl osi ng
i s
cal l er-speci f i c
and makes ref erence
t o t he i nt erest s of
t he ot her.
A
di scussi onabout a
possi bl e l uncheonhas been
proceedi ng:
A: Uhrn l i vers ' n
an
gi zzards
' n st uf f i ke t hat
makes
i t real
yummy.
Makes i t t oo ri ch f or me
but : makes i t
yummy.
A:

Wel l
I ' l l l et chu
go.
I don' t
wannat i e
upyour phone.
And, on t he ot her hand,
t here are such
cal l ed-speci f i c t echni ques,
al so
maki ng
ref erence
t o t he ot her' s i nt erest s, as
A:

Thi s i s
cost i ngyou
al ot of
money.
There are, of
course, devi ces usabl e
by
ei t her
part y
whi ch do not make
ref erencet o t heot her' s
i nt erest s, most
f ami l i arl y,
"I
got t ago".
One f eat ure common t o
t he
so f ar di scussed i s
t hat
t hey
make no
ref erence t o t he
part i cul ars
of t he
conversat i on
i n
whi ch
t hey
occur. Whi l e
someof t hemret ai nand
empl oy
some
el ement s
of t he
conversat i on' s
begi nni ng,
such as
whocal l ed,
no
conversat i onal l y
devel oped
mat eri al s are ref erred
t o i n
warrant i ng
t he
cl osi ng
of t he
conversat i on.
There are, i n addi t i on,
devi ces whi ch DOmake use of
conversat i onal l y devel oped
mat eri al s. Near t he
begi nni ng
of t heconversa-
14
For
expl i cat i on
of t he
probl em
t hi s sent ence al l udes t o see Sacks, 1972, and
Schegl of f ,
1972.
15
For
j ust i f i cat i on,
see
Schegl of f ,
f ort hcomi ng: Chap.
2.

311
t i onwewi l l
ci t e,
t he
cal l ed
( t he
recei ver of t hecal l )
says:
B: Are
youwat chi ng
Dakt a: ri /
A: N: no
B: Oh
mygosh
Of f i cer
Henry
i s
ui -l ocked
i nt he
cage
wi -
( 0. 4)
Wi ' t hel i on,
hheh
Andseveral mi nut es l at er, t hecal l er
i ni t i at es
t he
cl osi ng
wi t h
A:

Okay,
I
l et cha
go
back
t uh
wat ch
yer
Dakt ari .
Such devi ces
agai n
rei nf orce our
underst andi ng
of t he ori ent at i on of
conversat i onal i st s t o
' a
si ngl e
conversat i on'
as a uni t , and t o ' THI S
si ngl e
conversat i on'
as
ani nst ance,
i n
whi ch
I TS
devel opment
t o some
poi nt may
be
empl oyed
as
a
resourcei n
accompl i shi ng
i t s f urt her
devel op-
ment as a
speci f i c, part i cul ari zed
occurrence.
Such mat eri al s can be
pi ckedupany
pl ace
i naconversat i onand
seemi ngl y
be
preserved
f or use
i n t he
conversat i on' s
cl osi ng.
One
pl ace
t hey syst emat i cal l y
can occur
i s i nt he
begi nni ngs
of conversat i ons
( not onl y
i nt he
begi nni ngs
of t el e-
phone
conversat i ons but i n f ace-t o-f ace i nt eract i ons as wel l ) . The
' rout i ne'
quest i ons empl oyed
at
t he
begi nni ngs
of
conversat i ons,
e. g. ,
"what are
youdoi ng?",
"whereare
yougoi ng?",
"howare
youf eel i ng?",
et c. ,
can el i ci t t hoseki nds of mat eri al s t hat wi l l have auseat t he
endi ng
of t he
conversat i on
i n
warrant i ng
i t s
cl osi ng, e. g. ,
"Wel l , I ' l l l et
youget
back
t o
your
books",
"why
don' t
you
l i e down
and
t ake
a
nap?",
et c. 16
By
cont rast wi t h our earl i er di scussi on of
such
possi bl e
pre-cl osi ngs
as
"O. K. " or "We-el i ", whi ch
may
be sai d t o
accompl i sh
or
embody
a
warrant f or
cl osi ng,
t hese
may
be sai d t o announce i t . That
t hey
do so
may
berel at edt o t he
possi bl epl aces
i nwhi ch
t hey
may
beused.
I nsof ar
as
t he
whi ch
announce a warrant
f or
cl osi ng
draw
upon
mat eri al s
part i cul ar
t o t heconversat i ons i nwhi ch
t hey
occur,
i t i s not
f easi bl e t o
speci f y
exhaust i vel y
t hei r
pri vi l eges
of occur-
rence.
One
t echni que
whi ch announces i t s
warrant , but does
not
make
ref erremi ce t o mat eri al s deri ved f romt he conversat i on, and whi ch i s
general l y
usabl e
( i . e. ,
not
rest ri ct ed t o
part i cul ar
users)
can
be
bri ef l y
di scussed,
namel y
"I
got t ago" ( and
i t s vari ant s and
expansi ons,
such as
"The
baby
i s
cryi ng,
I
got t a
go",
"I
got t ago, my
di nner i s
burni ng",
et c. ) .
16
Such a
use
of
mat eri al s
gat hered
earl i er
i n
t he conversat i onneed not berest ri ct ed
t o mat eri al s about t he
ot her' s ci rcumst ances or i nt erest s. Ani ni t i at or of
a
conversat i on
may
i nsert at i t s
begi nni ng
mat eri al s
f or
hi s ownuse
at i t s
cl osi nge. g. ,
"I ' m
j ust l eavi ng
t o see
t hedoct or, but I want edt o ask
you
. . . ". Thi s
t echni que may
al so al l owt hecal l er
t o
provi de
f or a
conversat i on' s
monot opi cal i t y
when, f or t heconversat i onal i st s i nvol ved,
i t woul d not
ot herwi sebe
expect abl e.
312

EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFF
ANDHARVEYSACKS
Wenot ed bef ore t hat t he
whi ch
accompl i sh
a
warrant wi t hout
announci ng
i t are
pl aced
af t er t he cl ose, or t he
cl osi ng
down, of
a
t opi c ( i ndeed,
such
pl acement
may
be
requi red
f or t hei r
recogni t i on
as
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs) .
The overt announcement
we
are
now
consi deri ng
can be
used
t o
i nt errupt
a
t opi c.
Whi l e
exchanges
such
as
"O. K. ;
O. K. "
respect
i nt hei r
pl acement
cert ai nl ocal orders of
organi -
zat i on, such as t he
organi zat i on
of t al k
on a
t opi c
or
adj acency pai rs
( t he
f i rst
"O. K. " not
bei ng
pl aced
af t er t hef i rst
part
of an
adj acencypai r,
or not
bei ng recogni zabl e
as a
i f i t i s) , t he overt
announcement , "I
got t a
go"
need not
respect
such
boundari es, and can
even
i nt errupt
not -yet -possi bl y-compl et ed
ut t erances. That i s not t o
say
t hat "I
got t ago" may
not be
pl aced
wi t h
a
respect
f or such l ocal
organi za-
t i on. I t
can
be
pl aced
af t er a
t opi c
cl ose, and
wecan
specul at e
onreasons
f or i t s
bei ng
usedat such a
pl ace
i n
pref erence
t o t he"O. K. " whi ch coul d
al so beusedt here. Whi l e"I
got t ago"
cannot
prohi bi t
f urt her t al k, whi l e
ot hers
may
i nsert an unment i oned ment i onabl e af t er i t , i t does not
speci f i cal l y
i nvi t e
such
a
sequel ,
as "O. K. " does. For t he i ni t i at i on of a
cl osi ng
sect i on i n a
way
t hat
di scourages
t he
speci f i c
al t ernat i ve of re-
openi ng t opi c
t al k, t hi s
pre-cl osi ngmay
bemoreef f ect i ve.
One
i mpl i cat i on
of t he
precedi ng
di scussi on
whi ch wecan but hi nt at
nowi s t hat f romt he
i nvent ory
of
devi ces, onecri t eri on
of
sel ect i on
may
bet he
pl acement
t hat t he i t emi s t o be
gi ven.
That
i s,
t he
avai l abi l i t y
of al t ernat i ve mechani sms f or
accompl i shi ng
t he i n-
vi t at i on or i ni t i at i on of a
cl osi ng
sect i on af f ords us
( as anal yst s)
an i n-
t erest i ng probl em:
howcan some
act ual l y empl oyed
mechani sm
or
component
be sel ect ed?
I nvest i gat i on
of t hi s
probl em
can be
expect ed
t o showt hat such a
sel ect ed i t em
operat es
not
onl y
t o i ni t i at e or i nvi t e
t he i ni t i at i on
of t he
cl osi ng
of a
conversat i on
( whi ch any
of t he ot her
avai l abl e
component s mi ght
do al so, andwhi ch t heref orewi l l not account
f or t heuseof t he
part i cul ar component empl oyed) ,
but
accompl i shes
ot her
i nt eract i onal l y
rel evant act i vi t i es as wel l . What wehave
suggest ed
above
i s t hat one
such consi derat i on
i n
t he
sel ect i on
among component s
t o
i nvi t e or i ni t i at e t he
cl osi ng
sect i on
i s
t he
pl acement
i t wi l l be
gi ven
i n
t erms
of t hel ocal
( ut t erance-t o-ut t erance)
and
t opi cal organi zat i on.
Anot her
i mpl i cat i on
shoul d be not ed. I t
i s
t he
i mport
of someof t he
precedi ng
di scussi on t hat t here are
sl ot s
i n conversat i on
' ri pe'
f or t he
i ni t i at i onof
cl osi ng,
such t hat ut t erances i nsert ed t here
may
be
i nspect ed
f or
t hei r
cl osi ng
rel evance. To ci t e an
exampl e
used earl i er,
"why
don' t
you
l i edown
andt akea
nap" properl ypl aced
wi l l
be
heardas an
i ni t i at i on
of a
cl osi ng
sect i on, not as a
quest i on
t obe answeredwi t h
a"Because
. . . "

313
( al t hough,
of
course, a
copart i ci pant
can seek t o decl i ne
t he
cl osi ng
of f eri ngby
t reat i ng
i t as a
quest i on) .
Toci t e act ual
dat a:
Bhas
cal l edt o i nvi t eC, but has
beent ol d Ci s
goi ng
out
t o di nner:
B:

Yeah. Wel l
get
on
your
cl ot hes and
get
out and
col l ect someof t hat
f ree f oodandwe' l l make
i t someot her t i me
J udy
t hen.
C:
Okay
t henJ ack
B:
Byebye
C:
Byebye
Whi l eB' s i ni t i al ut t erance
i nt hi s
excerpt mi ght
be
grammat i cal l y
charact -
eri zed as an
i mperat i ve
or a
command, andC' s
"Okay"
as asubmi ssi onor
accessi on t o i t , i nno sense
but at echni cal
synt act i c
one woul d t hose be
anyt hi ng
but whi msi cal charact eri zat i ons.
Whi l eB' s
ut t erancehas cert ai n
i mperat i ve aspect s
i n i t s
l anguage
f orm,
t hose are not ones t hat count ;
hi s ut t erance i s
a
cl osi ng
i ni t i at i on; and C' s
ut t erance
agrees
not t o a
commandt o
get
dressed
( nor
woul d
shebei nconsi st ent
i f shef ai l edt o
get
dressed af t er t he conversat i on) , but
t o ani nvi t at i on
t o cl oset he conver-
sat i on. The
poi nt
i s t hat no
anal ysi s
-
grammat i cal ,
semant i c,
pragmat i c,
et c.
-
of
t hese
ut t erances t aken
si ngl y
and
out of
sequence,
wi l l
yi el d
t hei r
i mport
i n
use, wi l l
showwhat
copart i ci pant s
mi ght
makeof t hemand
do about t hem. That B' s ut t erance
here
accompl i shes
af ormof
cl osi ng
i ni t i at i on, and C' s
accept s
t he
cl osi ng
f ormand not
what seems t o be
proposed
i ni t , t urns ont he
pl acement
of t heseut t erances
i nt heconver-
sat i on.
I nvest i gat i ons
whi ch f ai l
t o at t end t o such
consi derat i ons are
bound t o bemi sl ed.
VI
Wehavebeen
consi deri ng
t he
probl em
of t he
pl acement
of t he i ni t i at i on
of
cl osi ng
sect i ons, andhave
f oundt hat t hi s
probl em
and
t hesel ect i on of
a
t echni que
t o
accompl i sh
i ni t i at i on
of t he
cl osi ng
arerel at ed
t o t hei ssue
of
warrant i ng
t hei ni t i at i onof aconversat i on' s
cl osi ng.
That i ssue, i t
may
be recal l ed, concerned howt o warrant
undert aki ng,
at some ' here and
now' i n aconversat i on, a
procedure
t hat
woul dachi eve asol ut i on
t o t he
probl em
of
coordi nat i ng
a
st op
t o t he
rel evanceof t het ransi t i onrul e
and
t hat woul dat t hesamet i me
respect
t hei nt erest s of t he
part i es
i n
get t i ng
t hei r
ment i onabl es i nt ot heconversat i on.
Onesuchwarrant
coul dbef ound
whent he
speci f i c
al t ernat i ve t o
cl osi ng
-
reopeni ngt opi c
t al k
-
had
no
i nt erest
di spl ayed
i n i t
by
any
of t he
part i ci pant s.
I t shoul dbenot ed
t hat
t heuse of a
of t he f orm"O. K. ",
or "we-el l " canset
314

up' proceedi ng
t o cl ose' as t hecent ral
possi bi l i t y,
andt he
useof unmen-
t i oned ment i onabl es
by
copart i ci pant s
as
speci f i c
al t ernat i ves. That
i s
t o
say,
t he al t ernat i ves maderel evant
by
anut t erance
of t hat f ormare
not
symmet ri cal . Cl osi ng
i s t he cent ral
possi bi l i t y,
f urt her t al k
i s
al t er-
nat i vet o i t ; t he reversei s not t hecase
( an asymmet ry hopef ul l y capt ured
by
t he t erm
' possi bl e pre-cl osi ng' ;
' possi bl e
t opi c reopener'
woul d not
do) . Unl ess t he
al t ernat i ve
i s
i nvoked,
t he cent ral
possi bi l i t y
i s t o be
real i zed.
There i s anot her f ormof t he
warrant i ng probl em,
wi t h
concomi t ant
cont rast s
i n
pl acement
andut t erance
t ype,
whi ch reverses t hi s
asymmet ry.
Wewi l l ref er t o i t as
' pre-t opi c cl osi ngof f eri ngs' .
Wehavei n mi nd dat a
such as t he
f ol l owi ng:
( 1)
A:

Al l o
B:

Di d
I wake
you!
A:

Who' s
i t .
B:
Nancy
A: Ohhi
B:
-
Hi , di d I wake
you
A:

Uh
no no, not at al l
hhj / h
B:
(

)
hh
af t er a whi l e i t st art ed
ri ngi n
I
kept
t hi nki n
maybe
I
shoul d
hangup( but
I )
you
knowhh
A: No
no no, i t ' s O. K.
/ /
I was
j ust
uh
rushi ng
al i t t l e
t hat ' s al l hh
B: Oh
good.
B: hhUmmdon' t
bri ngany
sausage
because

et c.
( 2)
A: Hel l o!
B:

Good
morni ng.
A:
Oh
hi / / howareyouhhh
B: Li sa
B:

-+
Fi ne. Di dI wake
youup!
A: Nono no, I was
readi ng

et c.
( 3)
A: Buh
nobody f ought
wi t h huh l i ke
I
f ought
wi t h huh.
( 1. 4)
A: Uhb-uh f er
exampl e,
uh
d-oh
about t wo weeks bef ore she uh
di ed I hh I don' knowwhat
possessed
me. I
real l y
don' t . I f ound
mysel f
i n
my
car,
dri vi ng
ovuh t uhsee her al one.
( 1. 3)
A: An' I uh; ; ; i t koo-t ook meabout oh I don' t knowhow
l ong
t ' f i nd a
parki ngspace
i n t hat area t here,
( 0. 4)
B:
yeah
A:
-
About a
hal f
hour. Are
yi h busy!
B: Uhno.
My
l i ddl e
gran' daught er
i s here.
A: Oh.
Oh so i t ' s hard
f ' you
t o
f t
uh,
B:

That ' s
al ri ght

315
A: -t o uh: : , t o l i st en.
Then
uh,
l ook,
enj oy yer grai l '
daught er,
hh
B:
I ' l l be
t aki ng
her
homesoon,
A: An' I ' l l
t ry
t ouh: : : uh t osee
you/ / on-
B:

Yeah, i t coul dbe-woul d
I f
be
( ni ce) .
A:
-on
Thursday.

( et c.
t o
cl osi ng)
( 4)
B: Hel l o
A: Vera/
B: Ye: s
A: Wel l
you
know, I had a l i t t l e
di f f i cul t y get t i ng you. ( ( short
di scussi onof t he
di f f i cul t y) )
A:

-+
AmI
t aki ngyou away
f rom
yer
di nner!
B:

No: : , no, I
haven' t evenst art ed t uh
get
i t
yet .
A: Oh,
you( h) haveI f
n' t .
B: hhheh heh
A: Wel l I -I never amcert ai n,
I di dn' t knowwhet her I ' d be t oo
earl y
or t oo l at e
/ /
or ri -
et c.
( 5)
A: . . .
( Karen
Sweet )
B: Wel l ,
howarya( h)
A: Fi ne, howare
you.
B: Wel l
j ust
f i ne.
A:
-
Were
you eat i ng,
( 1. 0)
B: Some
grapes,
ehh
/ 1
hehheh
A:

heh, I was
j ust
l ooki nat mi ne.
Such
quest i ons
as "Di d
I
wake
you",
"Are
youbusy",
"Am1.
t aki ng
you
away
f rom
your
di nner", and ot hers
( e. g. ,
"I s t hi s
l ong
di st ance?", "Are
you
i nt hemi ddl e
of
somet hi ng?",
et c. )
are
pl aced
not at t he
anal yzabl e
cl oseof some uni t , such
as
a
t opi c,
but at , or near, t he
begi nni ng
of one.
One
consequence
of t hi s i s t hat , i nst ead
of some
act i vi t y
such as
t opi c
t al k
bei ng
a
speci f i c
al t ernat i ve t ot he
cl osi ngt hey
ot herwi se
pref i gure,
t he
cent ral
possi bi l i t y
i s
an
undert aki ng,
or cont i nuat i on, of t he uni t at t he
begi nni ng
of whi ch
t hey
are
pl aced
( be
i t a
' t opi c' ,
a ' conversat i on' , or
a ' si l ence'
as
when about t o ' hol d' i n.
a
t el ephone
conversat i on) , and
cl osi ng
i s t he
speci f i c
al t ernat i ve t o t hat . Whensuch
pre-t opi c cl osi ng
of f eri ngs
are
decl i ned,
t hent he
of f eri ng
or some
component
of t he decl i n-
i ng
ut t erance
may
be
t opi cal l y
el aborat edi ni t s own
ri ght ,
or t he
of f eri ng
becomes a
pre-sequence
f or t heof f erer' s
t opi c
t al k.
I f
t he
pre-t opi c
cl osi ng
of f eri ng
i s
accept ed,
t here f ol l ows a
cl osi ng
sect i on, one
component
of whi ch
rout i nel y
i s
maki ngarrangement s
f or
resumpt i on
of t heconver-
sat i on
( as
i nt he dat af rom
( 3)
above) . ' 7
17
These f eat ures of
pre-t opi c cl osi ng
of f eri ngs
seemt o be rel at ed i n
t hei r
capaci t y
not
onl y
t o
pref i gure
t he
undert aki ng
of someconversat i onal uni t
i n t he absence of
a
316

EMANUELA. SCHEOLOFF
ANDHARVEY
SACKS
Of
speci al
i nt erest herearewhat
mi ght
becal l ed
' pre-f i rst -t opi c cl osi ng-
of f eri ngs' ,
of
whi ch al l but one of t he dat aci t at i ons above are i nst ances
( t he except i on bei ng
t he dat af rom
( 3) ) .
These are not
si mpl y speci al
cases of
pre-t opi c
cl osi ng
of f eri ngs, speci f yi ng
t he
' t opi c'
as ' f i rst
t opi c' .
Rat her,
by
vi rt ue
of
t he
speci al
st at us of ' f i rst
t opi c'
di scussed
earl i er,
i nqui ri es
such as "Are
youbusy?",
"Are
youeat i ng?",
et c. ,
pl aced
bef ore
f i rst
t opi c
are more
i mport ant l y
seenas
pl aced
bef ore ' t he conversat i on' .
Thebases f or t he
i nsert i on of such
i nqui ri es,
bef ore
' f i rst
t opi c'
cannot
be di scussed at
l engt h
here, but
t wo
may
be
bri ef l y
i ndi cat ed. Fi rst , such
i nqui ri es
may
beheard
( by
part i ci pant s)
t o be
warrant ed
( i . e. ,
t o have t he
' why
t hat
now'
expl ai ned) by
f eat ures of
t hecont act t o t hat
poi nt ( e. g. ,
by
t he ' number of
ri ngs
bef ore
answeri ng' ,
as i nt he dat af rom
( 1)
above)
or
by assumedl y mut ual l y
ori ent ed-t o f eat ures of t he i nt eract i on such as
i t s t i me and
pl ace ( on
t he mut ual ori ent at i on t o t he t i me and
pl ace
of a
conversat i on
by part i ci pant s,
see
Schegl of F, 1972) , 18 e. g. ,
t he ori ent at i on
t o t he soci al t i me of
day di spl ayed by
"AmI
t aki ng you away
f rom
your
di nner", i n t he dat aabove.
Secondl y,
such
i nqui ri es may
be heard
as at t ent i ve t o t he
' pri ori t i es
assessment ' t hat
may
berel evant i n
i ni t i at i ng
a
conversat i on. Wheret he i ni t i at or of aconversat i on
i s unabl e t o assess
t he
comparat i ve pri ori t i es
of
possi bl y ongoi ng
act i vi t i es of t he ot her
and t he
prospect i ve
conversat i on
( f or
a
f ul l er di scussi on
of t hi s i ssue
concerni ng
openi ngs,
see
Scheg1of l , f ort hcomi ng: Chap.
2) ,
as when
f i rst
comi ng
upon
t he scene
( e. g. , knocki ng
at t he
door) or
cal l i ng
ont he
t el ephone,
an
i nqui ry concerni ng possi bl y
ongoi ng
pri ori t y
act i vi t i es
may
be
i nt roduced, as a
way
of
f i ndi ng
whet her
ani ni t i at ed conversat i on
shal l be
prosecut ed.
Si nce t he
subj ect
of t he
i nqui ry
i s
t hus sel ect ed as
one whi ch
mi ght
have
pri ori t y
over t he
proposed
conversat i on, anaf f i rm-
at i ve answer
may
have t he
consequence
of
accept i ng
what t urns out
t o bea
cl osi ng of f eri ng.
Pre-f i rst -t opi c cl osi ng of f eri ngs
have
beeni nt roduced here t o
suggest
t hat ,
j ust
as
do not f orecl ose
t he
possi bi l i t y
of
reason t o t he
cont rary,
but al so t o
proj ect
acert ai ncont our or
l engt h
f or t heuni t , such
t hat ,
i f t he
of f er t o cl osei s not
accept ed
ont he occasi on of t he
of f eri ng,
no
opport uni t y
t ocl osewi l l
soon
present
i t sel f whi ch
respect s
t he
organi zat i on
of t hat uni t
( f orexampl e,
i t
mayrequi re
an
i nt errupt i on) .
18
These al t ernat i ves
may
shadei nt o each ot her. "Di dI wake
you?" may
beheard
as
di spl ayi ng
i t s
speaker' s
ori ent at i ont o t het i me of t he conversat i oni f askedat at i me
t he
speaker mi ght
knowt he ot her t o have
possi bl y
been
sl eepi ng; i . e. ,
i t canbeheard
as
ref erri ng
t o
t i me
i f
i t i s t he
ri ght
t i mef or such a
quest i on.
I f not , i t canbeheard as
pi cki ng up
onaf eat ure of t he i nt eract i on t o t hat
poi nt ,
e. g. ,
number of
ri ngs
bef ore
answeri ng,
voi ce
qual i t y l eadi ng
t o t al k about ' col ds' , et c.

317
f urt her
t opi c
t al k i nt heconversat i on
( i . e. , rai si ng
t he
possi bi l i t y
of
cl osi ng
does not ensure i t ) , so does t he
openi ng
of aconversat i on not
precl ude
t he
possi bi l i t y
of
i mmedi at el y cl osi ng
i t . When
t he l at t er
possi bi l i t y
i s
act ual i zed,
al t hough by
ref erence t o t he basi c f eat ures
di scussed at t he
begi nni ng
of t hi s
paper,
' conversat i on'
may
t echni cal l y
be sai d t o have
t aken
pl ace,
t he
part i ci pant s may
f i nd t hat ' no conversat i on occurred' .
The
possi bi l i t i es
f or bot h conversat i onal cont i nuat i on
and f or conversa-
t i onal
cl osi ng
aret hus
present ,
i f
appropri at et echni ques
are used, f rom
t he
very begi nni ng
of aconversat i on
t o i t s end.
VI I
Af t er i ni t i al f ormul at i on
of
t he
cl osi ngprobl em
f or conversat i oni nt erms
of t he
suspensi on
of t he t ransi t i on
propert y
of ut t erance
compl et i ons,
a
t echni que
was descri bed whi ch i s used t o come t o t erms
wi t h
t hat
probl em
-
t he t ermi nal
exchange.
I t was f ound t hat t hat
exchange by
i t sel f was i nsuf f i ci ent andt hat an
adequat e descri pt i on
of
cl osi ng
woul d
havet o
provi de
f or t he
proper pl acement
of t ermi nal
exchanges
whi ch do
not have
unrest ri ct ed
pri vi l eges
of occurrence. Theneeded
suppl ement
was
f oundt o
consi st
i n
properl y
i ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
sect i ons,
and wedescri bed
a
vari et y
of
t echni ques
f or
properl y
i ni t i at i ng cl osi ng
sect i ons, t hei r
pl acement ,
and t he warrant
t hey
est abl i sh f or
cl osi ng
a
conversat i on.
Once
properl y
i ni t i at ed, a
cl osi ng
sect i on
may
cont ai n
not hi ng
but a
t ermi nal
exchange
and
accompl i sh
a
proper cl osi ng t hereby.
Thus,
a
proper cl osi ng
can
be
accompl i shed by:
A: O. K.
B: O. K.
A:
ByeBye
B:

Bye
Cl osi ng
sect i ons
may,
however, i ncl ude much more. There i s acol l ect i on
of
possi bl e component part s
f or
cl osi ng
sect i ons whi ch we cannot
descri be i n t he
space
avai l abl e here.
Among
ot hers,
cl osi ngs may
i n-
cl ude
' maki ng arrangement s' ,
wi t h vari et i es such. as
gi vi ng
di rect i ons,
arrangi ng
l at er
meet i ngs,
i nvi t at i ons, and t he
l i ke; rei nvocat i on of
cert ai n
sort s of mat eri al s t al ked of earl i er i nt he
conversat i on, i n
part i cul ar,
rei nvocat i ons of earl i er-made
arrangement s ( e. g. ,
"See
youWednesday")
andrei nvocat i ons of t hereasonf or
i ni t i at i ng
t heconversat i on
( e. g. ,
"Wel l ,
I
j ust
want ed t o f i nd out howBobwas") , not t o
repeat
here t he earl i er
di scussi on of
mat eri al s f romearl i er
part s
of t he conversat i on t o do
18

EMANUEL
A. SCHEGLOFFANDHARVEYSACKS
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs;
and
component s
t hat seemt o
gi ve
a
' si gnat ure'
of sort s t o t he
t ype
of conversat i on,
usi ng
t he
cl osi ng
sect i on as a
pl ace
where
recogni t i on
of t he
t ype
of conversat i on can be
di spl ayed ( e. g. ,
"Thank
you") .
Col l ect i ons of t hese and ot her
component s
can be com-
bi ned t o
yi el d
ext ended
cl osi ng
sect i ons, of whi ch t he
f ol l owi ng
i s
but
a modest
exampl e:
B: Wel l t hat ' s

why
I sai d "I ' mnot
gonna
say anyt hi ng,
I ' mnot
maki ngany
comment s
/ /
about
anybody"
C: Hmh
C:
Ehyeah
B:
Yeah
C:
Yeah
B:
Al ri ght y.
Wel l I ' l l
gi ve you
acal l bef ore
wedeci det ocomedown.
O. K. ?
C: O. K.
B:
Al ri ght y
C:
O. K.
B:
We' l l see
you
t hen
C:
O. K.
B:
Byebye
C:

Bye
However ext ensi ve t he col l ect i on of
component s
t hat
are
i nt roduced,
t he t wo cruci al
component s ( FOR
THEACHI EVEMENT OFPROPERCLOSI NG;
ot her
component s
may
be
i mport ant
f or
ot her
reasons, but
not f or
cl osi ng
per
se) are t he t ermi nal
exchange
whi ch achi eves t he col l aborat i ve t er-
mi nat i on of t he t ransi t i on
rul e,
and t he
proper
i ni t i at i on of t he
cl osi ng
sect i onwhi ch warrant s t he
undert aki ng
of t herout i newhoset ermi nat i on
i n t he t ermi nal
exchange
properl y
cl oses t he conversat i on. I t shoul d be
not ed
agai n,
however, t hat at
any
poi nt
i nt he
devel opment
of t hecol l ec-
t i on of
component s
whi ch
may
occur bet ween
a
proper
i ni t i at i on
of
a
cl osi ng
up
t o and
i ncl udi ng
t he
t ermi nal
exchange,
andevent hemoment s
i mmedi at el y f ol l owi ng
i t , t here are
procedures
f or
reopeni ng
t he
conver-
sat i on
t o
t opi c
t al k. A
necessari l y
bri ef
descri pt i on
of some
procedures
f or
doi ng
so
may
i ndi cat e
why
we have ref erred t o t hi s conversat i onal
part
as
a
cl osi ng
SECTI ON,
t hereby ascri bi ng
t o i t t hest at us
of
anori ent ed-
t o conversat i onal uni t .
One
way t opi c
t al k
may
be
reopened
at
any
poi nt
has
al ready
been
di scussed
i n anot her cont ext . Wenot ed earl i er t hat some
possi bl e pre-
cl osi ngs speci f i cal l y
i nvi t e t he i nsert i on
of unment i oned
ment i onabl es
and i f t hat i nvi t at i on i s
accept ed by
a
copart i ci pant ,
t hen consi derabl e
t opi c
t al k
may
ensue,
si nceot her
part i ci pant s
may
f i nd i n t he t al k about
OPENI NG
UP CLOSI NGS

319
t he
newl y
i nt roduced ment i onabl e occasi ons
f or t he nat ural
f i t t i ng
of a
t opi c
of t hei r own. Thesame
procedure
of
f i t t i ng,
of
t opi cs ' nat ural l y'
comi ng
up,
can ari se f rom
any
of t he
proper component s
of
cl osi ng
sec-
t i ons. I f
one
component
of a
cl osi ng
sect i oncanberei nvocat i onof earl i er
t al ked-about mat eri al s,
t hen on
any
occasi on of such an i nvocat i on,
occasi ons f or
f i t t i ng
new
t opi cs
t o t hat rei nvocat i on
may
ari se. Thesame
i s t rue f or ot her
component s
of
cl osi ngs,
each of whi ch
may
' l ead t o'
some
f i t t ed ot her
t opi c ' comi ngup nat ural l y' .
Si nce
most
cl osi ng
com-
ponent s
have t hei r
root s i nt he
body
of t he conversat i on, i t
appears
t hat
' new'
t opi cs
canent er i nt o a
cl osi ng
sect i on
onl y by
t hei r f i t t o, or t hei r
comi ng
up
' nat ural l y'
f rom' ol d' mat eri al s. Thi s charact er of
cl osi ng
sect i ons as ' not a
pl ace
f or new
t hi ngs
t o come
up'
i s consi st ent wi t h
t echni ques
f or
i ni t i at i ng
t hemsuch as
possi bl e pre-cl osi ngs,
whose war-
rant
( when
t hei r
cl osi ng opt i ons
are
accept ed)
i s t hat none of
part i es
has
f urt her ment i onabl es t o i nt roduce.
The
suggest i on
abovet hat t hereare
procedures
at
any poi nt
i na
cl osi ng
sect i on f or
reopeni ng t opi c
t al k was not , however,
i nt ended
pri mari l y
t o ref er t ot hi s
process whereby
newmat eri al s
arei nt roduced
by ' hooki ng'
t hemont o ol d mat eri al s
properl y appeari ng
as rei nvocat i ons. There are
al so
ways
i nwhi chnewmat eri al s
may
bei nt roduced, so t o
speak,
i n t hei r
own
ri ght ,
and t hese ref l ect t he sect i onal charact er of
cl osi ngs.
When
such
newmat eri al s arei nsert edi nt o a
cl osi ng, t hey
are
speci al l y
' marked' ;
wecanheredi scuss
onl y
t wo f orms of such.
marki ng.
One f ormof
marki ng,
used el sewhere i n conversat i on
and not
onl y
i n
cl osi ngs,
wecan ref er t o as
' mi spl acement marki ng' .
Cl asses
of ut t er-
ances
or act i vi t i es
whi ch
have a
proper pl ace
i n aconversat i on but are
t o be done i n some
part i cul ar
conversat i on i n ot her t han t hei r
proper
pl ace,
or an ut t erance
( t ype)
whi ch has no
part i cul ar proper pl ace
but
i s nonet hel ess
' out of
pl ace'
wherei t i s t o bedone,
may
havet hei r occur-
rence
mi spl acement
marked. As an
exampl e
of t hef ormer: ' i nt roduct i ons'
are
properl y
doneat or near t he
begi nni ngs
of conversat i ons. Onoccasi on,
however,
t hey may
not occur unt i l wel l i nt o t he
conversat i on, as
may
happen
i n conversat i ons bet ween
adj acent l y
seat ed
passengers
i n an
ai rpl ane
or t rai n. Such i nt roduct i ons
may
be
pref aced
wi t h
a
mi spl acement
marker,
e. g. , "By
t he
way, my
namei s . . . ". As
an
exampl e
of t he
l at t er
sort of occasi on al l uded t o above, we
may
not e t hat
i nt errupt i ons
of an
organi zat i onal
uni t f or ut t erances, such as an
adj acency pai r, may
be
si mi l arl y mi spl acement
marked. Thus, anut t erance
i nsert ed af t er a
ques-
t i on has been asked but bef ore i t has been answered,
may begi n
wi t h
"By
t he
way
. . . ".
320

EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFFAND
HARVEYSACKS
Mi spl acement
markers, t hus,
di spl ay
an
ori ent at i on
by
t hei r user
t o t he
proper
sequent i al -organi zat i onal
charact er of a
part i cul ar
pl ace
i n a
conversat i on, and
a
recogni t i on
t hat anut t erance t hat i s
t hereby
pref aced may
not
f i t , and t hat t he
reci pi ent
shoul d not
at t empt
t o use
t hi s
pl acement
i n
underst andi ng
t hei r occurrence. The
di spl ay
of such
ori ent at i on
and
recogni t i on
apparent l y
ent i t l es t heuser t o
pl ace
ani t em
out si de
i t s
proper pl ace.
I n t he
case
of
cl osi ngs,
wef i nd t hat
ut t erances
i nt roduci ng
newmat eri al s
may
be
mi spl acement
marked when
t hose
ut t erances
do
not occur
bet ween
t he
part s
of
an
adj acencypai r
anddo
not
accompl i sh
an
act i vi t y
whi ch
has a
proper pl ace
el sewhere i nt he
conver-
sat i on. That such
ut t erances, but not ones
whi chuse
proper cl osi ng
com-
ponent s,
are
mi spl acement
marked
suggest s
an
ori ent at i on
by
conversa-
t i onal i st s
t o t he st at us of
' cl osi ngs'
as an
organi zat i onal
uni t
-
what we
have ref erred t o as a
' sect i on'
-
wi t h a
proper
charact er wi t h whi ch t he
mi spl acement
marked
ut t erance i s not
consi st ent .
Cal l ero:
You
don' knoww-uh what t hat woul dbe, how
much
i t
cost s.
Crandal l :
I
woul dt hi nk
probabl y,
about
t wunt y
f i vedol l ars.
Cal l ero:
Oh
boy
hehh
hhh
Cal l ero:
Okay,
t hank
you.
Crandal l :
Okay
dear.
Cal l ero:
OHBYTHEWAY. I ' d
j ust
l i ket uh
say
t het uh, I DOl i ket he
new
programmi ng.
I ' ve been
l i st eni ng,
i t ' s uh
/ /
(
)
Crandal l : Good
gi rl !
Crandal l :
Hey
l i st en do meaf avor
woul dj a
wri t eMi st er Fai rchi l d ' n t el l
i mt hat , I
t hi nk t hat ' l l s-shi -break
up
hi s whol e
day
f or i m.
Cal l erO: ehhh heh heh
hhh!
Crandal l :
Okay?
Cal l ero:
Okay,
Crandal l :
rrTha
you.
Cal l ero:

LLbye bye,
Crandal l : Mmbuh( h)
bye.
A
secondf ormof
marki ng
whi ch
di spl ays
an
ori ent at i ont o a
cl osi ng
sect i on as ' not a
pl ace
f or newmat eri al s' we
may
ref er t o as
' cont rast
marki ng' .
I t i s best
di scussed
i n
connect i onwi t hdat a:
A, who i s
vi si t i ng
t he
ci t y,
andB, who
l i ves t here, havebeen
engaged
i n an
ext en-
si ve
maki ng
of
arrangement s
t o see
each ot her.
A: I
meanb' cause I -eh
you' regoi ng
t o t hi s
meet i ng
at t wel ve
t hi rt y,
enI don' t
want t o uh
i nconveni ence
you,
B:
Wel l , eveni f
you get
hereet
abayout
eh t en
t hi rt y,
or
el even uh'
cl ock, west i l l
haveenhour enahal i f ,
A:

O. K. , Al ri ght ,

321
B:

Fi ne. Wec' d haveabi t e, en
I I ( t al k) ,
A:

Yeh, Weh-No! No, don' t
prepareany/ /
t hi ng.
B: Anduh-I ' mnot
gunnah prepare,
we' l l
j uz
what ever i t ' l l
I I
be,
we' l l (
) .
A: No! No. I don' meant hat . I
mm-becauseuh, sheenI ' l l
prob' l y
uhbe
spendi ng
t he
day
t oget huh,
souh;
; ;
we' l l
go
out t uhl unch,
or
somet hi ng
l i ke t hat . hh
So I mean i f
you; ;
have a
cuppa
cawf eeor
somet hi ng,
I mean
/ /
t hat uht hat ' l l bef i ne. But
I
/
uh-
B:
Yeah
B:
Fi ne.
A: Ot huh t h' nt hat don' t
/ /
uh
B: Fi ne.
A: Don' t bot huhwi t h
anyt hi ng
el se. I -huh: : :
( 1. 2)
A:
-
1-uh; ; ; I di dwannat el l
you,
en
I di dn" wannat el l
you
uh; ; l ast
ni ght .
Uh because
you
had ent ert -uh,
company.
I -I -I hadsome-
t hi ng-
t erri bl et ' t el l
you.
So
/ /
uh
B:
Howt erri bl e i s i t .
A:
Uh, t uh-as worsei t coul d be.
( 0. 8)
B:
W-y'
meanAda?
A:
Uhyab
B:
Whad' she do, di e?
A: Mm; : hm.
The
dat aof
part i cul ar
i nt erest
here are i n A' s sevent h ut t erance i n t he
segment ,
"I di d wanna t el l
you. "
Whi l e t here are
vari ous
i nt erest i ng
i ssues rai sed
by
t hi s dat a, wewant
bri ef l y onl y
t o i ndi cat e one of t hem.
Thest ress
( as
wel l as
t he verb
f orm
empl oyed
whi ch al l ows t he st ress)
accompl i shes
onehal f acont rast whoseot her hal f i s not
expl i ci t ( t he
rest
of t he
ut t erance does
not
suppl y
i t ) , and whose
paraphrase
mi ght
be,
"There i s
somet hi ng
el se I want ed t o t el l
you".
A
st ress ont he
second
part
of a cont rast
pai r
whose f i rst
part
i s
not
expl i ci t
can
nonet hel ess
serve t o
di spl ay
t he
rel evance
of t he f i rst
part .
Thus, t o ci t e anot her
exampl e,
a
part i cul arl y
cl ear
di spl ay
of what
i s
' goi ngt hrough
someone' s
mi nd'
t hough
i t i s not
spoken
or
gest ural l y,
et c. ,
conveyed,
i s
provi ded
by
a
personwai t i ng
t o t akeanel evat or down, who i s t ol d
upon
i t s arri val
t hat t he el evat or i s
goi ng
up, pauses
amoment , andt hen
says,
"I
guess
I
wi l l wai t ".
The
cont rast accent
di spl ays
hi s
pri or,
now
abandoned,
deci si ont o
' go al ong
f or
t he ri de' .
I nt hecase of "I di d wannat el l
you",
t he
presumpt i ve
charact er of
cl osi ng
sect i ons
as ' not t he
pl ace
f or new
mat eri al s' canbeseent o behere
prospect i vel y
overrul ed
by
newmat eri al s,
whi ch however are
speci al l y
marked.
Thei nsert i on of
mi spl acement
markednewmat eri al s i nt o
cl osi ng
see-
322

t i ons, i t
may
beadded, marks t henewmat eri al s t hemsel ves i nadi st i nct i ve
way.
Whi l e i n t he case of t he dat a
j ust
di scussed, t hi s
appears
t o be
' def erred bad news' ,
regul arl y
t he
pl aci ng
of newmat eri al s
i n
cl osi ng
sect i ons i s a
way
of
achi evi ng
f or t hemt he st at us of
' af t ert hought s' .
Havi ng
of f ered some
suggest i ons
about t he st at us of
cl osi ngs
as sec-
t i onal uni t s,
we
t hi nk i t i s i n
poi nt
t o
suggest
several vi rt ues of asect i onal
sol ut i on
t o
t he
probl ems
we have f ormul at ed
as t he
probl ems
of
cl osi ng.
One
aspect
of
t he
probl em
of
cl osi ng,
f ormul at ed
by
ref erence t o t he
organi zat i on
of
speaker
t urns, i t
may
berecal l ed, was
t hat
t hat
organi za-
t i on
generat es
an
i ndef i ni t el y
ext endabl e, but
i nt ernal l y
undi f f erent i at ed,
st ri ng
of t urns. Wenot ed earl i er t he
i mport ance
of
havi ng
amarked
pl ace
f or a
probl em
whosef ocus was coordi nat i oni n
t ermi nat i ng
t he
t ransi t i on
rul es, anddescri bedt hecont ri but i ont hat at ermi nal
exchange,
empl oyi ng
adj acency pai r organi zat i on,
madet o t he sol ut i onof t hat
probl em.
That
cont ri but i onwas l i mi t ed, however,
by
t he
pl acement
probl em
f or t ermi nal
exchanges, i . e. ,
t he
i mpropri et y
of
a
cl osi ngproduced
by
an
' unprepared'
t ermi nal
exchange.
That
pl acement probl em
i s sol ved
by
t he use of
properl y
i ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
sect i ons. I t
i s
t he
cl osi ng
sect i on
whi ch,
t hrough
i t s t ermi nal
exchange,
marks a
pl ace
at whi ch
col l aborat i on ont ermi na-
t i on of t he t ransi t i on rul ecanbe l ocat ed. An
i mport ant part
of t hesol u-
t i on t o t he
cl osi ng probl em
t hus
i nvol ves
l ocat i ng
t he sol ut i on t o t he
i ni t i al
probl em
we
f ormul at ednot
so
much
i n
t he
conversat i onas awhol e,
but i na
cl osi ng
sect i on; one cancl oseaconversat i on
by cl osi ng
asect i on
whi ch has as i t s busi ness
cl osi ng
aconversat i on. Whenani ni t i at ed
cl osi ng
i s abort ed
byreopeni ng
t opi c
t al k, a
next ef f ort
t o cl osedoes not
proceed
by
si mpl e
i nsert i on of at ermi nal
exchange,
but
by
t he
i ni t i at i onof
anot her
cl osi ng
sect i on,
agai nprovi di ng
auni t wi t hi nwhi cht het ermi nal
exchange
canbe
l ocat ed.
Asecond vi rt ue of a
sect i onal sol ut i on can be ment i oned
agai n
here
bri ef l y.
Gi ven
t he
f eat ureof
cl osi ng
sect i ons
as
' porous' , i . e. ,
t heavai l abi l -
i t y
at
any
poi nt
of
procedures
f or
reopeni ngt opi c
t al k, sect i onal sol ut i on
has t he vi rt ue of
possi bl y provi di ngmul t i pl e opport uni t i es
f or t hei nt ro-
duct i on
of unment i oned ment i onabl es,
a
vi rt ue whose
i mport ance
vi s--vi s t hi s
conversat i onal
syst em' s t opi cal
organi zat i on
shoul d
be
evi dent f romt he earl i er di scussi on.
Onef i nal vi rt ue of a
sect i onal sol ut i ont o
t he
cl osi ngprobl emmay
be
suggest ed, concerni ng
t he art i cul at i on of conversat i ons
( i . e. ,
t he uni t
' a
si ngl e
conversat i on' ) wi t ht hei nt eract i on
epi sodes,
occasi ons,
or
st reams
of
behavi or i nwhi ch
t hey
occur. Oneorder of rel evance t ermi nat i oncan

323
have, andonebasi s
f or t he
i mport ance
of
t he
cl ari t y
of t ermi nal
exchanges,
i s t hat ot her
act i ons
by
t he
part i ci pant s
may
be
geared
t o, or
properl y
occasi oned
by,
t heoccurrence
of conversat i onal t ermi nat i on.
I n
t el ephone
conversat i ons,
hangi ng up
and
breaki ng
t he communi cat i on
medi um
properl y
awai t s t ermi nat i on,
and
properl y
f ol l ows i t s occurrence. I n
f ace-t o-f ace
i nt eract i on, awhol e
range
of
physi cal
doi ngs
and
posi t i oni ngs,
rul ed out
by
t he
propri et i es
of
mai nt ai ni ng
a showof at t ent i on
and
i nt erest , ' 9
become avai l abl e and/ or
requi red
upon
t ermi nat i on, f or
exampl e,
t hose rel at ed t o
l eave-t aki ng.
I nsof ar
as t he act i ons t hat
may
be occasi oned
by
t ermi nat i on of t he
conversat i on
requi re preparat i on,
t here i s use f or a
pl ace
I N
t he conversat i on t o
prepare
f or act i ons t hat
shoul df ol l owi t s t ermi nat i on
i n cl ose order. 2
Cl osi ng
sect i ons,
i n f ore-
shadowi ng
t hei mmi nent occurrence of
t ermi nat i on, al l owsucha
possi bi l -
i t y.
I ndeed,
t opi cs may
be
i mprovi sed
f or i nsert i on
i nt oa
cl osi ngsequence
t oext endt het i me avai l abl ef or
such
preparat i ons,
as when
vi si t ors
gat her
t hei r
bel ongi ngs
bef ore
depart ure
( t hus yi el di ng
a deri vat i ve
probl em
when such
i mprovi sed t opi cs
assume
a ' l i f e of t hei r own'
and cannot
easi l y
be
brought
t o acl osewhent he
preparat i ons
t hey
were t o
accom-
19
Cf . Gof f man,
1961; 1963;
1967.
20
Onereader of
t hi s
paper
i n
manuscri pt
underst ood
i t t o cl ai mt hat
cl osi ng
canbe
accompl i shed by
' verbal means' al one, andt hat ' non-verbal accompani ment s'
arenot
i nvol ved.
Thus, f or
exampl e,
' t aki ng
l eave' or
breaki ng copresence
i s not
expl i ci t l y
ment i oned,
yet cl osi ng
woul d
not
appear
t o have beenef f ect ed
i f t he
part i es
remai n
i n
copresence
af t er
havi nggone
t hrough
such
sequences
as we descri be.
Not hi ng
i n
t hi s
paper,
however, deni es t he
possi bl e
rel evanceof ' non-verbal behavi or'
t o conversa-
t i onal
cl osi ng, e. g. ,
t he
possi bi l i t y
of
doi ng
t heworkof
possi bl epre-cl osi ngs
i nf ace-t o-
f ace
i nt eract i on
by post ure
shi f t s, ext ended
eye
scans, i ncreasi ng i nt er-part i ci pant
space,
edgi ng
t oward an exi t , et c.
However, wehave not st udi ed
t hese
phenomena
yet ,
andwe
do not havet he
empi ri cal
mat eri al s t hat woul d
al l owassert i ons t hat , and
how,
t hey
work. I nf ormal observat i on does
not
suggest
t hat
t hey
are
i ncompat i bl e
wi t h our
anal ysi s.
St i l l , i t shoul d be
poi nt ed
out t hat
' purel y
verbal means' DOwork
f or at l east onecl ass of conversat i ons,
i . e. ,
t hose
on t he
t el ephone.
Furt hermore,
t hey
work
f ul l y
or
part i al l y
i n ot hers,
t hough
not necessari l y
i n al l ot hers. That
i s: t here
may
besomeconversat i ons
whose
cl osi ng
i s
accompl i shed
sol el y by
' non-verbal means'
( as
whenoneof t he
part i es
has becomei nvol vedi nasi de
conversat i on, andhi s erst whi l e
copart i ci pant
seeks t o
depart
wi t hout
i nt errupt i ng) .
But i na
range
of ot hers,
conversa-
t i onal resources such as
we
have
sought
t o descri be
suppl y
some
part s
of t he
cl osi ng;
and i n st i l l ot hers, whi l e t here are ' non-verbal
accompani ment s'
and
consequences,
t he ef f ect i ve and
st rat egi c poi nt s
i n
accompl i shi ng
t he
cl osi ng
are
managedby
t he use
of
pract i ces
l i ke t hose wi t h whi ch wedeal .
Cl earl y,
our
anal ysi s
does not deal
wi t h al l
possi bl e
cases; but i t s rel evance shoul d not be
over-rest ri ct ed.
I t wi l l benot ed
i n
t heabovet hat we
haveset of f t hedi st i nct i on bet ween
' verbal ' and
' non-verbal ' i n
quot es.
Thi si s not t he
pl ace
t o revi ewt he
hi st ory
and
appl i cat i on
of
t hat
di st i nct i on, or i t s usef ul ness. Weuset het erms here
becauseof t hei r use
by
t he reader
t o whosecomment s weare
react i ng,
andbecause of t hei r st at us
as common
parl ance
i nt hi s area; wedo not , however,
t hereby
endorse
t he di st i nct i on.
324

modat e
have been
compl et ed) .
The sect i onal
organi zat i on
of
cl osi ngs
t hus
provi des
a resource f or
managi ng
t he art i cul at i on
bet ween
t he
conversat i onandt hei nt eract i on
occasi on
i nwhi ch
i t
occurs.
Thesource of
many
of
t hesevi rt ues resi des i nt he
pot ent i al
f or
reopen-
i ngt opi c
t al k at
any
poi nt
i n
t he course of a
cl osi ng
sect i on. Thi s i nvi t es
our
underst andi ng
t hat
t o
capt ure
t he
phenomenon
of
cl osi ngs,
one
cannot t reat i t as
t he nat ural
hi st ory
of some
part i cul ar
conversat i on;
one
cannot
t reat i t
as arout i ne t o berun
t hrough,
i nevi t abl ei ni t s course
oncei ni t i at ed. Rat her, i t must bevi ewed, as must conversat i onas awhol e,
as
a
set of
prospect i ve
possi bi l i t i es
openi ng up
at
vari ous
poi nt s
i n
t he
conversat i on' s course;
t here are
possi bi l i t i es t hroughout
a
cl osi ng,
i ncl udi ng
t he
moment s af t er a' f i nal '
good-bye,
f or
reopeni ng
t heconver-
sat i on. 2'
Get t i ng
t o a t ermi nat i on, t heref ore, i nvol ves work at vari ous
poi nt s
i n t he course of t he conversat i on and of t he
cl osi ng
sect i on; i t
requi res
accompl i shi ng.
For t he
anal yst ,
i t
requi res
a
descri pt i on
of
t he
prospect s
and
possi bi l i t i es
avai l abl e at t hevari ous
poi nt s,
how
t hey
work,
what t he resources are,
et c. ,
f romwhi ch t he
part i ci pant s produce
what
t urns out
t o
be t he
f i nal l y accompl i shed cl osi ng.
VI I I
Af ew
concl udi ng
remarks wi l l be i n
poi nt
t o
t ry
t o
speci f y
t he domai n
f or whi ch our
anal ysi s
i s rel evant . What weare
real l y deal i ng
wi t h i s t he
probl em
of
cl osi ng
aconversat i ont hat ends a st at e of t al k. I t does not
hol d f or members of a
househol d i n t hei r
l i vi ng
room,
empl oyees
who
21
To ci t e but one
exampl e
of t hi s
possi bi l i t y:
B: So uh,
gi mme
a
ri ng
somet i me
A:
yeah.
Al ri ght .
B: What chuc' n do
A:
Yeah
B: Tch!
' Kay?
A:
O. K.
B:
A' ri ght . Byebye
( 1. 0)
A: Mnnuh
Hel l o?
P: Yeah?
( 1. 0)
A: Uhm: : :
( 1. 8)
A:
Tch! hhehh hi t h I
di dn' t have
anyt hi ng
i n
put i cul ar
t uh
say,
1-
I j us'
f er aseki n'
di dn' t f eel l i ke
hangi ngup.
et c.

325
share
anof f i ce,
passengers
t oget her
i nanaut omobi l e,
et c. ,
t hat
i s,
persons
who coul d be sai d t o bei n
a
' cont i nui ng
st at e of
i nci pi ent
t al k' . I n such
ci rcumst ances, t here can be
l apses
of t he
operat i on
of what
we earl i er
cal l edt hebasi c f eat ures; f or
exampl e,
t herecanbesi l ence af t er
a
speaker' s
ut t erance whi ch i s nei t her an at t ri but abl e si l ence
nor a t ermi nat i on,
whi ch i s seen as nei t her t he
suspensi on
nor t he vi ol at i on
of t he basi c
f eat ures. These are
adj ournment s,
and seemt o
be done i n a manner
di f f erent f rom
cl osi ngs.
Persons i n such a
cont i nui ng
st at e
of
i nci pi ent
t al k need not
begi n
new
segment s
of
conversat i on wi t h
exchanges
of
greet i ngs,
andneednot cl ose
segment s
wi t h
cl osi ng
sect i ons andt ermi nal
exchanges.
Much
el se woul d
appear
t o bedi f f erent i nt hei r conversat i onal
ci rcumst ances as
compared
t o t hose
i n whi ch aconversat i on i s
speci f i -
cal l y
' st art ed
up' ,
whi ch wecannot det ai l here.
Theseconsi derat i ons
suggest
t hat howaconversat i oni s carri ed
oni n
i t s
course i s sensi t i ve t o t he
pl acement
of t he conversat i oni n
an
i nt eract i on
epi sode
or occasi on,
andt hat how
an
upcomi ng
l apse
i nt he
operat i on
of
t he basi c f eat ures i s
at t endedt o and
deal t wi t h
by
part i ci pant s
i s sensi t i ve
t o, and/ or
can
accompl i sh,
t he
pl acement
of t he conversat i on
i ni t s occa-
si on. As i t has
been
proposed
t hat t he
probl em
of
cl osi ng
a
conversat i on
beshi f t ed t o
endi ng
i t s
cl osi ng
sect i on, so
endi ng
anoccasi on
( or
i nt erac-
t i on) can be seen t o be l ocat ed i n some conversat i onal
epi sode.
That
part i ci pant s
at t end as a
t ask or as
a
pi ece
of busi ness t o
bri ngi ng
t he
conversat i ont o acl ose
may
havel ess t o do wi t h t hecharact er,
organi za-
t i on, st ruct ure,
et c. ,
of
conversat i on
per
se, t han wi t h t hat of occasi ons
or i nt eract i ons; or, rat her, i t has t o do wi t h t he
organi zat i on
of conversa-
t i onas aconst i t uent
part
of anoccasi onor i nt eract i on.
Thi s ki nd of
consi derat i on can be overl ooked
i f much of t he dat a
one i s
l ooki ng
at i s, as
i n t he case
of t hi s
paper,
made
up
of
t el ephone
conversat i ons,
because t here
especi al l y
t he occasi on i s more
or
l ess
cot ermi nous wi t ht heconversat i on; t he occasi oni s const ruct ed t o cont ai n
t he
conversat i on and i s
shaped by
i t s
cont i ngenci es.
Si nce,
t ypi cal l y,
t he
occasi on ends when t he conversat i on does, i t
appears
t hat i t i s t he
conversat i on' s
cl osi ng
t hat one i s
deal i ng
wi t h. But even i n
t el ephone
conversat i ons, i nt hosecases i nwhi ch. t he occasi onhas anext ensi onbe-
yond
a
si ngl e
conversat i on, one
may
f i nd t hat
onl y
t hat conversat i on
whi ch
ends t he occasi on i s
brought
t o acl ose wi t h t he f orms wehave
descri bed
( we
have i n
mi nd si t uat i ons
i n
whi ch a
cal l er t al ks
seri at i m
t o
several members of a
f ami l y,
f or
exampl e) . 22
A
si mpl e
di st i nct i on bet ween f ace-t o-f ace and
t el ephone
i nt eract i on wi l l not do.
Wedo not
yet
have
any adequat e
t echni cal account of t hese not i ons, whi ch woul d
326

EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFFAND
HARVEYSACKS
I f t hese
observat i ons are correct and i n
poi nt ,
t hen
t he observat i ons
weof f ered
earl i er about t heart i cul at i on
bet weenconversat i onand
ensui ng
act i ons,
i . e. ,
t he
preparat i on
of
act i ons
geared
t o t ermi nat i on, are not
passi ng
observat i ons. That t here are
geared
act i ons
requi red,
and t he
possi bl e
needf or
prepari ng
t hem, has t o do wi t h t heOCCASI ON' S
endi ng,
and i t i s as a
part
of
conversat i on t hat t he occasi on
may
be ended. I t
i s
by way
of t he
use of
cl osi ng
t he
conversat i on f or
endi ng
t he occasi on
t hat t heuseof asect i on t o
endt heconversat i on
may
be
appreci at ed,
i na
way
si mi l ar t o our
appreci at i on
of t he use of asnack t o endan
eveni ng
or a
get -t oget her.
REFERENCES
Al bert , E.
1965
"' Rhet ori c' ,
' Logi c' ,
and
' Poet i cs'
i n
Burundi : Cul t ure
Pat t erni ng
of
Speech
Behavi or",
Ameri can
Ant hropol ogi st
66: 6, Pt . 2,
40-41.
Garf i nkel ,
H. ,
ari d H.
Sacks
1970
"OnFormal St ruct ures of
Pract i cal Act i ons", i n: J . C.
McKi nney
and E. A.
Ti ryaki an ( eds. ) ,
Theoret i cal
Soci ol ogy ( New
York:
Appl et on-Cent ury-
Crof t s) .
Gof f man, E.
1961
Encount ers
( I ndi anapol i s: Bobbs-Merri l l ) .
1963
Behavi or i nPubl i c Pl aces
( New
York: Free Press) .
1967
I nt eract i on Ri t ual
( GardenCi t y,
N. Y. : Anchor Books) .
1971 Rel at i ons i n Publ i c
( New
York: Basi c Books) .
J ef f erson, G.
1972 "Si de
Sequences",
i n: D. N. Sudnow
( ed. ) ,
St udi es i n Soci al
I nt eract i on
( New
York: Free
Press) .
Moerman, M.
1967
"Bei ng
Lue: Uses and
Abuses of Et hni c I dent i f i cat i on", Ameri can
Et hnol ogi -
cal
Soci et y,
Proceedi ngs
of 1967
Spri ng Meet i ngs.
1970
"Anal ysi s
of
Lue Conversat i on", I and I I
( mi meo) .
Sacks, H.
1972a
"AnI ni t i al
I nvest i gat i on
of t he
Usabi l i t y
of Conversat i onal Mat eri al s f or
Doi ng Soci ol ogy",
i n: D. N.
Sudnow
( ed. ) ,
St udi es i n Soci al I nt eract i on
( New
York: FreePress) .
1972b "Two
Lect ures
i n
t he
Anal ysabi l i t y
of
Chi l dren' s St ori es", i n: J . J .
Gumperz
and D. H.
Hymes ( eds. ) ,
Di rect i ons i n
Soci ol i ngui st i cs ( New
York: Hol t ,
Ri nehart andWi nst on) .
speci f y
t he
anal yt i c di mensi ons of
si gni f i cant di st i nct i on.
A
vari et y
of i nt ui t i ve,
pl ausi bl e
di st i nct i ons donot
hol d
up.
I t shoul dnot be
t aken, f romt he t ext , t hat whereas f ace-t o-
f ace
conversat i on can
be ei t her
cont i nousl y
sust ai ned or have t he charact er of a
cont i nui ng
st at e of
i nci pi ent
t al k,
t el ephone
conversat i on
i nvari abl y
has t he f ormer
charact er. That
does not
appear
t o
be t he case. And eveni f i t were, i t woul d
bet he
di st i nct i on bet ween
t hese t wo modes, rat her
t han t hat bet ween f ace-t o-f ace and
t el ephoni c,
whi ch woul d be
rel evant .
OPENI NG
UP CLOSI NGS

327
Fort hcomi ng Aspect s of
t he
Sequent i al Organi zat i on
of
Conversat i on
( Engl ewood
Cl i f f s,
N. J . :
Prent i ce-Hal l ) .
Schegl of f ,
E. A.
1967 "The
Fi rst Fi veSeconds: TheOrder of Conversat i onal
Openi ngs" ( Berkel ey:
Uni versi t y
of Cal i f orni aPh. D. di ssert at i on,
Soci ol ogy) .
1968
"Sequenci ng
i n Conversat i onal
Openi ngs",
Ameri can
Ant hropol ogi st
LXX: 6.
1972 "Not es ona
Conversat i onal
Pract i ce:
Formul at i ng
Pl ace", i n: D. N. Sudnow
( ed. ) ,
St udi es i nSoci al I nt eract i on
( New
York:
FreePress) .
Fort hcomi ng
The Soci al
Organi zat i on
of
Conversat i onal
Openi ngs ( Phi l adel phi a:
Uni versi t y
of
Pennsyl vani a
Press) .
Schenl cei n, J .
1972 "Towards an
Anal ysi s
of Nat ural Conversat i on and
t he Sense of Heheh",
Semi ot i ca VI
-4, 344-377.
Sudnow, D. N.
( ed. )
1972 St udi es i n Soci al I nt eract i on
( New
York: Free Press) .
Symbol s
Usedi n
Transcri pt i ons
I
-
i ndi cat es
upward
i nt onat i on
/ 1
-
i ndi cat es
poi nt
at whi ch
f ol l owi ng
l i ne
i nt errupt s
( n. O)
-
i ndi cat es
pause
of n. Oseconds
( )
-
i ndi cat es
somet hi ng
sai d but not t ranscri babl e
( word)
-
i ndi cat es
probabl e,
but not cert ai n,
t ranscri pt i on
but
-
i ndi cat es accent
emPLoYee
-
i ndi cat es
heavy
accent
DO
-
i ndi cat es
veryheavy
accent
-.
i ndi cat es
st ret chi ng
of sound
i mmedi at el y precedi ng,
i n
proport i on
t o number of col ons i nsert ed
becau-
-
i ndi cat es brokenword
Harvey
Sacks
( b. 1935)
i s
anAssoci at e
Prof essor i n
Ant hropol ogy
and
Soci ol ogy
at t he
School of Soci al Sci ence,
Uni versi t y
of Cal i f orni a at I rvi ne. Hi s
pri nci pal
research
i nt erest i s t he
anal ysi s
of t he
of conversat i on.
Among
hi s
maj or publ i cat i ons
are"Das Erzhl envonGeschi cht eni nnerhai bvon
Unt erhal t ungen"
( 1971) ,
and"AnI ni t i al
I nvest i gat i on
of t he
Usabi l i t y
of Conversat i onal Mat eri al s f or
Doi ngSoci ol ogy" ( 1972) .
Emanuel
Schegl of f ( b. 1937)
i s an Assi st ant Prof essor of
Soci ol ogy
at t he
Uni versi t y
of Cal i f orni a, Los
Angel es.
Hi s
pri nci pal
research i nt erest i s t he
anal ysi s
of i nt eract i on
and
conversat i on.
Among
hi s
maj or publ i cat i ons
are
"Sequenci ng
i n Conversat i onal
Openi ngs"
( 1968) , and"Not es onaConversat i onal Pract i ce:
Formul at i ng
Pl ace"
( 1972) .
' he
a
part / Repri nt

Schegloff and Sacks - Opening Up Closings - 1973

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Schegloff and Sacks - Opening Up Closings - 1973

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EMANUELA.

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

308 EMANUELA. SCHEGLOFFANDHARVEYSACKS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

B: Wel l t hat ' s

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

OPENI NGUP CLOSI NGS

You might also like