A CONVERSATION ANALYSIS OF OTHER-COMPLETED REPAIR IN SYNCHRONOUS COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

by

Phalangchok Wanphet

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in English

at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2011

UMI Number 3462804

All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion

UMI
UMI 3462804 Copyright 2011 by ProQuest LLC All rights reserved This edition of the work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway PO Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346

A CONVERSATION ANALYSIS OF OTHER-COMPLETED REPAIR IN SYNCHRONOUS COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

by Phalangchok Wanphet

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in English

at The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee May 2011

Graduate School Approval

6IU III

ABSTRACT

A CONVERSATION ANALYSIS OF OTHER-COMPLETED REPAIR IN SYNCHRONOUS COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION

by

Phalangchok Wanphet

The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 2011 Under the Supervision of Patricia Mayes, Ph D

This dissertation, based on a Conversation Analytic (CA) perspective, investigates (1) how participants who do not understand what someone just said in online chats initiate and complete repair and (11) the characteristics and functions of othercompletion in synchronous online communication This study is based on the following premise First, troubles in understanding a message someone just produced in social interaction are ubiquitous Secondly, when participants take the next turn to produce their message, they reveal their analysis and understandings of the ongoing interaction Third, social interaction is designed for effortless understanding and for managing such problems Fourth, other-completion is a socially disaffihative action
in

other-initiation and distanced other-completion. and simultaneous other-completion The findings can be twofold First.After the close analysis of mundane synchronous electronic interaction. their social cues and the aspects of face are filtered out. immediate other-completion. other-repair performed in one e-turn. namely. other-completion occurs more frequently and pervasively in web chats than in face-to-face encounters Second. allowing an opportunity for self-completion Related to the interactional view. the ways other-completion is performed in synchronous CMC reflect both transactional and interactional views of language use The transactional view of other-completion in synchronous CMC echoes the fact that mutual understandings are ultimate goal in social interaction The interactional view suggests that not threatening participants' face is a major goal in maintaining social bonds during such electronic social interaction This is witnessed when other-completion is distanced from repair-initiation. which is rare in face-to-face talk <£^_ fjai^ter Major Professor iv ^//(/// Date . a socially disaffihative actions. resulting in frequent occurrence of other-completion. based on the locations of repair-initiation and -completion. I divided other-completion in synchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC). into six variations. other-repair performed over two consecutive e-turns. this study connects the face as a socio-psychological concept to the physical presence of participants When they interact online. self-mitiation and distanced other-completion.

2011 All Rights Reserved .© Copyright by Phalangchok Wanphet.

In Memory of Pra Kru Nibhasa Panyakhuna and My Grandparents .

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 Introduction Background information Where talk takes place How people communicate electronically How participants engage in synchronous CMC What synchronous CMC messages look like Preference for self-completed repair and face considerations Scope of the study Purpose of the study Significance of the study Summary 1 2 3 5 6 7 11 12 15 17 17 CHAPTER 2 Literature Review Repair A conversation analytic perspective Defining repair Intersubjectivity A display of mutual understanding in talk Participants' roles in repair Some sources of misunderstanding Organization of conversational interaction Turn-taking organization Turns and turn-constructional units vn 19 21 21 24 27 29 35 35 36 .

is synchromcity a criterion7 The medium of online chat is it speech or text7 Unclassified features of online chats Language in synchronous CMC Structural and interactional features of synchronous CMC Turn-taking system and sequences Social interactional activities Flaming Emoticons Summary 39 40 42 43 45 48 48 49 51 53 63 65 67 67 70 72 77 80 CHAPTER 3 Data and Methodology Data. participants. and language of the synchronous CMC Data Participants vm 82 83 83 85 .Transition relevance place Turn allocation component Sequence organization Adjacency pairs Insertion sequences Electronic environment as communicative context Internet Technologies for communication Computer-mediated communication Technically.

Language of the web chats Electronic recordings and data collection Unit of Analysis Data Analysis Summary 86 86 88 90 95 CHAPTER 4 Variations of Other-Completed Repair in Synchronous CMC Self-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair Other-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair Other-repair completed in one e-turn Other-completed repair performed over two consecutive e-turns Immediate other-completed repair Summary 97 97 103 108 113 119 128 CHAPTER 5 Sequence Organization of Other-Completed Repair in Synchronous CMC Question 1 How other initiates and completes repair Types and positions of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC Simultaneously-completed repair Sequence organization of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC Question 2 Functions of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair 129 129 130 131 133 138 Preference organization of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC 139 Face and face-threatening acts IX 142 .

Sequence organization of distanced other-completed repair 144 Sequence organization of other-completed repair in one and two e-turns 146 Sequence organization of immediate other-completed repair Turn-initial position Elsewhere other than turn-initial position in the same e-turn Accompanying conversational work Summary 150 151 152 157 160 CHAPTER 6 Discussion and Conclusion Other-completed repair as a social action in synchronous CMC Other-completed repair Evidence of social disaffiliation Unmitigated or 'still-dispreferred' other-completed repair Other-completed repair Evidence of maintenance of social bonds Opportunity given for self-completed repair Other-initiated repair as a display of understanding of the TS Smiley as a reminder of face Other-completed repair Transactional and interactional functions Conclusion and future research 162 164 165 166 171 172 176 179 182 184 References Curriculum Vitae 189 205 x .

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2 1 Possible sequencing in computer conversation Figure 3 1 The data collection process Figure 3 2 Sample of repair sequence in synchronous CMC Figure 5 1 Possible sequence of other-initiation Figure 5 2 Possible sequence of other-repair on the same e-turn Figure 5 3 Possible sequence oftheTS and other-initiation Figure 5 4 Possible sequence of repair-completion Figure 5 5 Possible sequence of self-initiated other-completion Figure 5 6 Possible sequence of repair-initiation and other-completion Figure 5 7 Possible sequence of other-completion and interpolated e-turns Figure 5 8 Possible sequence oftheTS and other-completion 68 88 90 134 134 134 135 135 135 135 136 xi .

LIST OF TABLES Table 2 1 Features of spoken language and written language Table 2 2 Features of language in synchronous CMC Morphology and syntax 55 66 .

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS CA CMC DCL EMP FTA's OC 01 SC SI TS Conversation Analysis Computer-Mediated Communication Declarative Emphasis Face-Threatening Acts Other-Completed Repair (or Other-Completion) Other-Initiated Repair (or Other-Initiation) Self-Completed Repair (or Self-Completion) Self-Initiated Repair (or Self-Initiation) Trouble Source Xlll .

Raquel Oxford. and the time they spent with me during the preparation of the Academic Review Both Kathie and Edith read this dissertation in a timely manner The next people who deserve my great gratitude are my parents (Mr Riang Wanphet and Mrs Bumrung Wanphet). patience.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would never have brought this dissertation to completion without constant help. and she advised me via email. and then patiently and intently directed this dissertation Most of my ideas about CA and research in talk-in-mteraction have developed over the years of conversations with her After I moved away from Milwaukee. for work in New York City. she continued her thoroughness by sending me long and detailed emails with her comments on my written work I can say that I have had the pleasure and honor of being her student and working on this dissertation with her I am thankful for insightful and invaluable comments and advice on this work from my four readers Drs Kathleen Wheatley. David Clark. support. and encouragement from many people to whom I wish to express my appreciation The very first person I would like to thank is my dissertation advisor. WI. and Edith Moravcsik I was very fortunate to have such a dedicated and supportive committee Special thanks go to Kathie and Raquel for their willingness to serve on my Academic Review committee in 2007 I am greatly indebted to them for their encouragement. who introduced Conversation Analysis (CA) to me at the beginning of my graduate studies She first steered me in the direction of this field that I have never regretted. who have always pointed out to me how xiv . Dr Patricia Mayes.

and support during the last stage of my dissertation The last people I want to thank are my nephew and niece. humor. done I owe an enormous thanks to my brother (Mr Jatuchok Wanphet) for taking excellent care of our parents while I was gone This work is dedicated to three of them My thanks also go to my friends and colleagues in Chicago. New York. whom I never met but indirectly inspired me to complete the dissertation as soon as possible so that I could make a trip home to visit them They have no idea how many times I looked at their pictures during the completion of this dissertation for inspiration and motivation xv .important education is and have encouraged me and believed in me throughout my life I could call them no matter when during the completion of my graduate degrees Talking to them and hearing their voices encouraged me to get school work. friendship. and Bangkok for their kindness. including this dissertation.

especially when talk is used to fix prior talk One how-question. then.and whyquestions to explain such phenomena So does this study As will be shown later. is a technical term used in conversation analysis (hereafter CA) to refer to the practice of dealing with troubles in understanding. in general. speaking. is how people use talk to repair prior talk. 1 e. this study will focus merely on a how-question. the human verbal behavior. regardless of who initiates a repair The practice of othercompleted repair is a socially disaffihative action because. m many cases. to answer how. or hearing in prior talk This does not include all types of trouble or misunderstanding. mainly. needs to be defined here as it is the focus of the analysis Other-completed repair is a repair that is completed by a participant who does not own the trouble (henceforth other). repair.1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Qualitative research in the social sciences. but those found in what someone involved in the same talk has just said Another term. but in synchronous electronic encounters Before I proceed. it is important here to briefly define a few important terms though they are explored in greater length in Chapter 2 The first term. . investigates human behavior-related phenomena and is intended. not in face-to-face. how participants detect and repair a trouble in ongoing talk This dissertation aims to study talk. it functions as the preliminary to or harbinger of disagreement (Schegloff 2007. other-completed repair (also known as other-completion).

once performed. the scope in which the research questions are outlined. face. it may seem to se//that other does not take into account selfs face want To minimize the degree of facethreatening acts (hereafter FTA's) or to maintain social bonds between participants. the most basic of social interaction.2 Schegloff et al. and introduces how it has changed in the digital age Background Information This section aims to introduce the basic background which inspired and influences the focus of this study Its aim is also to provide technical and sociohnguistic background on how to become an online user and especially an . unintelligible. problematic. other-completed repair should be specially performed and positioned How turns are designed to minimize the degree of face-threatening acts can be explicated by preference organization (this is discussed later in this chapter and Chapter 5) This first chapter provides general information and some technical and sociohnguistic background on which the literature review. and the purpose and significance of the dissertation The first section discusses the nature of talk. is defined by Goffman (1967) as "the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself (p 5) By nature. or incorrect Then. other may replace what se//just said with what other believes is correct without giving self a chance to correct it The last term. is built Included in this chapter are background information. Chapter 2. other-completed repair typically threatens the face of se//because. unclear. 1977) This can be observed when other believes what the owner of the trouble (henceforth self) said is doubtful.

3

online chatter, though these skills and abilities are relatively easy to acquire nowadays The first subsection below discusses the widespread use of the internet and factors that make it a distinctive communicative setting for human social interaction This is followed by a sketch of web chat procedures and web chat programs The last subsection presents the appearance of online chat dialog

Where Talk Takes Place Talk-in-interaction, a generalized form of conversation, is characterized as the unmediated, natural, and common form of human communication (Goffman, 1976) Although talk is conveyed by phonic means, it is usually accompanied by extrahnguistic cues Another characteristic is that people talk in the physical presence of one another, that is, there is a speaker and a recipient, whose roles are subject to change Although the telephone helps people overcome this necessity for physical presence, two parties have to be available at the same time to converse Whether talk takes place face-to-face or on the phone, moment-by-moment participants design a particular contribution to talk-in-progress Sacks, Schegloff, and Jefferson's (1974) analysis of the turn-taking system can usefully characterize ongoing talk in these two settings Nowadays, conversation is no longer limited to face-to-face exchanges or on the phone It has been mediated by and operated on the internet to overcome time and space constraints and to involve more people Undoubtedly, the internet has become the largest and most expansive system for communication that permits people in distant parts of the world to communicate with one another (Kiesler,

4

Siegel, & McGuire, 1984, Yates, 1996) in real time or postponed time According to statistical data presented on the Internet Society website (2010), the usage growth of internet users from 2000-2010 was 444 8% in June 2010 From the same source, two billion people had access to the internet in 2010 This number has tended to sharply increase There are many reasons that explain why more people use the internet First, the costs of personal computers and internet services are inexpensive (Herring, 2004b) Second, computers and internet programs are more user-friendly and easier to operate and maintain than they were Third, computer and internet programs are equipped with more options and functions, e g, larger memory units, a web camera, a microphone, a speaker, etc, allowing users to express themselves, fully communicate, and socialize Fourth, many stores (e g, coffee shops, restaurants), organizations (e g, government buildings), institutes (e g, universities, public libraries) and other places (e g, hotels, train stations, airports) provide free internet services to the public In addition, advanced technology allows many electronic devices to collaboratively work with computers (Kalman & Rafaeli, 2007) Cellphones and Smartphones, for example, are electronically connected with an internet service, permitting their users to send and receive messages anywhere anytime This is made possible by electronic devices which are now portable and wireless The next subsection explains how people can communicate electronically on the internet, both the process and product of online communication

5

How People Communicate Electronically Online communication is defined as all kinds of human communication that is mediated by the internet Such human communication can be either synchronous (e g online chats), asynchronous (e g email or discussion boards), or a combination of both Synchronous communication may involve visual presentation as in Skype, whereby participants can talk to and see each other in real time However, in this study, only synchronous text-based communication is used as the data Characterized by visual anonymity, physical isolation, and selective selfpresentation (Chester & Gwynne, 1998), online communication has directly and indirectly come to play an important role in our lives One impact it has on our lives is in the ways we communicate with one another Hutchby (2001) argues that the nature of human communication and how "intersubjectivity" (Schegloff, 1992, p 1295) is established and maintained have been affected by technologies for communication (see Chapter 2 for a discussion of intersubjectivity) For this reason, it is worth investigating how mutual understandings are generated, maintained, hindered, and regenerated by such technologies Although there are several communicative media supported by technologies for communication, this study is focused exclusively on one type of synchronous computer-mediated communication (hereafter CMC), l e, text-based online chats Online chats require certain tools and specific action from participants, so that they can be engaged in this type of communication The subsections below provide technical background about synchronous CMC the process of synchronous CMC (l e, how participants get involved in online chats, how they typing, edit, complete,

6 and send a text, and who can observe the process of message production) as well as the product of synchronous CMC (1 e, what a text as a final product in online chats looks like)

How participants engage in synchronous CMC Synchronous CMC allows exchanges of written messages between an unlimited number of participants in real time (Kiesler et al, 1984) Those who have a computer with an internet connection can participate in a chat program To be able to enter into a chat room, a participant has to download a chat program Most of the time, chat programs are free of charge (e g, yahoo com, msn com, skype net, etc) Completely-downloaded chat programs automatically preinstall a chat messenger which functions as a management tool that allows its participants to, for instance, present their availability, check the availability of others, send video links, add a contact, edit the user's profile, and send an instant message To log in to a chat messenger, participants have to have an account which typically requires a user name, password, and, optionally, a profile, which are all created when they sign up for the account for the first time To chat with others in a web chat, participants can either do so with those who are already in their contacts, or search for new contacts Once both participants are co-present and available to chat, they can begin their chat A system connecting participants in a chat program is called a chat server Messages can be sent to a chat server at any time by participants On computer screens, in general, there is a space called a dialogue box, private box, or compose box in which participants type messages Next to a dialog

or deleted by any participants including their owners The next subsection explores messages produced by participants in a chat room that are shown in a public dialog What synchronous CMC messages look like Recall that the message is sent off to a chat server once the participant presses the ENTER key A chat server works as a center distributing messages to all participants involved in the same channel A chat server does not change the format of texts originally composed by participants. corrected. the message is sent off to a chat server After that. they cannot be edited. participants can edit or delete it in their private box Again. before pressing the SEND button). there is the SEND button participants can click on when they finish typing messages and want their messages to be read by others Before sending a message to a chat server (1 e.7 box. but adds user names of message senders at the beginning of the message Extract 1 shows a public dialog Extract 1 Turns and dialog in synchronous CMC (Chat 2313-2009-4/70) Dave let me google it Dave haha Maia o k . this process is not seen by other participants Once the participant presses the ENTER key. it is sent off again to all involved participants It is at this time that all participants involved in that channel can see what others typed After messages have been sent off to a chat server.

to one or more words. 2003) In other words. therefore. phrases. o. participants can press the SEND button whenever they want. clauses. one turn unit may not represent one idea very well As a result. what is in one turn in an online chat is not the same as what is in one turn in ordinary spoken language as characterized by CA researchers (Sacks. Schegloff. one turn of an online chat can range from one symbol (e g. & Jefferson.'}. but also how participants take a turn While All extracts illustrated in this dissertation present what the participants actually typed in their online chats Foreign characters will be shown in this study without being changed. messages may not always be complete sentences or clauses (Schofeldt & Golato. O. 1974) Murray (1988b) therefore introduces the term "e-message" (p 353) to mean a message produced during electronic communication In everyday talk. or many complete sentences Sometimes. a speaker takes his turn or competes for the floor in order to produce a message This is different from how participants in online chats take turns An electronic turn therefore is not the same as a spoken turn unit in terms of the turn-taking system. but with or without the translation 2 1 have not corrected or made changes to any of their grammatical errors or typos 1 .'). one turn roughly begins when a speaker begins to talk and ends when he sends the message That is. a message follows a user name of a person who composes it and whatever fonts participants used will not be changed by the chat server In a private box. not only because of the syntactic structure or the presentation of ideas.8 Dave the Chinese name of the movie is A^ZM1 Maia I don't have Chinese front2 Maia I can't read it In Extract 1.

is pressing the ENTER key Extract 2 shows different lengths of e-turn Extract 2: Turns and dialog in synchronous CMC (MK-Chat: 2009-28/45) Alice I feel sorry to see you alone in office hours @ Alice no one coming Paula ©So I can do other stuffs Alice Did you know what Jane's teacher just told us that there (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) is no such thing as stuffs Alice stuff is already noun plural Paula I don't think there will be costomers since there is no assignment/HW. l'll talk to you later. I learn a lot from my kids ® Alice okay. then.9 e-message generally refers to the features of messages produced online. Alice Jane made mistake in her writing and the teacher showed is to us Paula OK I can't do other stuff(good to know ©) Alice yes. I'll finish my dinner I can't eat after midnight for the glucosa test so I have to fill up my tummy by now O (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) . it does not discuss how participants take turns and the order of turns Therefore. throughout this study. e-turn is used to refer to each time a participant starts typing a message until he presses the ENTER key The common denominator used to define e-turn.

or e-turn 7 by Alice) In the broader picture of a chat room. 1974). 2. software and hardware) and skills (e g. each participant can talk about different topics with different participants All of these factors make online chats far different from typical ordinary conversations where pervasively only one participant talks at a time (Sacks et al. and 10) It is possible to have two consecutive e-turns by the same participant (e-turns 1 and 2 by Alice. and basic . there are a few points to be made here First. typing skills. 6. 5. messages appearing on computer screens may not relate to the preceding or following messages These unrelated messages following one another make the content and patterns of the conversation rather incoherent and disorderly Because of the number of participants in a chat room who send messages at the same time. eturns 4 and 5 by Alice.10 In Extract 2. 3. some e-turns are less than one line long (see e-turns 1. leading to various subtopics and conversations Moreover. there is an increasing number of people who communicate on the internet Secondly. 1977) Therefore.8. because of transmission rate and internet services. e-turn 6 by Paula. and where turns themselves are chronologically ordered (Schegloff et al. while some can be longer than one line long (e-turns 4. where there are fewer subtopics which are coherently ordered. Murray (1991) coins the term "computer conversation" (p 35) to refer to a dialogue in online chat Before I proceed to the next section. or e-turns 9 and 10 by Alice) as well as a two-line long e-turn (e-turn 4 by Alice. the internet as a new platform for social interaction requires devices (l e. and 9). the flow of computer conversation goes very fast and the results are multidimensional. literacy skills.

there is a structural preference for self-completed repair (1 e. opportunities for self-initiated repair (1 e. but also reveals how the design of dispreferred actions is interrelated to participants' social . but also socially biased This does not mean that no participants are allowed to repair what others have just said during talk-in-interaction. special marks or/and special positions) draws the distinction between actions that are preferred from those that are dispreferred Such distinction can be explained by preference organization (Pomerantz. 1996b) First. 1984). but that othercompleted repair is customarily performed with extra work This extra work (e g. what they communicate on the internet is mostly text-based with available communicative functions provided by the chat programs The next section introduces face considerations and relates it to othercompleted repair and to preference organization Preference for Self-Completed Repair and Face Considerations In CA literature.11 computer skills) from participants Thirdly. a repair that is completed by a participant who owns the trouble) over othercompleted repair because of the following reasons (Lerner. both selfmitiated repair and other-initiated repair result interactionally in self-completed repair Other-completed repair is not only structurally biased as presented above. a repair that is initiated by a participant who owns the trouble) precede opportunities for other-initiated repair (1 e. which not only explains how dispreferred actions are specially marked and positioned in conversations. a repair that is initiated by a participant who does not own the trouble) Second.

can be investigated through the preference organization or "the set of practices through which persons manage courses of action that either promote or undermine social solidarity" (Heritage & Raymond. 2005. a dispreferred action. userfnendhness. . technology is designed to overcome geographical distance This advantage implies that technology can connect people from different parts of the world due to the aforementioned five factors (l e. participants' face consideration affects how they design their turn in talk-inmteraction To conclude. which is intimately connected to face This study looked at how participants in online chats positioned and marked othercompleted repair and how this is related to face-considerations Although the technical terms were introduced above. cost. p 16). 1992) when participating in talk Such social and psychological states come to be known as face-considerations which. where human beings communicate is usually referred to as a global village (McLuhan.and psychological states (Holtgraves. while the next one presents the scope of the study Scope of the Study As mentioned above. they will be again discussed in Chapter 2 This section has provided a general background for this study. and compatible electronic devices) The internet indeed is a space where people from different backgrounds not only learn but also socialize The electronically-mediated space known as the internet. Holtgraves contends. built-in devices. is "the major goal underlying preference organization" (p 148) That is. the design of other-completed repair. accessibility.

volume. how people talk. virtual community (Rheingold. chat participants may need to repair their utterances less because they can review previously typed text to retrieve the information and to deal with the causes of misunderstandings Still. pitch. and the language they use in order to . rhythm. 1993). or intonation) are missing. CA researchers have focused on everyday communication. facial expressions and gestures) and paralanguage (e g. as is the opportunity to study miscommumcation It is likely that the causes of repair in synchronous CMC differ from those of repair in everyday interaction On the one hand.13 1962). when chats involve non-native speakers. e-turns in synchronous CMC may not be sequentially ordered. chat participants may need to repair their utterances more for the following reasons non-verbal communication (e g. that consists of requests for explanation of language and content This dissertation investigates miscommumcation between native speakers and non-native speakers of English that happens to occur online and how both groups handle it The analysis of repair in online chats will reveal the causes of misunderstandings and miscommumcation and reveal how these are dealt with by online participants From the beginning. that is. or cyberspace (Gibson. it is likely that repairs will involve more negotiation of meaning. 1982) This phenomenon reflects the context of globalization where people are connected by communication technologies One interactional phenomenon this research studies is how such online chatters repair the immediately preceding talk Given that many people from different backgrounds are using English. the opportunity for miscommumcation is great. and there may be subtopics embedded in each topic On the other hand.

not English. and their participants used German as a mother tongue The study. by Golato and Talegham-Nikazm (2006). the language of interaction was German. by Shekary and Tahnnan (2006). or a combination of both) The four main features that have been of interest to CA researchers include turn-taking systems. repairs. non-verbally. web discussion boards. 2007) Since internet technologies were invented in the 1980s. email communication. studied how participants made requests. they planned the experiment to collect data and intervened in the participants' interaction The third study. but only those resulting in negotiation of meaning and then noticing To locate negotiation of meaning which is one activity of repair. text-based chats). explored the negotiation of meaning and noticing in text-based online chats among ESL learners Their study did not examine all repair practices. a negative face-threatening action in German online chats They found that their participants used a written pause to defer their requests. and used pre-requests and questions to elicit an offer Their study indicated that participants design their action in order to save other participants' face and that face can be a phenomenon that can be explored in web chats . but to my knowledge. there are few studies so far that examine repair in online chats The first one. sequences. and preference organization (Liddicoat. investigated whether the four positions of repair (see Chapter 2 for the definition of each position) appear in web chat In their study. alternative ways of communicating have been developing (e g. the two researchers followed a CA method However. by Schofeldt and Golato (2003).14 communicate (either verbally.

it is the purpose of this study to investigate the social nature of human communication in the form of repair in a technology-mediated environment The research questions of this study are as follows 1 How do participants who do not own the trouble in online chats initiate and complete repair7 . 2001). 1999). and in particular conversation or mundane talk (Schegloff. and evaluated listeners in relation to the content being focused More recently. 1991. including Baron (2003). Crystal (2001). and social identity (Kiesler et al. and influences ways in which humans communicate Therefore. the interests of some CA researchers have shifted to synchronous and asynchronous online communication Like other scholars who study communication or linguistics.15 Purpose of the Study A number of scholars. 1981.1984. 1984) began studying non-verbal communication For example. sociability (Hutchby. used gestures to indicate the transition of a story being told. it is essential to examine and explain human interaction as it occurs online As mentioned. before communication technology came to play a role in communication. Schegloff. CA researchers have suggested that computer technology has changed the nature of human interactions and relationships (Garcia & Jacobs. CA researchers (Goodwin. and Walther (2004). creates new language features. research in CA focused exclusively on ordinary communication. 1984) As mentioned. emphasize that technology promotes more effective human interaction.1996) Later. how participants simultaneously used eye gaze to manage turn-taking and to catch attention.

for example. there are no verbal (aural) or non-verbal (visual) cues What is available is the text through which they can communicate and turns they take to type. culture. word meanings and grammatical structures Repairs can also be caused by unshared background knowledge and experience of participants (Gass. the mechanisms of online chats can lead to repairs because online messages are not in sequential order and many participants can type several messages at the same time This research question is aimed at finding the location of the cause of repair and the functions of other-completed repair . and familiarity with each other More generally. which they do not have to compete for Like ordinary talk. repair found in online contexts involving non-native speakers may be caused by limitations in second language proficiency that hinders the progress of the conversation One possible strategy for dealing with this trouble is to request an explanation on language.This research question examines how the participants who are the recipients manage misunderstandings and miscommumcation The process of dealing with a trouble source found in ordinary conversation may be different from that found in synchronous CMC because the medium of communication is different. though pace in online chats seems a lot faster than face-to-face talks 2 What are the characteristics and functions of other-completed repair in synchronous online communication7 Like repair found in face-to-face talk. in particular. online chatters have to deal with misunderstandings and miscommumcation in order to keep the conversation flowing. 1997) Other factors include gender.

computer programs were first especially designed for information storage and data analysis purposes. the research demonstrates how technology. they develop strategies to deal with such limitations of technology because. the internet The specific type of communication that will be examined. was also introduced These points will be examined in detail in Chapter 2 The last section outlined two research questions this study aims to answer This section provided a general idea of the research procedures and tools that were used These issues will be dealt with in more detail in Chapter 3 .17 Significance of the Study There are two advantages of this study First. synchronous online chats. new language features evolve and are continually being interpreted by users who are more conscious of meaning than form Second. supports and at the same time limits human social interaction In communication. not communication purposes Summary In this introduction. the practice of repair was briefly defined to it make it easier to explore the process and its boundaries This chapter also introduced a new unique setting in which human communication is taking place. such as the internet system. all communicators want to be understood by and understand others As a result. as Walther (1996) points out. that is. it demonstrates how language can be used in human social interaction which is now delivered electronically Crystal (2001) maintains that. with different communicative media.

conversational organization. and electronic environment. and suggests further research . Chapter 5 discusses the sequential location of each variation These variations of other-completed repair lead to the discussion in Chapter 6 Chapter 6 also answers the two research questions. Chapter 3 introduces the online participants and language of the web chats Chapter 4 presents five variations of other-completed repair found in synchronous CMC.The next chapter presents theoretical background on repair. according to the locations of repair-initiation and othercompleted repair In addition to adding one variation of other-completed repair to the list. concludes the study. sources of misunderstandings. while Chapter 3 outlines research methods which consist of data collection and data analysis Extracts from online chats are given in Chapter 3 to demonstrate how an emic perspective will be implemented in the analysis Also.

1985.1992). this chapter is intended to review the literature on repair from a conversation analytic perspective. it is important to devote a few paragraphs below to presenting the development of CA. 1968. it was face-to-face talk to which CA researchers turned because it reveals fundamental . on organization of conversational interaction.1984. 1981. 1991.1991. Hutchby & Wooffitt. Goodwin & Heritage. and on computer-mediated communication Before reviewing this topic. 1992. on other-completed repair and preference organization. Heritage. before paying close attention to face-to-face talk However.1995. 1973). Schegloff. 1989. where two participants must be physically co-present in order to participate in conversational interaction. 2008. while verbal cues which are audible and gestural cues which are visible to participants facilitate communication It was talk on the telephone that pioneering CA researchers first used to examine human verbal interaction (see Sacks. and how repair and computer-mediated human interaction are related in the field of CA Face-to-face interaction is the default format of everyday situations of human communication (Goodwin.19 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW This dissertation aims to examine how other navigates and fixes misunderstandings and miscommumcation during interactional online chats where English is used as a language for communication While the background information about this topic was provided in the previous chapter. 1990. Schegloff & Sacks. Schegloff.

Goodwin.20 communicative practices (e g. 1977.1989.1992. Schegloff. 1984. CA was developed to examine the sequential ordering of utterances in order to find out about the properties of normative.1982. a computer-mediated environment is a completely new strategic setting in which human interaction is found and. etc) and offers a domain in which they can investigate the structural organization of human sociality (Drew & Heritage. micro-level social order With the advent of technologies for communication. and social psychologists with a new variable that broadens their research paradigms For CA researchers.1995. Schegloff et al.1992. 1991. linguists. around.1991. 1991. 1977) In other words. sociologists. Tannen. intersubjectivity. and potential sources of misunderstandings. and with the computer network since the 1990s (Hutchby. Heritage.1984. participants' roles in repair. 2006. Schegloff et al. therefore. 2001) This new electronic environment has provided not only CA researchers but also communication researchers. head direction. eye gaze. 1985. gesture. human communication has been operated through.1986). 1984. computer-mediated human interaction is no exception This chapter is divided into three main sections The first one introduces repair. 1980. where they can examine mundane human interaction This dissertation is inspired by a claim made by CA researchers and sociohnguists that misunderstandings and thus repair are ubiquitous in all kinds of human interaction (Schegloff. while the second section reviews the organization of conversational interaction The last section explores the electronic environment which provides the medium and context in which human social action occurs . utterances.

Schegloff.1992. 2000) This section is divided into four subsections designed to explore the practice of repair Defining Repair In this study. Gumperz. 1977. 1991. or successful It occurs in a wide range of activities. Koshik. following the work of CA researchers who define it as the treatment of troubles. Jacoby. repair is used as a technical term. can be considered a joint and cooperative undertaking not only because it is one activity of talk but also because it requires participants to cooperatively defer whatever else was due next in order to deal with the problematic talk that impedes their shared understanding of the ongoing interactional work (Schegloff. whether or not it is smooth.Repair: A Conversation Analytic Perspective Talk-in-interaction is considered a joint and cooperative undertaking (Clark. or meetings All of these and many other verbal activities cannot be successful if the participants cannot grasp what is being said or cannot grasp the significance of what is being said However. miscommunications. discussions. known as repair. when they cannot do so. talk-in-interaction provides them with the sequential organization of interaction to detect and afterwards fix problematic talk (Drew & Heritage. or misunderstandings occurring in talk-in-interaction (Schegloff et al. repair is referred to as a constellation of practices through which participants resolve breakdowns in the production and . Schegloff. enjoyable. 1991. Schegloff. 2002) Similarly. such as encounters among acquaintances. 1984. Wardhaugh. 2000) The practice of detecting and then fixing problematic talk. & Olsher. 1996. 2006. 1985).

2002. as claimed by Schegloff et al (1977). Schegloff etal. p 363) It should be noted that repair sometimes can be located where there is no error. the opposite is also true That is. or faults sometimes do not lead to repair Several scholars in pragmatics. Dascal 1999. audible errors. mistake. "nothing is. 2006) The problems calling for repair may be caused by difficulties in speaking. 2001. 2000. mistakes. excludable from the class repairable" (p 363) All utterances can be trouble sources and thus repairable Moreover.1997. in principle.22 intelligibility of talk (Drew & Heritage. 1977) That repair is defined as practices dealing with difficulty in understanding talk does not mean that it includes within its scope all practices addressing problems of understanding. listening. repair does not stand by itself. it necessarily follows what it is intended to repair A cause resulting in repair is referred to as a "trouble source" (henceforth TS) or "repairable" (Schegloff et al.1991. p 207) In other words. a repair is "a general mechanism used to modify the talk after its production" (Kurhila. 2006) This is also true for a repairable. and communication studies have claimed that misunderstandings are ubiquitous (Adenzato & Bucciarelh. 2008.1992. utterances used to repair miscommumcation and misunderstandings can be trouble sources themselves needing to be repaired Considering the process of repair in relation to the talk-m-progress. or understanding the talk in conversation (Schegloff. sociohnguistics. Schegloff (2000) claims that the organization of repair is an organization of action that can . Mauranen. but rather "only the narrower domain of understanding what someone has just said" (Schegloff. Gumperz & Cook-Gumperz. as in the case of a word search. 1977. or fault. 1987. p 1084) That is. 2000.

there is a mark of possible split between the immediately preceding talk and the rest of the conversation (l e. and the talk resumed The next subsection explores how mutual .replace or defer whatever else will be due next The problem detected by participants needs to be solved before the ongoing talk can resume This is observed in face-to-face talk as demonstrated in Example 1 Example 1: Repair as an action (Schegloff et al. p. repair is the only action type that has this property A turn a participant produces as a contribution to the ongoing talk can function as a regular part of the ongoing talk or as an indicator that a misunderstanding is occurring The latter is inserted into ongoing talk to discontinue it. That's nice (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) In Example 1. 367) TS B A B A B A Oh Sibbie's sistuh hadda ba by bo way Who7 Sibbie's sister Oh really7 Myeah. mutual understandings reestablished. 1977.. after repair operates. repair interrupts the flow of ongoing conversation to. so that troubles in prior talk are dealt with. between e-turns 1 and 4) According to Schegloff (2000). instead. do the business of repair as in turns 2 and 3 These two turns were inserted into the ongoing talk to deal with the problem in hearing It can be noticed that.

underlay social life were explicated by breaching experiments in ethnomethodological studies These experiments were designed to intentionally disrupt the taken-for-granted routines of ordinary social life in order to observe how members dealt with their sudden lack of certainty As it turned out. recognition. 1991. introduced in the last section. the breaching experiments failed to demonstrate how mutual understandings are constructed and maintained in the course of mundane interaction (Hutchby & Wooffitt. and act on the circumstances in which they find themselves" (Heritage. 2008) . a term first introduced by Garfinkel in 1967 It is defined as the study of "the body of common-sense knowledge and the range of procedures and considerations by means of which the ordinary members of society make sense of. and then demonstrates how such a turntaking system leads to the presentation and establishment of shared understandings in social actions It is necessary to start off this section with ethnomethodology. and shared understanding of joint activities The methods of practical reasoning and sense-making which. ethnomethodology reflects the contingent and socially constructed nature of both action and understanding of action and the role of shared methods in the production. Garfinkel believed. p 4) In other words. find their way about in.24 understandings in the talk-in-progress are maintained and reestablished as talk emerges Intersubjectivity: A Display of Mutual Understanding in Talk This section relates the practice of repair. to the sequential organization of turn-taking.

the sequential organization of turn-taking has been the primary focus because it displays how participants' sense-making and understanding are established and organized by them during social activities (Heritage. . principally through sequence organization of turn-taking According to Goodwin and Heritage (1990). 2006. p 23) or "the maintenance of common. shared and even collective understandings between social actors" (Drew & Heritage. patterns. by constructing a current action or turn.25 Because methodologically. p 150) Since the beginning of CA. through the sequence of turn-taking. and generally the methods through which participants perform and interpret social action. CA seeks to uncover the practices. 2008) for the following reasons First. therefore. p 5) Intersubjectivity explains how mutual understandings can be achieved moment by moment or turn by turn as the talk proceeds In these coherent moves. what CA can contribute to ethnomethodology is analytic access to the situated achievement of intersubjectivity "shared or mutual knowledge and understanding among social actors" (Heritage. participants display to one another their analysis and understanding of one another's conduct and of the field of action. 2008. "action and interpretation are inextricably intertwined" (p 288) These mutual understandings emphasize the fact that talk-in-interaction is a strategic setting that allows participants to perceive the world as the same world and. 1991. then. 1991) This is illustrated in the investigation of sequence organization. 1991. Schegloff. CA researchers to study "social sharedness" (Schegloff. speakers normally project and require normatively the relevance of the next or a range of possible next actions to be done by a subsequent speaker (Heritage.

Heritage.where the conditional relevance of subsequent turns is expected Put differently. 1990. one who owns the misunderstood talk and the other one who locates trouble in understanding However. 1991) Third. in talk-in-progress. speakers of a prior turn may find the understanding of current speakers problematic in terms of understanding These misunderstandings always occur and as stressed by Schegloff (1991). most commonly. speakers show an understanding of a prior action or turn (Goodwin & Heritage. Schegloff. the immediately preceding talk (Heritage. "intersubjectivity is not always untroubled" (p 157). turns can function as repair I have presented the practice of repair produced by two participants. Schegloff. repair may involve only one participant who initiates and completes a repair The next subsection introduces participants' participatory roles . in producing a current turn. 2008. the first speaker's turn makes it conditionally relevant for the next speaker to respond appropriately in the next turn Second. by the production of the next actions. therefore. speakers customarily address themselves to the preceding talk and. 1991) It is through this activity that owners of the immediately preceding action check if their action is correctly interpreted by others However. the sequential organization of ordinary conversation provides participants with the resources for recognizing the breakdown of talk in progress and repairing it This point is further stressed by Drew and Heritage (2006) "any form of systemic organization has as a basic engineering problem the matter of how to fix problems when the system encounters difficulties or breaks down" (p 15) For this very purpose. 2008.

self-completed repair is a repair completed by the owner of a repairable. while other-completed repair is resolved by the recipient When self both initiates and completes a repair. it has both a beginning and an end Schegloff (2000) locates the practice of repair which starts from repair-initiation and ends either with solution or abandonment of the problem The literature on everyday conversation distinguishes between who indicates a problem and who actually executes the repair The distinction is made between self and other Therefore. other-initiated self-completion. self-repair). this is referred to as self-repair Othercompleted repair. repair-initiation. and other-initiated other-completion (1 e. illustrates three components of repair. self-initiated othercompletion. other-repair) Example 1. and repair-completion . the trouble source. means other does both repair-initiation and repair-completion So there are four types of repair based on who initiates and completes repair self-initiated self-completion (1 e.in repair and how their action and involvement shape the direction and sequence of repair Participants' Roles in Repair Repair is an organization of action that deals with trouble in the preceding talk It is inserted into ongoing talk in order to reestablish the mutual understandings among participants before the ongoing talk can resume This means that the practice of repair has a boundary. repeated below. namely. in the same vein. self-initiated repair is a repair detected by the owner of the TS. while other-initiated repair is a repair done by the recipient who identifies the TS In the same fashion.

the brown paper Example 2 shows that L has trouble in searching for a word when due.Example 1: Repair as an action (Schegloff et al. other. so B initiates a repair (I e. as illustrated in Example 2 Example 2: Self-initiated self-completion (Schegloff et al. the TS. does not hear the word. p. 1977. 366). it can also involve only one person. is located in turn 1 B. however. which A does repeat with the word Sibbie's sister (I e. Sibbie's sistuh. there is other-initiated self-completion We have seen that several participants can be involved in the practice of repair. Sibbie's sistuh. other-initiated repair) by asking Who7 in turn 2 Who7 is understood by A as a request for repetition. 367) TS 01 SC B A B A B A Oh Sibbie's sistuh hadda ba by bo way Who7 Sibbie's sister Oh really7 Myeah. the brown paper) So L initiates and completes repair . L TS 01 L L An' 'en bud all of the doors'n things were taped up= =1 mean y'know they put up y'know that kinda paper'r stuff. self-completed repair) in turn 3 In this example. p. though a bit later he finds the word (l e. That's nice (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) In Example 1. 1977...

Tannen. when they are recognized by the participants in the course of interaction . a potential source of misunderstanding Below is a discussion of some sources of misunderstanding. not everything can be explicitly said (Gumperz & Cook-Gumperz. 1994. among others. all is done to ensure that sources of misunderstanding in talk-in-interaction are properly resolved As stated earlier.1986). methodologically. Heritage. 2003) However. 1983. it is found that misunderstandings are present and ubiquitous due to the fact that. 1987). 2002.29 Participants' participatory roles affect the shape and direction of repair. more importantly. a phenomenon that repair is subsequently developed to manage Potential Sources of Misunderstanding In any communication. one property of repair is that it follows or replaces what comes before it. that is. Smith. Jucker. the sources of misunderstandings are only considered trouble sources when they lead to repair performed by participants in the talk and. "talk in interaction is built for understanding and on the whole effortless understanding" (p 202) This section aims to introduce some potential sources of misunderstandings that call for repair Notwithstanding. Cutting. Schegloff (1987) argues. in CA. the sources of misunderstandings are identified differently Emically speaking. that the same things can be differently interpreted (Blum-Kulka & Weisman. 1991. and that language systems are ambiguous (Channell. participants always manage to get meaning through as effectively and early as possible (Schegloff. & Ludge. 1979) This is made possible because. 2007.

ambiguous pro-forms. p 204). refers to a conversational trouble caused by the sequential import of the utterance or turn as a whole This reflects the relationship between a speaker's utterance. / / this. this ((pointing)) I'on't mean on the shelters. what Z understands is different from what A wants to communicate. and a fully explicit reference Example 3 illustrates problematic reference Example 3: Problematic reference (Schegloff. refers to a recipient's utterance responding to a speaker. is problematic as Z misinterprets what it refers to Clearly. p. this. I mean on the roads Oh (1) (2) (3) (4) Z treated turn 1 as a request for information and A intends it to be interpreted this way. therefore. for instance. 1987. "problematic reference" (p 204). turn. Schegloff (1987) studies problematic talk that results in misunderstanding and divides the causes of misunderstanding into two groups The first group. but ones. an which ones are open Most of em This.Based on the conversation analytic perspective on context. or turn component which the . an interpretive error. which displays to the speaker an acceptable understanding of what that prior utterance was doing but reveals misunderstanding of some reference in that turn Factors involved in this type of misunderstanding are. "problematic sequential implicativeness" (Schegloff. 1987. A takes the third turn to initiate and complete the repair The second source of misunderstandings. mentioned twice in turn 1. 204) TS 01 SC A Z A Z Which one s are closed.

208-9) TS B A B Well honey7 I'll prob'ly see yuh one a'these day s. 1987. 1987. "serious versus nonsenous distinction" (Schegloff. p. Wher e t' Oh just anyp(h)la(h)ce71 wz jus' kidding yuh The second type. Example 4: Serious vs. where one action appears to be favored This is demonstrated below Example 5: Favored action interpretations (Schegloff. p 208). 1987. refers to when utterances treated as serious by the recipient may be claimed to have been produced as nonsenous by speakers This is shown in Example 4. Oh God yeah Uhh huh' (1) (2) (3) . p.31 speaker intends to have different effects on the recipient or in which a recipient takes it in an opposite or different way Problematic sequential implicativeness is categorized into four types The first type. p 206). occurs when a turn produced to do one action is taken by other to be doing a different action. "favored action interpretations" (Schegloff. nonserious distinction (Schegloff. Mm hm. 207) TS A I wan'dahknowifyihgota-uh m whutchimicalht A -pah(hh)king th's mornin' hh OC B A SI B A A pa rking place. 1987.

211) B but-hh lately71 have fears a'dnving over a bridge ((silence)) B A nd uh seems I uh -1 just can't tuh (sit) . B then denied that she was complaining and. the constructive versus composite distinction (Schegloff. 1987. p 210) in the understanding of utterances occurs when what se//intends to be constructively understood by other is instead compositely understood This is exemplified in Example 6 Example 6: Constructive vs. p. composite distinction (Schegloff. therefore. 1987.if I hevuh haftuh cross a bridge I jus'. used line 6 as a repair-completion Third.don't (go an' make-uh-do the) trip at all TS A Whaddyuh afraid of (2) (3) (1) .32 We01 SC A B B't I c—I jis couldn' git downpthere Oh Oh I know (4) (5) I'm not askin yuh tuh come dow A Jesus I mean I jis I didn' have five minutes yesterday (6) (7) Example 5 shows that turns 5 and 7 were used by A as she thought that B had made a complaint that they could not get together (turn 1) In turn 6.

joke firsts are produced as intentional misunderstandings of the prior talk which has set the terms for the joking speaker's talk The practice of a joke first occurs when a participant provides a joke first before providing a serious response next A joke first makes the next serious turn conditionally relevant This is shown in Example 7 Example 7: Joke first (Schegloff.01 OC B A I dun'kno w. 1987. then. whereas A meant the former A then initiated repair in turn 5 redoing what was meant in the first place Turn 5 reveals that Whaddyuh afraid of'was intended as a request for information Fourth. 1987. see uh Well I mean waitam'n What kind of fear is it 'R you afraid yer gunnuh drive off the e dge7'R you afraid thet yer gunnuh hit while yer on it7 What (4) (5) (6) B Offtheedge'rsumthin Example 6 is from a phone call to a talk show The TS is located in turn 3 The question Whaddyuh afraid of can be understood either. 213) TS J You study the Tiwi7 (1) . p 212) can be a source of misunderstanding That is. compositely. the practice of "the joke first" (Schegloff. as something between a reassurance and a jeer The response / don't know. p. as a request for information or. shows B to be addressed to the latter hearing of prior turn. constructively.

01 SC

R J

Tea Wee (leafs) Tell people (fortune) No, the Tiwi(0 2) the Tiwi of North Australia

(2)

(3) (4)

R

I have heard of them

So far, I have introduced the practice of repair, intersubjectivity, repair positions, and some sources of misunderstandings in this section There are three observations to be introduced here First, repair as previously argued is not regular ongoing talk in that it is inserted into ongoing talk and it defers what is due next In essence, it is a separate organized action Secondly, a repair practice that involves only self, as in same-turn repair and transition-space repair, does not reflect how participants reestablish mutual understandings during everyday talk-in-interaction In contrast, a repair practice that involves two or more participants represents a reestabhshment of joint understandings (or intersubjectivity) when each takes a turn after the conversational system encounters difficulties and breaks down Thirdly, some sources of misunderstanding were touched upon Misunderstandings and the practice of repair can be potential and, according to a conversation analytic method, are only realized when they are talked into being in context It is then that decisions about what these are become apparent That is, only participants in an ongoing conversation are able to recognize misunderstandings or sources of misunderstandings as such, this emphasizes the participants' perspective

In order to help understand the sequence organization of interaction in which repair is found and in order to make discussion of my data clearer, the next section presents some fundamentals of sequence organization namely, turn-taking, adjacency pairs, and insertion sequences

Organization of Conversational Interaction So far, I have presented how a turn functions as repair once troubles in speaking, hearing, and understanding are located and how participants are involved in the practice of repair simply by being the next speaker or, in other words, taking the next turn Speaking-next reveals the mutual understanding that speakers have so far interactionally built Indeed, a repair is performed in a sequence of turns, illustrated in three types of organization below

Turn-Taking Organization Speaker change is characteristic of talk-in-interaction (Sacks et al, 1974) It can be observed when there are two turns one belongs to the current speaker and the next one to the next speaker The rule may be as simple as once the first speaker ends his turn, the next one begins a new turn However, it is more complicated and systematic than it seems, not only because, as Schegloff (2006) argues, it deals with "who should talk or move or act next and when should they do so" (p 61), but also because all participants must achieve this or the talk cannot continue Before I discuss the turn-taking system, it is essential to understand what a turn is and how it is constructed This is discussed next

36 Turns and turn-constructional units. Turns, according to Sacks et al (1974), consist of stretches of language which are formed as a unit This unit is named the turn-constructional unit (henceforth TCU), which includes "sentential, clausal, phrasal, and lexical constructions" (p 702) One turn can consist of one or more small TCU's Examples 8-10 illustrate turn-constructional components which have different linguistic forms

Example 8: Single-word turns (Sacks et al., 1974, p. 702) Desk What is your last name Loraine —• Caller Dinnis - > Desk What7 —• Caller Dinnis

Example 9: Single-clause turns (Sacks et al., 1974, p. 703) A B —• A B —• A B A B Where the sidewalk is 7 Yeah, Whuntends, Goes all a'way up there 7 They c'm up tuh the re, Yeah Uh you been down here before havenche Yeh

Example 10: Single-sentence turns (Sacks et al., 1974) Ken I still say though that -if you take uh a big fancy car out on the road and you're hotroddin' around, you're- you're bound to get- you're bound to get shafted

Although a turn can consist of a TCU which can be a sentential, clausal, phrasal, or lexical construction, it does not necessarily mean that all turns fit into these single linguistic categories (Liddicoat, 2007, Schegloff, 1996, Seedhouse, 2004) In Example 11 below, it can be seen that at (turn 3), though it is considered a lexical construction, stands alone In a linguistic sense, however, this word does not usually stand alone

Example 11: Stand-alone linguistic form (Schegloff, 1996, p. 76) Ther Whatkmdofworkdoyoudo 7 Mom Food service -•Ther At7 Mom (A)/ (uh) post office cafeteria downtown main post office on Redwoood Ther Okay (4) (5) (1) (2) (3)

So far, it may have seemed that turn-constructional units can be constructed out of lexical, phrasal, clausal, or sentential unit This reflects the fact that several CA researchers emphasize the importance of syntactic structure in conversation

1981. in the examples above. the second turn consists of two possible TCU's / tri ed and He's sorta got a lot on 't the moment A turn that comprises two possible TCU's is of . it can be observed that a turn consists of one turn-constructional component However. in addition to a syntactic completion unit. 1974. 1991. complete social actions (Sacks et al. turns can be found to consist of two or more turn-constructional component This is illustrated in Example 12 Example 12: Multi-TCUs turn (Liddicoat. ten Have. 1974). the potential completion points for TCU's can be signaled by combinations of possible prosodic completion (Selting. Sacks et al. Schegloff. 2000). p. 1996). remains problematic and needs further exploration So far. but this example points out that this is not always the case What can be concluded at this point is that any utterance can be considered a TCU when it is recognized by participants in talk as a possibly complete turn Some CA scholars examine factors other than syntax in determining a possible complete turn-constructional unit Many believe that. or even non-verbal expressions (Goodwin.did you ask him if hew'd do the session next week "*• Joy I tn ed He's sorta got a lot on't the moment Harry hhhh well we'll just haftuh think of somethin' else 'f e can do it In Example 12. to date. 2007.38 (Lerner. pragmatic and intonational completion (Ford & Thompson. 1979). 74) Harry so did. 2007) To exactly define and examine TCU's in CA.

and social action completion The possible completion of TCU's can be seen when these elements are achieved. although one person talks at a time. from a CA perspective which differentiate them from linguistic systems The possible completion of TCU's may be determined by lexical. pragmatic completion. p 300) Language and social action have developed units of talk and rules of turn allocation to ensure that participants achieve this goal While turns and TCU's were touched upon above. it is a possible TCU when it is recognized by participants as possibly complete. transition relevance place Transition relevance place Sacks et al (1974) argued that.interactional significance because the place between them creates a socially-shared place which can lead to the possible change of speakership As in this example. Harry may project to be the next speaker after Joy's / tri ed This socially-shared place in talk-in-progress will be examined again in the next section I have included in the discussion turns and possible TCUs'. namely. or clausal completion. which is grouped under syntax Other indicators include intonational completion. singly or in combination Emically speaking. 2007) The next subsection examines the space that follows possible TCU's. there is speaker change A speaker change permits participants to take a turn in order to have their "mentionables" talked about (Schegloff & Sacks. phrasal. rules of turn allocation will be presented below It is essential to first explore the place in talk-in-interaction that allows speaker change . 1973. and also as performing a social action (Liddicoat.

p 703) Sacks et al (1974) proposed that there are two ways in which a recipient can become the next speaker. 2003) Another device is the use of a question asked by the current speaker. for instance. The mechanism that deals with turn contribution. which means that.Speaker change is found to occur throughout talk-in-interaction However. as shown in Example 13 . the current speaker selects the next speaker This can be achieved in many different ways. p 703) Once a TCU is brought to a possible end. 1974. 2008). is known as the "turn allocation component" (Sacks et al. as touched upon above. at a TRP. the use of eye gaze (Goodwin. there is a TRP. which makes an answer a relevant next action. but need not. talk has a mechanism that deals with who can talk. 1981) or context (Lerner. 1974. and who can talk next and when This mechanism is reviewed next Turn allocation component. speaker change can. and these are performed hierarchically First. the place where it is found is not random but interactionally systematic The place where there is a possible change of speaker is called a "transition relevance place" or TRP (Sacks et al. occur Speaker change is a normative process in which participants in a conversation employ one signal or a combination of the signals discussed above in order to successfully take the next turn However. there is often a coordination problem (Heritage. for example. there are gaps and overlaps found in the moment in which there is speaker change This problem can occur more often in multi-party conversations However.

Whoever starts talking first and no one else has the rights and is obliged to take the turn. and no one else does. 64) Joy: Have juh got the papers for the meeting ye' Carol Carol: Yeah=they came in th's morning The use of the pronoun you is not problematic when it is a two-party conversation. the next speaker self-selects. The speaker who self-selects often starts talking after a brief silence following the turn-constructional component. 2007. The next strategy is the use of an address term.41 Example 13: Question (Liddicoat. turn design. 2003). if the talk so far has not employed the current-speaker-selects-next rule. p. After a single strategy or a combination of the strategies is used. Example 14: Question (Liddicoat. . To solve this problem. physical location. It can be seen in Example 14that the first speaker also uses the pronoun you. The next speaker has the rights and obligations to take the next turn. the current speaker may use context. 2007. There are times when there are no recipients selecting themselves to be the next speaker. Secondly. 1996a. If one who is not selected talks. his talk is considered an accountable action that needs an explanation. the next speaker is identified. it is ambiguous when it is a multi-party conversation. 64) Joy: how's things Harry: Not ba:d Joy. p. however. and eye gaze (Lerner.

and turn completion.have not operated. uh huh. which are presented next . while rules designed to help participants take turns appropriately are considered normative and interactionally enacted by participants in talk-in-interaction Having discussed turns. the current speaker may. which is a primary focus of CA Sacks (1987) defines a sequence as "the parts which are occurring one after the other.yeah. I will next demonstrate how turns are organized to form coordinated social actions Sequence Organization I have noted that a turn by the first speaker makes speaker change a relevant next action The relationship between these two turns represents sequence organization.current-speakerselects-next and self-selection for next speakership. and have some organization as between them" (p 54) The relation between two consecutive turns within a sequence can be explained by what Schegloff and Sacks (1973) call "adjacency pairs" (p 295). these three rules reapply So far. but need not. turn construction. or are in some before and after relationship. if these two rules. etc) Thirdly. I have presented how turns are produced as a unit which may consist of small TCU's Units of talk and rules of turn allocation are conversational mechanisms designed to allow participants to collaboratively produce their turn Turn-taking behavior is indeed a socially-constructed behavior.42 This is evident when the TRP is extended or when the current speaker uses contmuers (e g . continue talking Once his turn has reached the next TRP or subsequent ones.

as does hi. the adjacency pair consists of sequences produced by two different participants Secondly. precedes the second utterance. "adjacency pair" (Schegloff & Sacks. it is important to discuss the concept of conditional relevance. 1973. 1968.Adjacency pairs. its speaker customarily stops talking at the first . p 1083) Items here refer to "participants' expectations in regard to the sequential organization of turns in conversation" (Bussmann. p 229) Conditional relevance can be observed in sequence of turns. or "utterance pair" (Sacks 1987. the second [item] is expectable. and announcements which involve either congratulations or condolences. p 295). I e. p 56) Schegloff and Sacks (1973) conclude that the characteristics of adjacency pairs are as follows Firstly. second pair part The first pair part is produced to initiate the next action. first pair part. a turn can initiate a particular type of action to be produced by the next speaker Examples of conditional relevance includes greetings. such as hello which occasions another hello. suggested by Sacks (1972) The term means "given the first [item]. I e. the first utterance. while the second pair part is designed to complete the action initiated in the first pair part After the first pair part is produced. the other produced by the second speaker Thirdly. the first utterance produced by the first speaker. invitations which involve either acceptances or rejections. upon its occurrence it can be seen to be a second item to the first" (Schegloff. To help explain the sequential relationship between turns that are considered adjacency pairs. 1999. questions which require answers. for instance. etc The sequential relationship between two turns is called a "sequence pair". the sequence has two utterances.

TRP so the second speaker can begin the second pair part Fourth. 232) Phone rings Mar Ton Mar Ton Mar Hello7 Hi Marsha7 Ye ah How are you7 Fi ne (0 2) Mar Did Joey get home yet7 . the second one is produced Some examples of adjacency pairs are shown below Example 15: Question-answer (Schegloff & Sacks. 2007. 2007. 301) A B A What's up Not much What's up with you7 Nothing Example 16: Greeting (Liddicoat. p 107) Amy Hello Jean Hi Example 17: Greeting and question-answer (Schegloff. 1 e. these two turns occur immediately together. both parts are placed adjacently to each other Very often. p. p. after the first one is ended. 1973. and briefly after the TCU.

is that the first and second pair parts are physically and immediately placed adjacent to each other (e g. the second pair part should be immediately produced. p 110) Amy w'd yuh like tuh come over t'morrow night Jane yea h =that'd be nice Examples 15-18 indicate sequences of adjacency pairs Schegloff and Sacks (1973) emphasized that both the first and second parts of a sequence must be members of the same pair-type The completion of adjacency pairs largely depends on whether or not the second participant recognizes the first pair part as such and whether or not he responds to it. the second pair part does not immediately follow the first one This phenomenon is elaborated below Insertion sequences. Adjacency pairs require that. especially in the way that the first speaker considers relevant Two cues for understanding that the second participant can rely on when hearing the first pair part are syntactic structure and conventional formulas of the first pair part (Schegloff & Sacks. after the first pair part is produced by the first speaker.Ton Well I wz wondering when 'e left Example 18: Invitation-acceptance (Liddicoat. adjacent to the first . 1973) One of the characteristics of sequences of adjacency pairs. 2007. as explained above. question followed by answer) However. under some circumstances.

78) Ql Q2 A2 Al A B A B Have you seen Jim7 Was he in today 7 Yeah No. I didn't see him It can be observed in Examples 19-20 that the first pair part of the first adjacency pair is separated from the second pair part of the same pair-type by a second adjacency pair This can be more complicated. 78) Ql Q2 A2 Al A B A B Are you coming tonight 7 Can I bring a guest 7 Sure I'll be there Example 20: Insertion sequences (Schegloff. as in Example 21 . 1972) That is. p. a new adjacency pair is inserted between the first pair part and second pair part of the previously produced adjacency pair The conditional relevance of the previously-produced adjacency pair is broken by the participants' involvement in another adjacency pair This can be seen below Example 19: Insertion sequences (Schegloff. 1972. p. it has been found that these sequences are sometimes interrupted by other talk (Schegloff. by the second speaker However. 1972.46 one.

although it interrupts the ongoing talk. it does not cancel the relevance of the original second pair part Those insertion sequences are considered relevant to the first pair part and to the projected second pair part In brief. 1972. but also to help explain how participants interact to accomplish such actions online The next . p. 79) Ql Q2 Q3 Q4 A4 A3 A2 Al A B A B A B A B Are you coming tonight7 Can I bring a guest7 Male or female7 What difference does that make7 An issue of balance Female Sure I'll be there Schegloff (1972) argued that this phenomenon is so distinctive that the absence of the second pair part and the replacement of the second pair part with something else unrecognizable as an answer does not lead to a repair-initiation.47 Example 21: Insertion sequences (Schegloff. which was pioneered by CA researchers The purpose was not only to provide background information on how participants use talk as a course of action to accomplish social actions in talk-in-interaction. this section has introduced the sequential organization of conversational interaction. it also does not lead the first pair part of the new adjacency pair to be "accountable" and in need of explanation The reason for this is that whatever sequence is inserted between the original adjacency pairs.

body movement) can be perceived by other participants without using any devices With the internet. Hargittai. is a number of computers linked together into a communication network (Baron. 2001) It was not until the 1980s that ordinary people began to have access to computer networks The internet is the fastest growing new communication technology (Flaherty. & Rubin. and reviews literature on online social interaction Electronic Environment as a Communicative Context By default. first known as ARPANET (Advanced Research Project Agency Network) in 1969 and renamed Internet in 1983. Neuman. we can be physically separated by distance but can still communicate. linguistic features of language on the internet. we can communicate and perform social activities This section explores the internet as a medium for social interaction. synchronous text-based communication on the internet. by typing texts) and visually (1 e. 1998) which provides different ways of communication . humans communicate verbally and non-verbally because both sounds (1 e. and human social interaction on the internet Internet: Technologies for Communication The Internet. & Robinson. textually (1 e. by reading text) Although the medium and channels have been altered by the internet. voice) and images (1 e.section introduces the electronic environment in which human social interaction can be found. Pearce. 2003) It was initially intended for scientific communication in the United States and remained in use for the same purposes until the 1970s (DiMaggio.

among others. Internet Relay Chat or IRC. the former receives close attention from researchers from language-related disciplines because of its completely new and unique channels of human communication and because it deals with direct human-human personal and group communicative practices. the internet is divided into human-human communication and informatics However.49 such as electronic mail (or email) and web chats Operating on networked computers. was written by a Finnish student to enable synchronous communication Differences between the chat program in the eighties and the ones currently in use are. the use of emoticons (discussed below). the internet is an "electronic network that links people and information through computers and other digital devices. the number of characters in each e-turn. the chat programs that are currently in use can be dated back to 1988 when the first online chat programs. and it is thus the focus of the next subsection Computer-Mediated Communication Murray (1991) defines computer-mediated communication as "any humanhuman communication mediated via computer" (p 18) This definition underscores computers and networks as mediators of human communication Several authors . allowance of a private channel and multiple channels. allowing person-to-person communication and information retrieval" (p 307) Bellamy and Hanewicz (1999) and Santoro (1994) agree with this definition and propose that. according to its purposes. as inclusively defined by DiMaggio et al (2001). etc It should be remarked that the internet is not limited only to technologies for communication In fact.

cogmtively. mostly in the form of typed text. education. a debatable question regarding synchronous CMC is no longer whether or not technologies of communication affect language. in what ways. not only permit humanhuman communication to operate but also provide a new empirical arena for various research traditions in linguistics. Herring. CMC is divided into asynchronous (I e. though CMC can operate on several new portable devices (this is discussed in the following section) I consider CMC as interpersonal human communication. one activity of synchronous CMC. 2003. 2003. communication. discussion boards). Kiesler et al. 1984) but. due to the fact that they result in completely novel and unique social interaction in which language. and society (Baron. communicative practices. chat) The time lag of the former tends to be greater than that of the latter Online chats. while the latter does (e g. human behaviors. and sociology. rather. and to what extent they do so . delayed-time) and synchronous (l e. 2001) These definitions recognize that CMC takes place on the internet. learning. that is enhanced by a networked system In general. real-time) communication (Kiesler et al. 2001. DiMaggio et al.50 have added to the definition of CMC that it is mainly text-based natural language that is transmitted and/or received via a computer connection (Baron. 1984). email. psychology. and communities emerge Indeed. according to the level of interactiveness and the dependence on the presence of a co-participant for the communication to take place The former does not require participants to be online at the same time in order to communicate (e g. under what circumstances.and socially-related behaviors. communication.

1988b) Second. second pair part) (Murray. before exchanging several emails Participants may even use a first pair part of an adjacency pair in one mode. during the course of communication. Kalman and Rafaeh (2007) disagree with the idea of dichotomizing CMC into asynchronous and synchronous modes and propose a continuum between highly asynchronous on the one end and highly synchronous on the other because of several factors discussed below Their analysis of manners in which participants actually utilize CMC presents three important findings First. there are several activities that operate on the internet which ranges from highly asynchronous to highly synchronous For example. there are intermediate levels of synchromcity found in each CMC activity Online chats. for example. participants may first chat online. for example. can be highly synchronous when the two participants interactively converse Although email is recognized as asynchronous. is synchromcity a criterion? Initially. it may be considered synchronous if the receiver is logged on when the email is sent and responds immediately It is important to note that the feature of synchromcity is dynamic rather than static because. email may be as fast as or even faster than online chats . 2004) This section does not exhaustively discuss all of the effects of synchronous CMC but rather gives an overview of its characteristics Technically. then use a discussion board. Walther. CMC can be divided into synchronous and asynchronous modes according to the synchromcity of participation Yet.2004b.(Herring. 2002. and the receiver might respond in a different mode (l e.

the context of situation covers the availability of a certain CMC mode at that moment In addition. or whether it is a secret) Also. the context of situation includes the relationship between the sender and the receiver. the increasing availability and quality of wireless connection allow devices to be online all the time Fourth. portability allows messages to be created. whether or not it is urgent. and the nature of communication (e g. whether it is recorded. the convergence of media blurs the boundaries between the message and the medium used to create the message and to receive it Third. the levels of synchromcity are not only a function of the medium being used but also of decisions made by participants Users constantly make decisions on the level of synchromcity they prefer for each conversational exchange they are involved in Most participants are aware of the technological functions of available media that can serve their need or the "context of situation" (Murray 1988b p 351) Murray (1988b) suggests that the context of situation covers the nature of the topic being communicated (whether it is sensitive. amount of time for participants to communicate. or secret) Kalman and Rafaeh (2007) propose four technological trends facilitated by advanced computer networks that weaken the dichotomy distinguishing asynchronous and synchronous First. but rather a result of user preferences and decisions at the time they communicate .52 Third. and responded to instantly. the ease and ubiquity of digitahzation allows information to be digitahzed and communicated anytime anywhere Secondly. and stored indefinitely These four factors imply that synchromcity of computermediated communication does not reflect a function of technologies for communication. sent.

is it speech or text? It is unquestionable that synchronous CMC is changing language in general because of new technological means for production and transmission of language (Baron. owners of a message send the message through phonic (I e. graphic (I e. 1989) As a component of mode. or gestural (e g. and the computer capacity To sum up. another issue that is debated is the medium of computer-mediated communication This is discussed next The medium of online chat. sign and orthography). length of delays.53 There are other factors which are user-related and network-related which blur the dichotomy between synchronous CMC and asynchronous CMC Osman and Herring (2007) and Murray (2000) identify factors. channel is defined as the actual modality employed by owners of the text to transmit the message That is. such as typing speed and skills. language proficiency. the idea of classifying CMC into either synchronous or asynchronous modes should be done with caution because of participants' decisions and the emergence of new communication technologies This section is not meant to disqualify the dichotomy but to provide useful guidelines for the classification Besides the debate on synchromcity. system overload. internet connections. sound). via channel. 2003) One topic that is of interest to linguists is the type of discourse or mode of online chats. sign language) means Medium is defined as the patterning of wordings which can be either spoken or written . I e. whether it is spoken or written It is essential to point out that messages are typically delivered via channels and through a medium (Halhday & Hasan.

whether it is spoken or written Biber (1986). Chafe (1982). we can assume the potential difficulties when categorizing synchronous CMC. as in academic conferences. text-based. Schafer (1981). and electronic means Before the relationship between online chats and spoken and written discourse is presented. or graphically transmitted as in term papers At this point. Chafe and Tannen (1987). as in emails among acquaintances Language that seems wntten-hke in the same fashion can be phomcally transmitted. as in everyday exchanges. it is useful to see the characteristics of spoken and written discourse as they have been typically characterized . and Tannen (1982) have discussed in great length the differences between spoken and written language of various text types However.54 Language that seems spoken-like not only associates with the phonic channel. they did not include in their corpus texts that were distributed by reciprocally interactive. but also can be conveyed by a graphic channel.

carried out between two or more persons Speakers must constantly monitor their recipients to check their understanding There is time pressure Written Language Was developed long after spoken language It must be consciously taught mostly in formal settings Some become literate. D (2001). Schafer. but they can only do this by a process of empathy There is no time pressure for writers Receivers are not expected to provide immediate feedback or response Written texts are decontextuahzed as they cannot rely on contextual clues There is no use of such cues. such as and. while others do not Through an organized system of graphic symbols One-way transmission Mainly monologic where the audience is removed in time and space Writers often take their readers into account. and integrated whole There is an extensive use of markers to mark relationships between clauses Writing allows repeated reading and close analysis Writing features include pages. especially in academic writing Authors have time to put their ideas into a more complex. D (1987]. umm. contracted forms. Foertsch. repetition. verbal tokens or physical reactions are expected Speech is more context-sensitive and flexible than writing There are visual cues such as body language. and logical connectors. hmmn. lines. and other vocal characteristics. Chafe. even Grammaticahty is expected 3 The table is based on all of these authors Brown. e g. etc Ungrammaticahty is allowed. etc There is no time-lag between production and reception Includes prosody and intonation. D (1988b). W (1981. capitalization. and auditory cues Looser construction. and comment clauses Parahnguistic cues Structure and organization Time-related factors Linguistic features Discourse markers replaced by fillers. Crystal. such as er. Murray. rephrasing. J (1981). J A (1995). G (1978). D (1982) .1982). and punctuation Transmission method and process Participant involvement Responsibility of participant who originates the message Context Immediate response. R (1997). W and Tannen. e g. but.55 Table 2. then.1 Features ofspoken language and written language3 Variables Innate capacity Spoken Language Human beings are equipped with vocal systems We all acquire a speaking skill All reach the same general level of their competence Through an organized system of sound (phonic] symbols Two-way transmission Primarily a social activity. Chafe. coherent. Lippi-Green. and Tannen. gestures. and slang.

but is. very often. and to tasks of memory and learning It is heavily informational and documentary Transience Editing . once spoken.56 expected Less syntactically complex and complete than written language Contains more repetition than written language and more interactive control markers Ephemeral Editing occurs in spontaneous "online" fashion (1 e. cannot be withdrawn Formality Social functions Can be planned. repair) Errors. spontaneous Very suited to social or phatic functions due to the vast range of nuances which can be expressed by prosody and non-verbal features Syntactically complex Fillers and channel markers are not normally included in text Relatively permanent It is more likely to be edited Errors are eliminated in later drafts Some ideas or weak constructions are more likely to be filtered out along the way Always planned Very suited to the recording of facts and the communication of ideas.

57 I now turn to a discussion of the medium of online chats which is based on the variables used in Table 2 1 Note that linguistic features and organization. those receiving it read it on the computer screen and respond in the same format as it is received That is. asynchronous CMC remains new to human beings because it contradicts their nature that prefers highly synchronous interaction However. for example. and synchromcity" (p 5) Therefore. a participant has to somehow possess computer literacy skills Another requirement is that a participant needs an electronic device in order to chat electronically However. these two requirements are not what a normal child has to meet before he or she can speak The research by Kalman and Rafaeh (2007) presents convincing evidence for the biological basis of fundamental human communicative interactions that prefer "reciprocity. they point out that participants do not like time-lag synchronous CMC and that the technological developments for communicative purposes have not yet been around for enough human generations to allow natural selection to influence this technology or its effective utilization The second criterion deals with transmission method and process In online chats. may be discussed under those variables These thirteen variables are overlapping rather than absolute. and only text . not a natural feature of being human To participate in online chats. participating in online chats is. which are partially the results of. like written language. time-related factors or participant responsibility. and some are discussed in the following section First. responsiveness. undoubtedly. both parties electronically exchange the letter-like messages. participants transform information into text on the keyboard. in terms of innate capacity.

at least. which are "visually-presented language" (Herring. or responses have effects on the shape and direction of chats . two participants logged on simultaneously in a chat room in order to start. for an online chat to start or continue. 2003) because there are. p 612). participant responsibility. and the relevant reaction of receivers resembles the synchronous collaboration of speech The next criterion. resume. the recipient's understanding.58 conveys meaning and does interactional work (Herring. two chatters have to be co-present This makes the chat more interactive and immediate When chatting online. 1995) One reason for this is that. claims that online chats have more in common with speech in that online chats allow senders to determine the clarity and effectiveness of a message as they are presenting it moment-by-moment (Foertsch. online chats appear to have more in common with spoken language (Baron. online chats are a one-way transmission (Herring. participants have to be sensitive to their recipient in terms of understanding as the chat emerges Intersubjectivity as introduced earlier comes to play an important role in how participants build and maintain their mutual understanding That is. 2001) which means that the recipient does not see the message as it is produced or that recipients do not know that the messages are addressed to them until they arrive The third criterion explains the involvement of participants in online communication In this regard. 2004a) Text production and text reception. stress the fact that online communication is physically a written medium Like text. feedback. or end a conversation The nature of online chats assumes receivers of the message. 2001.

2006. Murray. 2000. co-present The physical absence of online chatters causes the lack of paralmguistic and extrahnguistic cues (Edge. and modified e-turn-by-e-turn as chat progresses The next criterion includes paralmguistic cues In online chats. Schegloff. each e-turn is interpreted in the context of the talk that precedes it and forms part of the context of talk that follows it This aspect of context is constructed. allocate the turn. explains writing conventions. a sequence of e-turns can display how each e-turn is both text-shaped and text-renewing That is. 1984. are not presented in an orderly fashion Some ideas are left unmentioned while some already mentioned messages are reordered. Al-Sa'di and Hamdan (2005) and Mumandy (2002) discovered that in most of the samples. e g. 1991) With regard to structure and organization at the discourse level.59 The fifth criterion is context Like speech. 1984) The seventh criterion. Brown (1978). 1991) that are used to convey meaning. 2003). etc Still. in their studies. a question mark or a period) can be intentionally omitted unless it impedes the comprehensibihty of the message (Wilkins. and Murray (1990) show that arguments communicated in computer conversation. structure and organization. expedite the sender's message delivery. 1981. or presented slightly differently Ideas are presented in online chats in a . not physically. repeated. discourse markers. like speech. Krohn. and facilitate the receiver's comprehension of the message (Goodwin. Kiesler et al. Foertsch (1995). punctuation was missing Some punctuation marks (e g. Wilkins. which can be found in online chats (Baron. punctuation. receivers are electronically. 2004. maintained. the presentation of idea.

typing speed. umm. interactiveness in online chats depends on. among other things. they occur more quickly than during written correspondence In online chats. system overload. when messages are typed quickly and spontaneously. colloquial. 2001. e-turns are short and unedited (Al-Sa'di & Hamdan. 1995. such as er. many think of online chats as speaking because they are found to be responsively and interactively faster than ordinary written exchanges Time pressure results in electronically typed text that is "interactive. as discussed earlier. or computer capacity However. 2005.simple manner or simple syntactic structure because of time pressure This makes online chats more like speech With regard to structure. 2000) With regard to time-lag. 2003) However. online chatters expect to get a reply immediately Although replies in online chat are not as instantaneous as face-toface talk. verbal fillers used in verbal communication. texts in synchronous CMC are simpler in terms of . Baron. and hmmm are often used by online chatters The eighth criterion is time-related factors Due to the interactive nature of the exchange. compared to speech. and spontaneous" (Foertsch. internet connections. which resembles the production of speech By the same token. long time-lag or silence simply means the other participant is not available to chat or has left the chat room Linguistic features are the ninth criterion The language used in online chats makes it seem like speech Because message transmission is immediate and interactive. p 304). they are therefore less coherent and less thoughtfully structured than printed texts Yet. it is found that the speed at which people type is significantly slower than the speed at which they talk (Herring. Murray.

informal lexis. sentence fragments. as a result. 1988b. online chats are not always as ephemeral as previously thought by Foertsch (1995) and Murray (1988b). edit. it is presumable that online chats can create the careful and reflective construction of an abstractable and highly structured text (Foertsch. revise. 1990. Murray.1991) The tenth criterion is transience Like written text. and Skype) in which a chat room is housed provide such technical options not only whether to record a current conversation but also whether to retrieve previously recorded ones Therefore. long pauses in electronic media where physical and verbal cues are lacking can be perceived as conversational closings The twelfth criterion concerns formality There are two aspects of formality to be discussed here the linguistic features of e-messages and the process of e- . colloquialisms. and format the message as often and as long as needed before the intended receivers read it (Al-Sa'di & Hamdan. while and after typing.range of vocabulary used and measures of word and sentence length (Herring. and informal constructions (Murray. 1991) Ideally. 2002) E-turns are found to contain contractions (e g. Herring. to check. which requires interactivity In addition. He'll vs He will). 2001. right7). it is pretty rare because of the simultaneously electronic presence of receivers. 1995) Although this is indeed technically possible for senders to do. incomplete sentences. tag questions (e g. in reality. which depends largely on the participants Many websites (e g. who believed that the transcripts are completely gone once the computers on which the web chat occurred are turned off or once the participants log off The next criterion is editing Online chats allow senders. 2005. Yahoo. online chats can be recorded. MSN. I'm vs / am.

Crystal (2001) argues that language in online communication is "better seen as written language which has been pulled some way in the direction of speech than as spoken . such as ellipsis and contractions which can be often found in spoken language (Chafe. emotional subjectivity. both of which often are considered social interactional functions of language (Crystal. who believe that personal information. does not pass through written medium The above variables have been discussed as characterizing the differences between spoken and written discourse When the criteria used to mark differences between these two types of discourse are used to classify online discourse. online chats are a highly social medium where the activities of social interaction. 1997) This is supported by Trevino. are designed to bond online chatters and maintain social solidarity This is supported by Al-Sa'di and Hamdan (2005) and Foertsch (1995). online chatters do not usually have time to plan their message This makes online chats closer to spoken language than to written language The thirteenth and last criterion concerns social functions Like everyday exchanges. Lengel.message production Message features. non-verbal codes. which is conveyed by. who assert that it is common to see humor. and Daft (1987). conveyed through some social features of language. for instance. it appears that online chats are more similar speech than to text However. 1991) The process of message production explains how a message is produced in regard to spontaneity Because of the fast flow of online chats. and taboo words in online chats Yet Murray (1990) finds that online participants are not usually engaged in phatic communication such as greetings or bidding farewell. can be frequently located in online chats (Murray. 1982).

she considers eturns a "process" due to the fact that an "[electronic] conversation is typically a work in progress. with the outcome being determined by the interaction between participants" (p 11) The logs of typed verbal interaction in online chats reflect an "ongoing discourse process" (p 11) that consists of at least two participants taking . or from sending a message to the chat server Messages that are simultaneously typed by participants in the same channel will all be put in the dialog box and still be intelligible The second feature concerns the process or product of online discourse Baron (2003) views e-turns as a product. according to Sacks et al (1974).63 language which has been written down" (p 51) It can be problematic to classify online chats. simultaneous typing does not interrupt the flow of the chats and does not prevent others from starting and continuing to type a message. using the traditional dichotomy between spoken-like language and wntten-hke language Online chat is neither of them. in the sense that only a finished work can be consumed by receivers On the other hand. though. nevertheless. There are some features of online discourse that do not fall into spoken or written discourse categories The first feature is simultaneous talk which includes overlaps and interruptions. on the one hand. which cannot be located in online communication (Schonfeldt & Golato. it selectively and adaptively displays properties of both These properties are discussed in the next subsection Unclassified features of online chats. it is common in ordinary talk Overlaps and interruptions may be identified in online chats only when participants simultaneously type e-turns. 2003).

they do not necessarily have to be hierarchical as in everyday talk Moreover. 1998. unless the name of the addressee is included in the message. this section introduced the differences between written discourse and spoken discourse Then. many researchers have directed attention to the following language features that are . 2004) While the categorization of online discourse remains controversial. Mumandy. p 700) Sacks et al (1974) also propose "turn allocation techniques" (p 703) as a hierarchical process for selecting the next speaker in everyday conversation Although all the turn-taking techniques can be located in online chats. 1990. Foertsch. 1995. Zitzen & Stein. 2003. we discussed the features of online chats Online chats have characteristics that cannot be classified into either written or spoken discourse. 2002. 2005. sequence of turns. 1974. for instance. and turn-taking systems found in online chats are not the same as in spoken language Another feature is the multi-dimensionality of communication Synchronous CMC allows multiple participants to communicate simultaneously. self-selection seems to be the default speaker selection technique in online chats In brief. leading it to be considered either a new type of discourse or a hybrid (Al-Sa'di & Hamdan. in a question-answer sequence.turns These turns. based on the criteria used to identify these two types. therefore. Tanskanen. Herring. 2001. and a participant can attend to more than one exchange and topic at a time This feature contrasts with ordinary conversation where "one party talks at a time" (Sacks et al. there are many exchanges and topics to attend to at a time. Baron. Murray.

which are available on the keyboard It should be mentioned here that not only communication technologies but also participants. substitute for the lack of paralmguistic or non-verbal cues. the spoken language features that are used in textual communication. have an impact on online language form This is evident when synchronous CMC participants employ strategies that reduce the time needed to write the message. smileys (see the discussion of the use of smileys under emoticons below). and syntactic levels Al-Sa'di and Hamdan (2005) contend that cyberspace has left its impact on language at all levels. used. or express themselves creatively . morphological. and the features of written language found in web chats The next section presents some of the features found in English online discourse Language in Synchronous CMC This section examines the linguistic features of the English used in online chats at the lexical.65 created in online discourse to see how online language is developed. intentionally or accidentally. symbols. mimic spoken language features. and how it conveys meanings. and a combination of these. from the word level to the discourse level Chat programs allow online chatters to use only characters.

suffenn. lata) 1 Subjects. currently in park be by later) 2 Abbreviations or acronyms are widely used (e g. D (1988a. I do 2 u think so 7 ] 2 Sometimes a whole sentence (or a series of sentences) is typed in capitals That is because the user has his caps lock on It could be meaningless. anger. Crystal. auxiliary verbs.Pearce. DuBartell. copulas can be deleted (e g.2nite) 3 All (or most) of the vowels in a word are deleted as long as the consonants are still capable of unambiguously conveying the intended meaning (e g. but it is sometimes used to show emphasis or to denote shouting. ppl] 4 One letter for a word (usually a function word rather than a lexical one) is common (e g. u 2) 2 Syllables in a polysyllabic word are replaced by a homophonous letter or numeral (e g. colloquial. Flaherty.2 Features of language m synchronous CMC Morphology and syntax4 Features Word Truncation Descriptions 1 Letter or numeral is used instead of a word when the letter or numeral and the word are homophones in speech (e g. D (1995). *fnsbee) 2 Multiple vowels are added at the end of a word to raise intonation (e g soooo] 1 Capitalization is rare Even proper nouns and sentence-initial words are usually typed with a lower-case initial letter (e g. b4.& Rubin R (1998]. A (2002). Murray. etc (e g YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT FROM BEGINNING] 3 Apostrophe is not used (lhv done tht) 4 A word is spelled just the same way it is pronounced (e g. and Hamdan. goin] 6 Informal. hi. K. determiners. or slang spelling is used if shorter than the standard spelling of the same word (e g. cuz) 7 Only the initial letter of a word is used when the context easily determines the intended word or phrase (e g. n] 5 g is dropped in -ing constructions (e g. btw] 3 Series of punctuation marks are widely used to emphasize the functions of a message and affect (why-"7?-"7??????????????????) Emphasis and Intonational Word CyberOrthography Syntactic Level 4 Al-Sa'di. J M (2005).66 Table 2. D (2001). L. bday) 1 Asterisks are added to indicate emphasis or to correct what was previously typed (e g. Mumandy. 1990) . R A.

morphological. lexical. for the discussion) Baron (1986. however.67 It can be seen in Table 2 2 that a number of features of the English language have been affected by CMC This may have led some scholars to express their concerns regarding this issue and how teenagers naturally absorb this type of written language (see Baron. lexical. 2002b. and syntactic levels). English is used differently because of the constraints of the technologies. which reflects the common sense. not functionally.2009) and Crystal (2001). on the internet. both language and human social interaction operating in CMC are found to be different from that which people regularly experience face-to-face This is discussed next Structural and Interactional Features of Synchronous CMC In addition to the above features of the English language (l e. creative thinking and ingenuity of internet users This section has discussed some linguistic features of language on the internet Not only all language levels (e g.2005. the discourse level has been affected by communication technologies and CMC users This can be demonstrated below Turn-taking system and sequences.2002a. and syntactic units) on which CMC has an impact. Computer conversation is characterized by a complex turn-taking system and by sequences consisting physically. 2003. of adjacent pairs Chat systems . but also the interactional level has been affected by the internet In other words. semantic. 2009. morphological. believe that.

1991) Besides the chat system. though insertion sequences can be found in online chats Herring (1999) contends that the interactional incoherence of computer conversation reflects the fact that computer networks were not originally intended as a means for social interaction. this is because the operations of receiving and sending messages are separate (Wilkins. in a dialog box. one can see the following pattern A A B A B B Question 1 Question 2 Answer 1 Question 3 Answer 3 Answer 2 Figure 21 Possible sequencing in a computer conversation This figure shows the interactional incoherence of a conversation found in online chats Each message is posted in the order in which it is received by the system. but for information analysis and retrieval This interactional incoherence can be observed locally and globally Local disruption results from an interruption in an adjacency pair For instance. it is found that computer. causing an initiating message and its response to become separated by irrelevant messages This phenomenon is different from what Schegloff and Sacks (1973) and Schegloff (1972) called insertion sequences. and typing .disrupt patterns of turn-taking. without regard for which message they are responding to The system allows online participants to post a message whenever they want without negotiating to be the next one to post or to hold the floor Technically. network.

one can see that it is topically multidirectional and thus interactionally incoherent on a global level Although this feature might appear to be a weakness of online chats. the turn-taking system and sequence organization of synchronous CMC represent the unique structural order of computer conversation In the bigger picture. 2004) Like locally-observed interactional incoherence. especially when multiple participants are involved (Herring. Lerner. there tends to be more chance that the group will be divided into several subgroups and that topics are accordingly divided This is also true for online chats where each participant can participate in more than one topic at a time. and many topics can be simultaneously developed (Herring. Walther. 1991) as in everyday talk (Goodwin. it fosters playfulness and interpersonal interactivity. 1981. globally-observed incoherence results from chat systems that allow multiparty conversations Research in everyday interaction finds that when there are more participants. 2003. while some social activities are uniquely characteristic of synchronous CMC. 2004) In brief. the next subsection introduces some of them . so senders do not know whether or not perspective receivers are in the process of replying Also. these structures of talk reflect a course of action which resembles a spate of ordinary talk Some social activities found to be typical in ordinary encounters are not usually found in synchronous CMC. 1991) If a script of online chats consisting of multiple participants is printed out. Murray. 2002. online participants cannot use eye gaze and intonation to control the flow of the conversation (Wilkins. 1999.69 speed lead to interactional incoherence Online chats are communicated only via the physical appearance of typed text. 1996a.

the electronic presence of the other does not always guarantee that others are able and willing to engage in chats Murray (1988a. though optional. 1988b) reports the use of u there7 in online chats which functions as a summons She finds that 'u there 7 ' is used by senders at the beginning . they can do so visually and/or verbally Some electronic messenger devices allow their users to recognize the electronic presence of others who are included in the list Still. in her data. This section presents the interactional activities found in an online environment Not only are turns sequentially misplaced in online chats. while in ordinary talk. and the fact that participants do not think. when done online that it is rude not to greet each other or to respond to a greeting According to Duranti (1997) and Schegloff (1968).70 Social interactional activities. participants are not physically present so it is hard or not necessary for them to display and acknowledge "public recognition" (Duranti. 1988b. are absent in synchronous CMC She also finds that if online chatters use a greeting. 1990. p 68) of each other's presence. 2000) reveals that greetings. Murray (1988a. 1997. 1997) Yet. some turns functioning as second pair parts can be missing as in openings and closings It has been found that ordinary talk usually begins with greetings and/or summons (Duranti. p 366) or "social maintenance of conversations" (p 367). it is never responded to with a greeting by the receiver This is due to characteristics of web chats that "free participants from traditional social constraints on interaction" (Murray. as described in summons-answer sequences before participants establish a shared field of interaction In online chats. greetings also function as attention-getting devices.

of the chat as a conversational initiative. 1981. continue when a participant wants the other to keep doing what he is currently doing. e g. as checking the interest of the other to chat. when participants did close. still checking or downloading. Murray (1988a. for example. as checking the attentional status of the other Interestingly. which are customarily expected when ordinary conversation is ending Closings are usually prefaced by pre-closing activities negotiated between participants (Goodwin. in their study. or still here It can also be used by senders. when they are expected to respond Another social activity is closings. and. during the course of chat. while some are developed specifically in synchronous CMC and are thus characteristic of synchronous CMC Two characteristics of synchronous CMC that have been widely discussed in several disciplines are presented below . Schegloff & Sacks. Hancock and Dunham (2001) identify several forms of summons-answer sequences that were used as a second pair part by a receiver without a first pair part. 1973) Yet. 1990. 2000) found that participants did not usually employ pre-closmg activities and did not do closings She found that silence worked as a closing Also. the turns that functioned as closings were single turns rather than pairs of turns The reasons for this phenomenon would be the same as those for openings in addition to the communicative culture of online chats I have discussed social activities found in synchronous CMC Some are designed to imitate those of ordinary encounters. in online chats.

. other-completed repair is the practice of repair that pioneering CA researchers believe not to occur often in face-to-face talk. which emphasizes the rarity of flaming in speech and text. was first introduced by Kiesler et al (1984) as the "practice of expressing oneself more strongly on the computer than one would in other communication settings" (p 1130) This definition. leads Kiesler et al to conclude that participants in CMC are more uninhibited than they are in face-to-face talk Flaming is generated by word choice. insults. 2003) Avgennakou (2003) and Crystal (2001) argue that flaming is characterized as nonconforming. This subsection introduces flaming .actions found in face-to-face and electronic encounters. but are more common in electronic encounters As you will see. as the findings from this study reveal. flaming is mainly about strong language used in online communication In the same manner. direct. and directed at an individual recipient Flaming can also be judged by the purpose of language use when flamethrowers use to express. sarcasm. or even rude or profane language (Baron. how language use.72 Flaming. or aggressive as being related to some topics. other-completed repair occurs very often in synchronous CMC There may be some explanations for the occurrence of both flaming and other-completed repair in online communication The lack of contextual cues in online chats contributes to the use of language that is not usually found in either ordinary conversation or writing Flaming. for example. or the purposes or effects of language use that online participants attach to their e-turns Word choice considered as flaming contains direct.

& Geller (1985) have listed activities considered flaming which are impolite statements (e g. 1986) Kiesler. and body language This low level of social presence leads online chatters to be less socially oriented toward the other chatters In other words. they are considered flaming not only because they are not often used in front of the person to whom they are addressed but also because their users are less careful with the language they use online Avgennakou (2003) usefully summarizes the causes of flaming in online communication First. flirting (e g. Zubrow. such as eye contact. relatively unconstrained and unregulated behaviors occur and embarrassment. Can we meet after this experiment7). offense. terrible). and fear of revenge and rejection tend not to be found . You are a jerk). expressions of personal feelings toward the other ( e g . and hostility (Siegel. 1985) Second. facial expression. the lack of those cues makes CMC less personal because it reduces the flamethrower's sense of others as individuals (Kiesler et al. exclamations (e g. intimidation. / like him best) Sproull and Kiesler (1986) add to this list telling bad news. Kiesler. Dubrovsky. and using typographic extremes marked by exclamation points and by words typed in all capital letters Although these words or expressions are usually found in everyday talk. / like you). guilt. social anonymity is technologically supported in online communication. empathy for others. online chats yield low social presence because of their lack of contextual cues. Moses. tone of voice. sending messages that express negative sentiment (e g.73 aggressiveness. swearing. and therefore self-awareness is reduced As a result. & McGuire. Hoorayf). and the use of superlatives in expressing evaluations ( e g .

therefore. the lack of such cues and insufficient multiplicity of channels imply that the more equivocal. as in situations in past . their behaviors to be less repressed Some conversational behaviors. and emotional Therefore. insults. that the outcomes might not be as successful as when done face-to-face This point echoes the ineffectiveness of the communicative function of online chats in comparison to everyday exchanges According to Turnage (2007). if done. or emotional information should not be communicated online or. ambiguous. online participants' relative status. certain behaviors are encouraged by the medium That is. which are found in everyday encounters. as a result. facilitate talk about certain topics that are relatively equivocal.Social anonymity assumes the absence of social contextual cues (e g. similarly. ambiguous. such as swearing. lack of such cues leads participants and. name calling. the fourth cause explaining the occurrence of flaming is second-guessing This occurs when receivers interpret an e-turn and also evaluate the flamethrower Wilson (1993). social indicators. can be expected to appear online Kiesler et al argue that online participants are more uninhibited than they are in face-to-face groups as measured by uninhibited verbal behaviors. rarely displayed in face-to-face encounters because of cultural norms or laws. claims that in situations where there is a disagreement between spoken exchanges. flaming can be caused by the lack of extraverbal cues and by the insufficient multiplicity of channels in online communication These cues and multiplicity of channels. and hostile comments Third. and the nature of the social situation) Kiesler et al (1984) describe these social contextual cues as fostering less inhibited behaviors.

when an exchange should be seen as flaming or what the indicators of flaming should be remain debatable Crystal (2001) argues that those involved in flaming do not usually see their hot interchange and communicative activities.but other online participants do On the contrary. a "failed flame" (p 84) refers to a situation where the flamethrower's intent is toflame.75 conversations. arguments or discussions. the receiver negatively interprets the e-turns because the receiver expects the e-turns to be biased either by the flamethrower or the flamethrower's experience Although the discussion above includes the characteristics and causes of flaming. asflaming. and written exchanges as in e-turns. receiver's. for instance. an "inside flame" (p 84) is evident when the flamethrower's intent is to violate norms and the receiver . and third party's perception of the exchange First. insult. even though a violation is apparent to a third party Third. or highly emotional statement should not be interpreted as flaming if nobody in the interaction seems to take offense or be insulted by it For him. Avgennakou (2003) views flaming from an emic perspective He argues that a threat. a "missed flame" (p 84) occurs when the flamethrower's intent is to violate norms but the receiver does not perceive the message as a violation.but no one else views this message as a violation Second.flamingis a "co-constructed phenomenon emerging between interactants" (p 276) A flaming e-turn is one that appears to run contrary to the norms sanctioned by other participants and thus provokes their reaction The debate mentioned above about whether or not an exchange is seen as flaming leads O'Sulhvan and Flanagin (2003) to classify flaming into four main categories according to the flamethrower's.

to be specific. a "true flame" (p 85) is a message in which the flamethrower intentionally violates interactional norms and is perceived as violating those norms by the receiver as well as by third-party observers Effective flames. the flaming is unsuccessful. may be able to help explain the frequent occurrence offlamingin synchronous CMC. from the flamethrower's perspective. they point out the nature of both flaming and other-completed repair as socially disaffihative actions The findings from this study. are those that are perceived by the receiver on whom the flamethrower intentionally wanted his or her message to have a negative impact If those people do not perceive the flame (1 e. which focuses on other-completed repair in online communication.perceives that norms are violated. and because their self-awareness is reduced All of these reasons are believed to be caused by the fact that social cues and other cues are filtered out online (Culman & Markus. and the flamethrower may revise or elaborate his or her initial thought The flamethrower's verbal process of revising or elaborating the initial thought after an unsuccessful flaming can be understood as a repair or. 1987) Although the explanations for the frequent occurrence offlamingin synchronous CMC are drawn on speakers' conscious intention and therefore appear to be static. a self-repair I have argued above that flaming is an activity that is not what participants typically do face-to-face This is because participants in an online communication are less socially oriented toward the other participants. but the violation is not apparent to an outsider Fourth. from a conversation analytic perspective The lack of physical . because participants are socially anonymous. failed flaming and missed flaming).

a Carnegie Mellon University researcher. which are discussed below Emoticons. emotional icons. the final punctuation marks of each e-turn. and read sideways Normally.presence online.can result in the replacement of facial expressions with. gestures. a smiley face needs two keystrokes which. all emoticons are also known as smileys To produce emoticons. a mouth One additional keystroke. 2001) reportedly first appeared in online communication in 1982 when Scott Fahlman. 2001. also known as icons. 2008. which leads toflaming. though unnecessary. represents eyes and. or emoticons. Krohn. Provine. & . 2003. second. and the conventions of body posture and distance which are critical in expressing personal opinions and attitudes and in moderating social relationships (Baron. if any. One of the most distinctive features of synchronous CMC is the use of emoticons Emoticons. Spencer. one types punctuation marks (sometimes along with characters or numerals) to indicate facial expressions The punctuation marks that make up emoticons are typed in sequence on a single line. emoticons are icons used to express emotion in online chats because online chats lack facial expressions. typed ) in his message Because of their appearance. & von Grumbkow. Crystal. emotional icons (Wilson. then placed after. can be typed between the two keystrokes to add a nose to the face Some emoticons have hands (eg. " or w ) even though a participant types only two keystrokes As the name implies. Derks. among other things. first. 2004. Bos. 1993) or relational icons (Walther & D'Addano. intonation.

emoticons are consciously used to express the emotion of the participants. "although emoticons may be used to replicate non-verbal facial expressions. or irony. because of the typing process. it has been found that emoticons are used to strengthen the verbal part of a message that otherwise would be done facially They are also used to express humor. and to increase the warmth of the chats This use of emoticons reflects the conversational nature of synchronous CMC and the inadequacy of writing to express conversational intent There are many linguists and CMC researchers who study the effectiveness of emoticons Crystal (2001) identifies differences between facial expressions and emoticons in terms of consciousness of their online participants He believes that. to increase the richness of CMC. although facial expressions are considered to be among the most controllable of non-verbal cues. they are not non-verbal behavior" (p 329) . 2007. 1993) Besides. 2001. they are not as deliberate and voluntary as emoticons One example is when one may unconsciously smile. Wilson. but it is hard to imagine someone typing 0 with less awareness than of the words he or she is selecting To manually type texts that represent messages that are typically conveyed through the face is indeed conscious Walther & D'Addano conclude that. who comment that. jokes. Walther & D'Addano. and to function as a politeness device Other functions are to create rapport to minimize misunderstanding of e-turns. senders have to put time and effort into typing an emoticon This raises the question of whether emoticons really represent the true emotion of the sender Crystal's claim is supported by Walther and D'Addano (2001). which differs from facially expressed emotions To rephrase this claim.78 Mandell. to achieve socially oriented communication through typed text.

and body language at the same time. 1996a. can add to studies of emoticons in general as it reveals how participants take into account emoticons as parts of their interaction and establishment or reestabhshment of their mutual understandings Functioning as a code. emoticons may not be picked up by the receiver. emoticons are subject to misinterpretation. 2003). 1993) Moreover.1984. humor. and therefore the . in online chats. 1979. misunderstandings. and therefore repair When used as irony. Lerner. what appears in the dialog box is what other participants involved in the same chat room see and rely on when producing the next e-turn moment-by-moment. while these activities are presented linearly in online chats Also. while emoticons are electronically produced and textually interpreted in a linear fashion In ordinary talk. between receivers' interpretation of the emoticons and the emoticons to which senders attach intention (Wilson. the different places where senders put emoticons in their e-turn may have different emotional effects on a receiver The question regarding whether or not emoticons represent accurately the facial expressions of the users remains controversial in the field of CMC In either case. facial expressions. or politeness devices. consequently. participants speak and use prosody. participants interactively and simultaneously use both linguistic and non-linguistic cues to make themselves understood (Goodwin.1986. during ordinary talk. emoticons can cause mismatches between senders' actual feelings and the emoticons and.79 Differences between facial behaviors and emoticons are assumed to echo the shortcomings of the later When used as indicators of feelings. following an emic perspective. and is therefore what I as a researcher analyze Findings from this study. based on a CA perspective.

1993. may turn out to be face-threatening. as in the following example Example 22. one of many people who voted for it. emoticons represent the conversational nature of synchronous CMC and represent how participants try to adapt to the limits of web programs to imitate ordinary talk Emoticons are supposed to serve that very purpose.80 emotional impact on the receiver can be unexpected Humorous effects. such colleagues tended not to pick up the humorous tone. though the process and outcomes may be different Summary This chapter reviewed the literature on repair and synchronous CMC Repair occurs ubiquitously because sources of misunderstandings can include almost . 391) A anyone wanna buy some CPROS lottery tickets7 0 At a department in a university. there is a chance for misunderstandings to occur Regardless of a great chance for misinterpretation and emoticons' inaccurate representation of their users. there was a hot debate on whether lottery tickets should be sold More people that worked at the department voted for this activity A. sent out this e-message to everyone in the department This e-message was sent also to colleagues who disagreed on this departmental project who later interpreted this message as sarcasm In this situation. though A believed it was humorous Due to the varying pragmatic functions of emoticons and the receivers' possible misinterpretation. Emoticons (Wilson. for instance. p.

replacements of what is said with something within the same lexical class. languages. environments. reading. etc) A trouble source is visible to me. but rather how participants deal with them once they recognize them as a source of misunderstanding that hinders their online socializing Included in this chapter was a review of the sequence organization of conversational interaction It was intended to explain how people talk or communicate whether in an ordinary or mediated context Interaction consists of sequences of turns interactionally produced by participants during the course of conversation In this study.everything. an endless list of differences between participants. can arise from the medium itself or from shortcomings of the writing system for dealing with the new environment Again. etc) or internal to the ongoing talk (e g. e-turns in online chats. as the researcher. word searches. I am not exploring those in this dissertation. in addition to those mentioned in the last paragraph. violation of turntaking rules. only when it is recognized as such by participants in a conversation Troubles in typing. external (e g. and understanding can be observed in synchronous CMC Causes. to be more specific. I analyze turns or. that constitute the practice of repair The next chapter outlines the research methods employed in this study .

observational. sequence organization of conversational interaction.82 CHAPTER 3 DATA AND METHODOLOGY In the preceding chapter. a systematic analysis of the talk produced in everyday situations of human interaction. the focus of this dissertation. and computer-mediated communication was reviewed to provide the necessary general background on which this dissertation is based The current chapter demonstrates that CA. sources of misunderstandings. will be examined from a conversation analytic perspective It is the purpose of the current chapter to discuss the applications of CA to the study of both online interaction in general and repair in synchronous text-based talk in particular In order to accomplish this task. qualitative. through conversational data. participants. leads to understandings of social action and interaction Repair in synchronous CMC. and the language of the chats. and naturalistic in nature. data. units of analysis. has proved to be highly distinctive both in methodology and findings Its methodology. inspired by the intellectual development of ethnomethodology. it is necessary to systematically analyze participants' interaction in synchronous CMC Here. which was originated as a method for explicating primarily face-to-face talk. and data analysis . can be a potential method also for describing online human interaction Developed within a sociological domain. namely. electronic recordings and data collection. CA. which. has been descriptive. the methods and procedures for doing so are introduced in four sections. the literature on repair.

talk-in-interaction is a primordial site of sociality and a primary constituent of social life (Schegloff. this study analyzes data collected exclusively from electronic talk-in-interaction Therefore. Participants. 1991) Instead of examining conversational data collected from ordinary encounters as most CA researchers do. and competencies are what ordinary participants use and rely on in participating in intelligible. 2005) In contrast. socially organized interaction. the transcriptions are not a substitute for recordings. working with web chats does not require me to transcribe the interaction This is because chat scripts function as the data that capture and present original online interactional phenomena That is. two e-turns that respond relevantly to each . Seedhouse. the data in this study consist of chat scripts Chat scripts at first glance appear similar to the transcribed mundane talk that most CA researchers customarily analyze However. practices. talk-in-interaction has been recognized by CA researchers as a strategic setting in which social structure can be studied Indeed.83 Data. 1997. 1996) This yields high reliability (Perakyla. and competencies underlying the organization of social action and interaction rather than language itself Because norms. and Language of the Synchronous CMC Data As discussed. practices. at least. CA was developed to investigate norms. but a convenient way of looking at the conversational data I collected approximately seventy web chats from the participants I define one web chat as consisting of. what actually goes on in web chats and what participants actually see are adequately coded textually in the chats (Herring. theoretically. CA researchers working on ordinary talk need both transcriptions and recordings because.

and that the longer the interaction is. or when they do not log off over a long period of time during which they participate in several chats A web chat consists of chat scripts which are produced in the form of e-turns Some web chats were as short as consisting of a few e-turns. or when there is a long silence What counts as one web chat can be complicated when participants abruptly discontinue their chats. or stop chatting without bidding a farewell while not logging off from the chat program. when participants log off. the more chances it is subject to repairs Overall.84 other In other words. there are more than nine hundred and fifty pages of chat scripts analyzed in this study Some web chats were a result of one-time chats. while many were as long as comprising twenty pages or more In this study. one e-turn belongs to one participant and the other to the other participant One web chat typically starts when participants perform a summons-answer sequence after they log in or when they start talking to each other. a web chat ends with bidding a farewell (which is very rare). while some dyads participated in several online chats over an extensive period of time I have introduced what is considered data in this current study The chat scripts reflect the actual online interaction as it was produced moment-by-moment as a computer conversation emerged The next section will introduce the participants who produced the chats in their regular encounters . it is the long web chats in which repair practices were frequently found to operate This is due to the fact that repair is usually inserted into ongoing talk.

although they participated in the study. Italy. India. I never had any contact with them The participants interacted in their ordinary online encounters What they produced reveals the structural organization of human sociality which this study further explores In addition. Indonesia. undergraduate. and the majority of the participants had met their co-participants mperson before they started chatting online Each party consisted of at least one Thai student. who chat with their Thai friends or non-Thai friends Their non-Thai friends are from China. to whom I was introduced by the Royal Thai Embassy I contacted them to request their chat scripts I consider them primary participants Each of these Thai students may have had a different co-participant in each chat room I consider the primary participants' coparticipants to be secondary participants because. Malaysia. and UK The participants have known each other for quite some time. this study explores how English functions as an international language The next subsection gives more details about the language of these online interactions . for instance. through school or work. or graduate students in American and British universities. because their interactions were in English. South Korea. the US.85 Participants There were thirty-five parties participating in this study The majority of the parties were composed of two participants in each channel. Canada. only two web chats consisted of three participants The majority of the participants were Thai ESL.

Thai. which . it did not last throughout the whole computer conversation The participants sometimes used words from another language (e g. they always used English as the medium of interaction Foreign languages (e g. particles. though this was rare and when it did occur. other participants spoke English either as a second or as a foreign language These foreign students had lived or lived in either the US or UK for an extensive period of time Having been admitted to a program where English was used as the medium of instruction and having lived in English-speaking countries for quite some time suggests that their English language proficiency was sufficient enough for them to communicate on a regular basis The next section presents how data were collected in this study Electronic Recordings and Data Collection This is a naturalistic observational study exploring mundane situations of human communication that were mediated by the internet This subsection. Chinese) were used sometimes in the web chats. they were transcribed wordby-word and later glossed as a sentence underneath by me Some participants sometimes romanized the spelling of non-English words or expressions. but this was rare Besides the American and Canadian participants. and words signifying the gender of participants) in e-turns that had been so far constructed in English or in one-word e-turns When some words or some e-turns were produced in Thai.Language of the synchronous CMC The majority of the web chats were produced in English Although there were a few dyads who were both Thais.

I contacted the participants. to forward them. to save them on their computers. unless the participants change the record option Participants can go back later to read their chat scripts. they are not allowed to make changes in the script itself once their chat scripts are recorded All the data that were collected are chat scripts that were recorded long before I was introduced to the participants This ensures that they are naturally occurring discourse To collect their chat scripts. than that of an experimental approach because CA researchers employ naturally occurring conversations as the basis for their research All web chats took place in a chat program Chat programs typically allow participants to chat and provide them with technological options (e g. the display of the participants' and their coparticipants availability. chat programs automatically save the chat scripts for a certain period of time on the chat messenger This means that the chat programs record the whole computer conversation as it emerges. deserves less space than others in this section and. a list of emoticons.describes how the data were collected. certainly. etc) By default. or to delete them However. provided them with instructions on how to retrieve their chat scripts from the chat programs. and photo and file sharing. and asked them to send the chat scripts to me The chronological process of data collection is illustrated below . image displays. voice and video calls.

88 Ordinary online social interaction (1 e. participants chatted before the researcher contacted them] \y Chat scripts (1 e. which represent repair practices Units of Analysis The chat scripts were analyzed to locate repair practices Specifically. this dissertation studies e-turns that are sequenced in the practice of repair That is. picked the time to chat. each time participants chat there are chat scripts which are stored in their chat programs) \y Data Collection (1 e. chat scripts) Figure 3 1 The data collection process Because the participants chatted long before I contacted them. I did not prompt reasons for conversation The participants freely chose with whom they wanted to chat. as . negotiated their participatory roles. I did not intervene in their chats and. the participants mutually oriented to their chats and collaborated in order to achieve meaningful communication After the data were collected. managed the direction and flow of conversation. voluntary submission of chat scripts from the participants) \y Data (1 e. and decided how long a chat should take That is. they were analyzed from a conversation analytic perspective Before I demonstrate how the chat scripts were analyzed. therefore. it is important to understand the units of analysis. set up topics.

if any. or whether there is an abandonment of the repair. if any. it is essential to include e-turns following a repair-completion To sum up. some trouble sources do not necessarily lead to repair A trouble source e-turn is usually followed by an e-turn(s) designed by a participant or participants to initiate and complete a repair In order to observe the outcome of repair. that in synchronous CMC begins with an eturn at which the cause of problematic understanding or trouble source is located Recall that repair can be initiated without a trouble source and. the organization of repair covers a sequence of eturns starting from a trouble-source e-turn. which can be illustrated below Prior turn Trouble source or repairable item Repair-initiation Repair-completion Outcome Continued talk B A B A B A turn 1 turn 2 turn 3 turn 4 Figure 3 2 Sample of repair sequence in synchronous CMC Figure 3 2 shows the sequential relationship between a trouble source. repairmitiation. whether it is successful. on the other hand. and repair-completion This is one of the typical organizations of repair in . and ending with an outcome eturn. the unit of analysis in this study is the e-turn Like the organization of repair in everyday talk.89 was previously discussed. whether there is a solution.

it is necessary to discuss what I mean by an emic perspective An emic perspective contributes to CA by demonstrating that any interactional behavior can be examined from the inside of the system and during the investigation In other words. it may take fewer e-turns when the repair is abandoned. as discussed in chapter 2 I have presented how e-turns function as repair. and how e-turns are connected during the course of repair It is within e-turns that repair practices occur. which may be more incoherently organized or topically multidirectional.90 computer conversation However. or if repair-initiation does not specifically locate the trouble source Some of these points may be more likely in computer conversation. I employed an emic perspective Before I demonstrate how an emic perspective was applied in this study. there are two possible interrelated. a repair may take more e-turns. or if a repair-initiation specifies the trouble source On the other hand. CA researchers can obtain views internal to the talk by including those who participate in the talk Participants are believed to be able to provide such an . if it is a self-repair or an other-completed repair completed within one turn. the unit of analysis To so do. and thus the e-turn is the unit of analysis The next section demonstrates how the chat scripts were analyzed Data Analysis The data analysis process started with how to locate repair. if repair is initiated much later. how repair practice as a course of social action occupies several e-turns. simultaneous analytical practices when CA researchers approach data First.

such as interviewing the participants or having them fill in questionnaires.91 internal view because they are familiar with the conversational patterns and organizations and know how to function within them Involving the participants. talk-in-progress is problematic only . or both From an emic perspective. in other words. a recipient who does not understand the current turn or does not think that the current turn has been understood as intended usually takes the next turn either to initiate or complete a repair. each turn provides a display of the speaker's understandings A participant whose turn is misunderstood ordinarily takes the next turn either to initiate or complete a repair. but instead uses close analysis of how participants formulate and organize their turns This leads to the second practice which argues that analysts can access an emic perspective in the details of the interaction by adopting the same perspective as the participants to the way the interaction is organized Close analysis of the recordings of talk-in-interaction and transcripts can display in detail the actions participants perform as the talk itself emerges This is because participants document their social actions in the details of the interaction These two simultaneous practices reveal to CA researchers the participants' analysis of the organization of action and understanding in interaction In the case of repair in each sequence of talk or discourse. participants display their analysis and understandings of the prior talk and its conduct as they take a turn That is. allows the analyst to understand the talk-in-progress through participants' membership knowledge-in-use and their understanding of the procedural infrastructure of interaction This practice does not include data collection techniques. or both In the same way.

Gary7 Chris I told my mom. I treat only those instances that result in repair as trouble sources The participants in this chat did not treat either times or frist as trouble sources Close . from an analysts' perspective. for instance. Extract 3. my brother was cool with he but 1 told him (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) really quickly and changed the subject Dave your mom is Japanese.92 when it is detected and treated as such by participants Therefore. KSU-A (2009) Chris oh' I talked to my family last week Dave OH Dave how was that 7 Chris weird Chris my mom is so weird TS Chris but. give her times Dave wait 01 SC Dave you told your bro frist7. in order to take the participants' perspective. an e-turn is considered to contain a repairable item only when participants make it clear that there is a trouble source . frist in e-turn 9) which. there is an ungrammatical usage (e g.by initiating and/or completing a repair. in this study. could be potential trouble sources However. times in e-turn 7) and a misspelled word (e g . then told my twin In Extract 3.

1 e. here) is located in e-turn 2 and is owned by Matt The repair is initiated in turn 3 (I e. I as an analyst can identify whether it is self or other who does the initiating In Extract 3.93 analysis of this excerpt reveals that there is a trouble source in e-turn 6. but to initiate a repair Where7 functions as a repair initiator which reveals that the TS precedes it Where7 responds relevantly to here (e-turn 2) as here represents a problem with deixis Because Tina does not . the repair is other-initiated. where7) by Tina This where7 is not used by Tina to request additional information. occurring in e-turns 8-9 Extract 4 provides another example Extract 4: FI-AR-UP (2009-5/29) Tina l just found out they have a very good deal for one mostunzer I need TS 01 TS 01 SC Matt theres a sephora at the local mall here Tina where7 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Matt the mall here Tina which mall7 near me7 Matt no near me Tina o Extract 4 shows that the TS (I e. whether Chris talked to his mom or brother first about his problem The next step is to identify repair-initiation which is related to the trouble source Repair-initiation typically locates the source of misunderstanding By locating the TS and the repair initiation.

when the previous repair does not work) and that these two TS's are connected Matt's e-turn 6 solves the trouble in understanding here This extract demonstrates that once the trouble source is identified. you can drtive thru not FLY thru 1 year in Japanmust be difficult for you (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) . this repair-initiation is also other-initiated Although Matt s e-turn 4 is designed to repair what Tina initiates. Matt's e-turn 4 would reasonably be understood as a more proper repair-completion because he may have thought that Tina did not hear his eturn 2 However. his e-turn 4 in synchronous CMC repeats what he just types in eturn 2. repair-initiation can be categorized either as self-initiated repair or other-initiated repair Another analysis is demonstrated below Extract 5: KSU-A (2009) Joe Joe Tim Tim Tim Joe Joe TS Joe long distance relationship SUCKS trust me we are long distance right now. which at any time could be reread by scrolling up the screen Tina's e-turn 5 is therefore specifically designed to re-initiate repair (I e.own the TS. though 2 hours O well. it does not do so If this interaction had occurred face-to-face. other-initiated repair) It can be seen that her e-turn 5 is used to locate the initial TS which is in e-turn 2 and then another trouble source in turn 4 (I e.

95 OC Tim Tim Joe it's not a full year and i'm coming back in between oh then it's great (9) (10) (11) Extract 5 reveals that a trouble source is located in e-turn 8 which specifically is 1 year 1 year is a factual error which leads to repair Notice that the misspellings in e-turn 6 and the lack of a space between words in e-turn 8 do not lead to repairs This excerpt shows two things understanding the meaning is typically what is important in repair and the fact that the analyst only sees something as a trouble source if the participants make it clear that it was a trouble source . which is the purpose of Chapters 4 and 5 Summary This chapter has presented the research methods implemented in this study I have shown above what is considered data I have also demonstrated how electronic data were collected and will be analyzed from a conversation analytic . other-completed repair in the above excerpt is unusual in face-to-face talks Whether it is a common occurrence in the online chats is a question that can only be addressed by examining more data.by repairing it Recall that there are four types of repair (see Chapter 2) The only type found in this excerpt is other-completed repair.1977) Thus the stand-alone. while there is neither self-initiated repair nor other-initiated repair Previous research has shown that othercompleted repair is usually preceded by either self-initiated repair or other-initiated repair (Schegloff et al .

self-initiated othercompletion and other-initiated other-completion.point of view. both of which are types of othercompleted repair . that is. I examined closely when and how troubles in talk were detected and completed by the participants This again emphasizes the emic approach in CA I would like to emphasize the usefulness of CA as a potential method for analyzing synchronous online interaction as done in this study The next chapter examines the issue of other-completed repair in the data in more detail. which values naturalism and an emic perspective To locate repair.

self-completed repair is preferred. other-completed repair customarily follows either self. (2) (1) .CHAPTER 4 VARIATIONS OF OTHER-COMPLETED REPAIR IN SYNCHRONOUS CMC In the last chapter. the one thet wrote / / that piece. especially other-initiated other-completion. Watts on. while other-completed repair is dispreferred. p.. 364): TS SI B He had dis uh Mistuh W-whatever k-I can't think of his first name.1 emphasized the fact that because of the structural and social bias. are self-initiated other-completion and othermitiated other-completion Recall that in Chapter 2. then. which is extremely rare in face-to-face talk This chapter is organized into the five main sections corresponding to five variations of other-completed repair that have been found in this study Self-Initiated Repair and Distanced Other-Completed Repair This section concerns self-initiated other-completion This pattern is shown in Example 23 Example 23: Self-initiated other-completion (Schegloff et al. I outlined the research methods implemented in this study This chapter is intended to present the turn design and sequential organization of other-completed repair found in synchronous CMC In everyday talk. 1977.or other-initiated repair The two practices.

resumes the same turn (turn 1. Watts) This practice of self-initiated other-completion is considered successful Example 23 demonstrates self-imtiated other-completion which can be found now and then in face-to-face talk. e g. the other-completed repair was found to immediately follow self-initiated repair or. and other-completed repair In synchronous CMC. the one thet wrote // that piece) In the second turn. B cannot think of a man's name when due B then does a wordsearch (turn 1) which is unsuccessful. self-initiated other-completion is frequently found Like selfmitiated other-completion in face-to-face talk.OC A Dan Watts (3) In Example 23. 1977) In my data. as opposed to its counterpart. while other-initiated other-completion is rarer The infrequent occurrence of other-completed repair in face-to-face talk echoes the fact that it is dispreferred. self-completed repair. which is more preferred and therefore occurs more frequently (Schegloff et al. self-initiated repair. self-initiated other-completion in synchronous CMC has three components a trouble source. A performs other-completed repair by providing B with the first name and then partially repeating part of the previous turn (I e. in many cases. the evidence is / can't think of his first name B. after that. to follow several e-turns that separate it from the self-imtiated repair In other words. there may be e-turns interpolated between the self-initiation e-turn and the other-completion eturn This is presented in Extract 6 .

that is. he then resumes talking about purchasing new calculators without further correcting himself Witnessing Tony being unable to spell correctly the name of the classmate twice (e-turns 3 and 4) and being asked for help (e-turn 6). I e. l e. he provides Tony with the right name Lines 9-11 indicate . Dan takes e-turn 8 to solve the problem. Xiaochen). Xiaocheng) Then he types again the name in e-turn 4 (l e.Extract 6: EA (2009-4/5) Tony You want me to buy for you or you can go to amazon and do that (1) Tony it's up to you 0 TS SI Tony I brought one for Xiaocheng Tony Xiaochen Dan Ok. I want one too (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Tony I dont know how to spell © Tony You want me to buy for you 7 0C Dan Xiao Shan Tony oh Tony Ok c} Tony Xiao Shan 0 Extract 6 illustrates self-initiated other-completion in synchronous CMC Tony and Dan talk about purchasing new calculators on one website Telling Dan that he bought one already for their mutual classmate. though unsuccessfully before calling for help from Dan (e-turn 6. he corrects himself. / dont know how to spell 0 ) In e-turn 7. Tony misspells that classmate's name in e-turn 3 (l e.

e-turn 4) and other-completion e-turn (1 e. eturn 8).100 that the repair is successful It can also be observed that there are several e-turns between the self-initiation e-turn (1 e. though Nick uses the word . and 7) belong to both participants Several extracts from the collected data demonstrate the same phenomenon as follows Extract 7: UP (TN 2009 28/34) Nick so would u mind further explaining what u meant by u were attracted to me during onentaiton Val TS SI Val Val l guess I was interested is that the same as attracted7 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) Nick in meeting me 7 Nick Val OC interested in waht away in getting to know you Nick yea. Val questions her own use of interested in the previous e-turn. and that these interpolated e-turns (e-turns 5.6. is that the same as attracted7). Nick and Val talk about their first meeting during the orientation for new students at their school The TS is located in the third e-turn Following that TS e-turn. she is not certain whether interested or attracted should be used to describe her feeling in the fourth e-turn (l e. that's attracted Nick but l thin there are different types of attraction In Extract 7.

yea. Nick does an other-completed repair Below. p 319) in the repairable or ultimately as an other-initiated repair Extract 8: T-TXT (2009-3/9) Fred i'm watching Olympic Ken Ken Ken TS oo me too well not right this sec (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) © Fred i'm watching swimming Ken which event7 Fred now SI Fred how to call Fred haha . Nick asks her one question in e-turn 6 (l e. but to complete the sentence Val left incomplete in e-turn 3 To help Val solve the problem. that's attracted) that he believes is the right word In other words. self-initiated repair) The recipient's question (e-turn 15) functions as a "candidate understanding" (Heritage. is another extract in which other asks a question after self has initiated repair (l e. interested m waht away) Val's answer in e-turn 7 (I e. / was interested) Note that Nick's e-turn 5 is not designed to help Val solve the word selection problem. Extract 8.attracted earlier in the first e-turn and though Val corrected Nick following that eturn (e-turn 3. m getting to know you) leads Nick to provide the word in e-turn 8 (l e . 1984.

which could be 100m. team (e-turn 12). Fred cannot answer this question. / 'm watching swimming) Ken's which event7 is an information-seeking question used to seek further information about the swimming Fred watches The which event question makes it conditionally relevant for Fred to provide an answer. and 4 people (eturn 13) In e-turn 15. possibly because he may not remember it or does not know the answer Fred's responses are the description of the swimming he watches which is men (e-turn 10). Ken's yea h (eturn 16) and l saw that (e-turn 17) imply that 400m7 was intended as an othercompleted repair .102 Fred Ken Fred Fred Ken OC OC Ken Ken Ken men © team 4 people ooohhfun'" 400m 7 yeah I saw that (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) Extract 8 illustrates a self-initiated other-completion Fred and Ken talk about swimming in the 2008 Olympics Ken's follow-up question in e-turn 6 (I e. though this question actually is not the repairable The TS actually is located in e-turn 5 (I e. which event7) leads to repair-initiation. 400m7). however. 400m. 200m. etc However. after waiting for the answer Ken does what seems to be other-initiated repair in the form of a question (I e.

In conclusion. 1977) TS 01 SC Gary so what'dya think of the news7 John what news7 Gary yihknow about the election7 John o-*uh*'ste rnble isn't it. other-initiated other-completion in synchronous CMC. other can initiate repair in the turn subsequent to the TS turn as found in second-position repair This gives self an opportunity tofixthe problem or. it has been observed in this section that self-initiated othercompletion. the other-completion eturn is relatively distant from the TS e-turn and from the self-initiation e-turn Finally. repair tends to be successful In the following section. once other-completed repair is performed. in other words. (1) (2) (3) (4) In Example 24. do self-completed repair This is exemplified in Example 24 Example 24: Second-position repair (Schegloff etal.. other-completed repair is placed in an e-turn that is several eturns away from the self-initiation e-turn In other words. can be located in synchronous CMC Additionally. is introduced Other-Initiated Repair and Distanced Other-Completed Repair In other-initiated other-completion. which can be found in everyday talk. a counterpart of self-initiated other-completion. John asks a question which functions as other-initiated repair in the turn subsequent to the TS turn Doing so gives Gary an opportunity to repair it (l e. .

self-completed repair) in the third turn It is observed that three components of the practice of repair, namely, trouble source (turn 1), other-initiated repair (turn 2), and self-completed repair (turn 3), are placed adjacently to one another This example illustrates other-initiated self-completion which is not uncommon in everyday talk, while other-initiated other-completion is rarer and the rarest of all types of repair However, it can be frequently identified in synchronous CMC, as presented below

Extract 9- UP-SO-MA-TH (2009-5/14)
Pam Pam Bill Bill Pam Pam Bill Bill Bill Bill Pam l want that sentence to have real meaning "back to mind blowing sex" literally lol meaning u wanna go back 7 or u jus want some either way it's been too long I wont be picky haha goin through withdrawl I see lol picky wats that mean ull do it w / anybody l'mjing (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

In Extract 9, the TS is located in e-turn 6 (l e, it's been too long l wont be picky) To locate specifically the TS, in e-turn 8 Bill repeats the word picky before in the

following e-turn asking Pam to clarify it (1 e, wats that mean) Bill s wats that mean functions as other-initiated repair which demands repair-completion After that, Bill completes the repair (1 e, other-completed repair) in e-turn 10 (1 e, ull do it w/ anybody) This is acknowledged by Pam's response in e-turn 11 (1 e, l'mjmg) Other-initiated other-completion is not only found to frequently occur in synchronous CMC, but to sometimes have a unique organization Extract 10 shows that there are interpolated e-turns between the other-initiation e-turn and othercompletion e-turn

Extract 10: FI-AR-UP (2009-x/29) Gale so we gonna meet on tuesday and fnday, Saturday too 7 (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)

Tom yep Gale Tom Tom Gale Gale TS wow u ok with that 7 u did say u wanted more of me yep the more the better

Tom waht if u get too much of me, and won't let me go 7 Gale haha is that call "too much" waht if ginger or darcy try to get more of me7

01

Gale Tom

Tom what if dr house wants more of me7 OC Gale l thought "too much" means u dont want it anymore

106 Tom these are qs u need to ask Tom lol Gale Gale Gale well, I need to ask7 those questions r for u to decide not me (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20)

Tom lol Tom but u never answered

In Extract 10, too much introduced to the chat by Tom in e-turn 8 seems to be problematic for Gale Gale takes e-turn 10 to initiate a repair (I e, other-initiated repair) Her is that call "too much" (e-turn 10) requires Tom to explain the meaning of too much However, Tom uses the next two e-turns (e-turns 11 and 12) to complete his series of questions which he begins in e-turn 8 Gale then defines the meaning of too much in e-turn 13 Her definition, although it may not be completely accurate, functions as other-completed repair which remains ignored by Tom One more extract below demonstrates the practice of other-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair

Extract 11: CH-FR-RA (2009-1/18) Will Joe Joe Will Hi Joe, I have a quick question for you hey what's up 7 Do you know how much an oil change costs7 (1) (2) (3) (4)

107 Joe TS Will 15~20, sometimes you get it less than 10 I am offered $22,300 with a trunk tray from Honda in Brighton (30 minutes away from AA) while Fishcer in Ypsi offers 22,500 without accessory But they have 10 times free oil change Will Joe 01 Joe Joe Joe Will OC SC Joe Will Will really 7 with services 7 oh, only oil change you're buying a truck 7 l see okok nope sorry truck tray an Accord yes (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (5)

In Extract 11, the TS is located in e-turn 6 when Will tells Joe about his car offer and price There is a misunderstanding about a part of a car or truck located in this e-turn (l e, trunk tray) Joe may have confused a trunk tray with a truck tray (e-turn 9) A trunk tray is a plastic tray that is put in the trunk of a sedan car, while a truck tray is a rectangle metal container that is a part of a truck or is attached to a truck Although these two words fall into the same semantic class, these two parts mark different types of vehicles Then, Joe initiates repair (I e, other-initiated repair) in e-turn 9 and completes repair (l e, other-completed repair) in e-turn 13 Also, self-completed repair is found in e-turn 14, one e-turn immediately following other-completed repair

though competing for an e-turn to do so is not required in synchronous CMC In other words. another variation of other-completed repair. while the most immediate other-completed repair point occurs when other-initiated repair and other-completed repair are in the same e-turn. there is an inherent structural bias that allows self-completed repair to occur more often than other-completed repair because self . other performs othercompleted repair which is contiguous with other-initiated repair This is the focus of this section In everyday conversation. 1 e. is introduced Other-Completed Repair Completed in One E-turn The previous section suggests that other can complete a repair far after. other-initiated repair) This is considered the furthest other-completed repair point from the initiation point. what remains unclear is whether self-completed repair responds to other-initiated repair or unsuccessful other-completed repair I have suggested that other-initiated other-completion occurs in synchronous CMC in different variations One variation this section reveals is called othermitiated repair and distanced other-completed repair It occurs when there are eturns inserted between the other-initiation e-turn and the other-completion e-turn These inserted e-turns reflect an opportunity for se//to complete the repair. othercompleted repair performed within one e-turn. the other-completion e-turn is deferred several e-turns away from where it is due In the next section. or several e-turns away from. where he initiates it (1 e.108 Although what is clear from this extract is that other-completed repair can precede self-completed repair.

109 still holds the floor (Seedhouse. Sam in e-turn 4 omits the subject of the sentence. which leads Katie to think that Sam has told himself that he must not walk home alone Her Why7 in e- . 2004) This allows same-turn repair and transitionspace repair to be developed without being interrupted by other or competed for by other Another reason is that other-completed repair is face-threatening and thus dispreferred (Lerner. where other both identifies and later resolves the problem within one e-turn. as in Extract 12 Extract 12: T-UC (2009-1/177) Sam how r u 7 fine (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Katie I'm Sam TS Sam just got back from the teaching must be careful not going home alone Katie Why7 Sam Sam OC the guys might u questions © better go with friends Katie Oh'You mean me7 Thanks © Sam how's the food made by u7 Katie 555 Sam lmeanu yes In Extract 12. 1996b) (the issue of face-threatening act in regard to ordinary encounters and electronic communication will be discussed more in Chapter 5) This section deals exclusively with other-initiated other-completion.

other-initiated repair) by asking You mean me7. then. but instead of having Tom complete the repair. You mean me7\s an other-initiated repair that allows the owner of the TS to carry out self-completed repair. Katie completes it within the same e-turn Katie's Thanks © implies that she resolves the trouble and that the practice of repair is terminated Extract 13 presents another example of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair performed within one e-turn Extract 13: T-UC (2009-26/177) TS Jess I had finished the book ka DCL TS Jess Don Jess Jess Jess How about you7 hello Did u finish it7 Today. Katie initiates a repair (l e. the guys might u questions ©) displays to Katie that her initial understanding of e-turn 5 is faulty The pronoun u indicates that in his previous turns. he warns Katie that she should not walk home alone In eturn 8. e-turn 6 (1 e. which locates the repairable in Sam's prior talk You mean plus a possible understanding of the trouble in the prior e-turn is a very strong locator of the TS In this extract.turn 5 appears to be a sequentially appropriate response to Sam s e-turn 4 Her Why7 should be taken as a forwarding or go ahead response allowing to Sam to continue his talk and therefore to provide additional information As the talk continues. We have Suki for dinner It's so delicious"'>"'> >' © (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1) .

the book in e-turn 1. he is not certain about which book she is talking because he has so many books (in e-turn 7. who lives in the USA Trouble in understanding is caused by the use of the noun phrase. so he sent one from his country to Jess. Don initiates a repair (l e. talk about the same book both have Don had two copies of this book. and he completes other- . other-initiated repair) by asking which book (I e. international students. i have many books) In e-turn 7. because Jess may have assumed that Don knows which book she is talking about However.Ill OI-OR Don which book71 have many books 1finishedsmall ones by naowarat pongpaiboon Jess SC/TS Jess OR Don um the one u send to me math short stories I have read many chapters but a few more to read Jess Jess © I went to your blog (10) (11) (12) (7) (8) (9) Don reading many books at the same times two books by tantai and one by nn Jess Don Jess There is a new group blog by win me but not any blog in it (13) (14) (15) (16) Extract 13 illustrates two incidents of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair that are performed within one e-turn Jess and Don. which book7) Jess is talking about.

i finished small ones by naowarat pongpaiboon) That is. the process of repair is revealed to self once it is completed The next section introduces one variation of other-completed repair that is similar to one-e-turn other-completed repair but is found to occur relatively often in synchronous CMC . while previous research has shown that it is rare in face-to-face encounters Moreover. the one u send to me Her the one u send to me can be plausibly taken as another trouble source because she may have forgotten the name of the book This TS leads to the second other-completed repair to be performed. which is evident when in e-turn 9 she says. here it was shown that other-completed repair can be completed within one e-turn The process of other-completed repair completed within one e-turn is not observed by participants other than its owner. though he does not wait but completes other-repair This section has presented evidence to show that other-repair occurs frequently in synchronous CMC. which is a candidate understanding This candidate understanding may or may not be acknowledged by Jess.112 completed repair (1 e. again. he provides the name of the book (math short stories). he performs other-completed repair within one e-turn Another incident of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair in one e-turn occurs later in this excerpt Although Don performs other-completed repair. in the case of othercompleted repair within one e-turn. it does not engage se//in the process That is. still the book is not the same one about which Jess is talking. by Don within one e-turn (e-turn 10) At the beginning of e-turn 10. therefore.

I have used examples given by Heritage (1984) to elaborate on some activities that are grouped under other-initiated repair Example 25: Other-initiated repair and oh (Heritage. 1984 p. 1984. while the difference is that this new variation of repair is performed over two consecutive e-turns Before I introduce this variation. hh F S A wee k from (0 3) this coming Saturdee Yeah When didjuwant'ertih come do wrn Lhhh oh any time (2) (3) (4) (1) 0 F hhh oh (5) Example 25 shows that the trouble source is located in turn 2.Other-Completed Repair Performed Over Two Consecutive E-turns The previous section showed how other-initiated other-completion is performed within one e-turn This section presents a similar pattern where repair is performed by the other. I e. F invites S either to confirm or disconfirm the proposal (turn 4) Heritage considers understanding check as a . 318) F S between now en nex' Saturday. which can be either the coming Saturday or the Saturday after F then proposes a remedy for the trouble by producing an "understanding check" (Heritage. hh. p 318) which proposes a solution to that problem By producing an understanding check in turn 3 of what S had intended in turn 2. nex'Saturday. to avoid confusion.

though in Example 26. oh is produced by other to reflect a change of state from not knowing to knowing (Heritage. the owner of the TS disconfirms M's proposal of a solution to the trouble M's first turn is an understanding check intended to propose a remedy for the trouble B then corrects M's understanding The repair found in Example 26 is thus an other-initiated selfcompletion In brief. the two examples from Heritage (1984) point out that other can propose a candidate understanding which is considered an other-initiated repair which will be evaluated by se//(i e.hhhh Ah hhh fer dinner yih mean7 Hh No not fer dinner h= =oh Example 26 is similar to Example 25.114 repair-initiated repair. self-completed repair) Whether the proposal (l e. p. B. 1984) . other-initiated repair) is confirmed or disconfirmed by self. 319) B So we thought thet yihknow= =if you wanna come on over early C'mon over M B M hhhh. 1984. yeah implies confirmation in turn 4). while either a confirmation or disconfirmation should be viewed as self-completed repair Whether S confirms or disconfirms the candidacy of understanding (here. F uses oh as a changeof-state token to complete the understanding-check sequence One more example is given below Example 26: Other-initiated repair and oh (Heritage.

she initiates a . other-initiated repair).115 I now turn to other-completed repair that is completed over two consecutive e-turns. which turns out to be problematic because Jess does not know what types of shopping or goods he is asking about In other words. and completes the repair in the very next e-turn. as in the following Extract 14: UP (JU-RE. other takes one e-turn to initiate a repair (1 e. Rob explains to Jess how cold the winter in the USA is. the question is not specific enough So in the fifth e-turn. before he asks her when she wants to go shopping (e-turn 4). 2009-4/10) Jess Rob Jess TS 01 OC Rob Jess Jess Jess Jess Jess anyone take me back to thailand pleasesesessssssssss sorry there is no way l can leave my room in that weather yea wen are you going to go shopping7 clothes7 I dont know yet unclear emoticon my thai friends can take me shopping on thanksgiving but the family I lived with I cant really tell when will they have time Jess I just wish there is some kinda of outlet around l can go by myself Rob hmmdontkno (10) (11) (9) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) In Extract 14.

Jess's e-turn 6 assumes that it is the right word that makes Rob's question less problematic and more specific Her answer / don't know yet responds appropriately to the question asked by Rob. othercompleted repair) which is done in the e-turn that immediately follows her initiation in e-turn 5 Although clothes7 (I e. clothes7) She makes the initial question by Rob more specific by proposing one possible candidate (1 e. and her e-turn 5 is designed to let Rob know that the initial question is problematic Because Rob does not respond to e-turn 5. even though she does not wait for Rob's acceptance This practice can be observed in the following extracts Extract 15: CNL (2009-12/13) TS 01 OC Lisa Jane Jane When will u get back here u mean bkk/ don't know yet Extract 16: WARW-UK-AP (2009-2/12) TS Pat How is the atmosphere there 7 . it is reasonable to assume that what Jess proposes as a candidate understanding is correct. she provides the answer in e-turn 6 Her answer in e-turn 6 indicates that she completes the repair (1 e. Rob's question is then heard as yea wen are you going to go shopping for clothes7 Without waiting to hear from Rob whether or not clothes is what Rob meant. other-initiated repair). other-initiated repair) by asking if he means clothes shopping (1 e. other-initiated repair) in e-turn 5 remains unanswered by Rob.repair (1 e.

if he wants.117 Pat 01 is it good 7 means kmutt ler 7 Q Chad 'there' there means kmutt. take the e-turn next to other-initiated repair to perform self-completed repair However. right 7 OC Chad ft) "Ui 16 111 kmutt lau yet not have gone DCL I have not gone to KMUTT yet yes Pat Extracts 15-16 illustrate how other-initiated other-completion is performed in two consecutive e-turns This practice is similar to other-completed repair done in everyday talk in that self can. this practice is different from the other-completed repair within one e-turn because the latter does not allow se//to observe if there is trouble in the talk and possibly complete a repair There are two more extracts below that illustrate other-completed repair performed over two consecutive e-turns Extract 17: FL-JU-NA (2009-1/1) TS Kate it's ok 1 just want to tell you one thing Today 1 went to the temple Kate 01 01 OC Lisa Lisa Lisa I am good. thanks which temple 7 in West Palm 7 never heard of that (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) .

Lisa It's near Orlando (6) Extract 18: FL-JU-NA (2009-1/2) TS Mel Deb 01 OC Deb Deb I will check my posting on pantip l don't know if l use correct word correct word7 which posting7 the one l read7 nothing wrong m na EMP nsiQ Discussion Boards/Blog at DCL Mel Deb yess I read ur Katuu (Discussion Boards) na DCL lii | mma-anqi* ifh Itf fin OXi not know English they use word what I don't know which English word which should be used nothing wrong l understand jar DCL Mel Deb Deb Briefly. there is a relevant and sequential relationship between the TS e-turn and the other-initiation e-turn. gives self an opportunity to complete repair Second. se//is not involved in the practice of repair even though other. and between the other-initiation e-turn and the other- . three observations are made here First. the other-initiation e-turn and other-completion e-turn are adjacently placed Third. by composing one e-turn that functions as othermitiation and making it visible to self.

1987. Jo replaces what Pat said with . found in online chats In ordinary talk.119 completion e-turn The next section introduces the last variation of other-completed repair found in synchronous CMC. 87) TS Pat the Black Muslims are certainly more provocative than the Black Muslims ever were OC c} Jo Pat Jo "=) Pat Jo The Black Panthers The Black Panthers What'dl You said the Black Muslims twice Did I really7 Yes you di d. other may replace what was previously said by se//(e g. while the intended second referent is Black Panthers The intended word is supplied by Jo in the turn right after the TS turn (I e. wrong information) with what he believes is right This is similar to correction. immediate other-completed repair. that is. p. which Schegloff et al (1977) define as "the replacement of error or a mistake by what is right" (p 363) This can be demonstrated below Example 27: Correction (Jefferson. Black Muslims) twice in turn 1. immediate other-completed repair Immediate Other-Completed Repair This section presents the last variation of other-completed repair. Pat uses the same word (I e. namely. but that's alright I forgive you (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) In Example 27. turn 2) That is.

Black Panthers in turn 3) This replacement is known as an (X. while Y for an alternative It is noteworthy that Jo's replacement of Black Panthers in turn 2 discontinues their ongoing talk because the speakers now are doing the business of correction (turns 3-6) Jefferson (1987) refers to this practice as "exposed correction" and draws attention to the fact that. Y. Yes you di d. Black Panthers in turn 2) 3 Pat produces an alternative (I e. regardless of how or by whom the correction is done" (p 97) Turn 6 (l e. "there is room for accounting. repeated below. Black Muslims in turn 1) 2 Jo produces an alternative (l e. 1998). where X stands for an initial term. but that's alright 1 forgive you) functions to acknowledge the mistake and correction Exposed correction is frequently found in synchronous CMC Extract 2. once exposed correction is made. presents exposed correction Extract 2: MK-Chat (2009-25/48) Alice I feel sorry to see you alone in office hours © Alice no one coming TS OC Paula © So I can do other stuffs Alice Did you know what Jane's teacher just told us that there is no such thing as stuffs (4) (1) (2) (3) .120 the correct word The series word replacement found in this example can be outlined below 1 Pat produces an object (1 e. Y) series (Jefferson.

121 Alice stuff is already noun plural Paula I don't think there will be costomers since there is no assignment/HW Alice Jane made mistake in her writing and the teacher showed is to us c^ Paula OK I can't do other stuff(good to know © ) Alice yes. l'll talk to you later. a close analysis shows that Alice's there is no such thing as (e-turn 4) plus her e-turn 5 imply the other word stuff The word stuff is repeated by Paula in e-turn 8 Extract 19: PSR (2009-1/1) Jill u can track your package online na DCL Jill Mike it said that it shipped or not 7 not (2) (3) (1) . though it is a unique one There is a word change in this extract. I'll finish my dinner I can't eat after midnight for the glucosa test so I have to fill up my tummy by now © (10) (7) (8) (9) (6) (5) Extract 2 presents an exposed correction that follows an X-Y-Y format. from stuffs (e-turn 3) to there is no such thing as stuffs (e-turn 4). I learn a lot from my kids © Alice okay. and finally to stuff Although this X-Y-Y format may appear like an X-X-Y format because Alice uses the same word stuffs.

where the introduced term is used (curious-curiosity-curiosity) A few more extracts below illustrates exposed correction in synchronous CMC . not an adjective form (I e. curiosity versus curious).Jill when did you order 7 (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Mike yesterday Jill Jill com'on just order ysterday Mike © Jill Jill TS OC Mike Jill I think the latest u will get is either thurs of Friday otherwise monday It just a curious© I'm just curious or it's just my curiosity Mike oops c) Mike cunousity Jill Jill ya I don't think curious can be used as a noun na DCL t$ Mike I should chat with you more to practice my language skill © (17) Extract 19 demonstrates how embedded correction is completed Mike incorrectly used the word curious in his sentence (e-turn 11) His e-turn 11 requires a noun form. or he needs a sentence that requires an adjective form so that his curious can remain unchanged Jill takes the following next e-turn (e-turn 12) to provide Mike with both options This exposed correction follows an X-Y-Y format.

123 Extract 20- FI-AR-UP (2009-25/29) Mike umm I think u feel that you need to be upset at me but u cant' cuz u jus can't Sara TS OC Sara not upset but hate u for being so tricky and win all the time (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)

Mike ur supposed to say smooth Mike not tricky Mike tricky sounds bad

d)

Sara Sara Sara

ok smooth but the part that I canr is true cant*

Extract 20 shows that Sara's use of tricky in e-turn 3 to describe Mike's personality In e-turn 4, he suggests that Sara use smooth Mike's e-turns 5 and 6 explain why he does not like the word tricky In e-turn 7, Sara acknowledges the newly introduced word So the exposed correction follows an X-Y-Y format (tricky-smooth-smooth) A few extracts are shown below

Extract 21: UP (FIAR-2008) Mel Gary TS OC Gary Mel l feel bad but my paper is not making any progress at all wen is it due i'm pretty usre the 27 th 24 (1) (2) (3) (4)

Gary u sure 7 Gary need 1 ask u alway are Mel c) yea

(5) (6) (7)

Gary that is, by the end of the second week after the return from the Fall Break Mel yep (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13)

Gary y woulnd't he jus give a date 777 Mel not the beginning of the third

Gary he makes everything so difficult Gary ok

In Extract 21, Mel and Gary talk about the due date of their assignment Following the (X, Y, Y) series introduced above, we have X which is located in e-turn 4 (I e, the 27th) On the next e-turn, Mel or other provided Y or an alternative, \e,24 Gary, or

self, repeats the idea of "24" (which is the OC), saying "by the end of the second week after the return from the Fall Break," which presumably refers to the 24th From Extracts 20 and 21, it can be concluded that other-completed repair (l e, the first Y) can occur in the e-turn immediately following the TS e-turn (I e, X) However, what I found in these extracts from synchronous CMC is that there are eturns interpolated between the two Ys That is, the second Y is removed a few eturns away from the first Y Therefore, the pattern here is X-Y-Z-Y In the data, however, there are many extracts that present X-Y, not X-Y-Z-Y, in the practice of immediate other-completed repair The uptake by self can be in

125 the form of acknowledgement, rather than the original or the alternative, after other introduces an alternative This is illustrated also in Extracts 22 and 23 below

Extract 22- CHN-0 (2009-1/1) Chad more exams are coming Chad next week © (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

Hank what's subject 7 Chad Economics Chad and Quantitative finance TS OC iz) Hank sound difficult Chad brutal Hank hah— how many sub u r taking this sem 7 Chad 3 Hank it is not too much Chad yes

In Extract 22, Chad and Hank, two international graduate students, discuss how hard Chad's courses are Hank uses difficult (e-turn 6, sound difficult) to describe what he thinks about Chad's classes, however, in the next e-turn, Hank replaces difficult with brutal Hank's hah can be heard as same as oh, the change-of-state token His hah reflect his knowing state The two extracts below present the X-Y format This is also demonstrated in the extract below

Extract 23: YNR (2009-2/3) TS OC Rick Sean Sean c) Rick I am going for super, see you then supper © ThanK you~If u find any errors in English, no matDr which kind, please Dll me — Sean Sean Sean Rick Sure © Please Dll me too haha, Okay (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (1) (2) (3)

In Extract 23, in e-turn 1, Rick misspells a word (I e, super) This is corrected by Sean in the second e-turn Although there is no uptake, Rick's e-turn 4 indicates "accounting" or an "attendant activity" (Jefferson, 1987, p 88) Rick's e-turn 4 expresses appreciation Therefore, this is an exposed correction in which accounting can be expected One more example, Extract 5, which shows exposed correction, is repeated again below

Extract 5: KSU-A (2009) Joe Joe Tim Tim long distance relationship SUCKS trust me we are long distance right now, though 2 hours (1) (2) (3) (4)

the difference between the two is that the former follows X-Y-Z-Y. when Joe uses both an oh token (Heritage. it reflects the speaker's change of state from not knowing to knowing In this extract.Tim Joe Joe TS OC Joe Tim Tim d) Joe © well. you can drtive thru not FLY thru 1 year in Japanmust be difficult for you it's not a full year and i'm coming back in between oh then it's great (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Extract 5 reveals that a trouble source is located in e-turn 8 which specifically is 1 year 1 year is a factual error which leads to other-completed repair. not X-YY as found by Jefferson (1987) in exposed correction in face-to-face contexts The second set of extracts indicates that other corrects in the second e-turn what was . Joe uses it to signal the end of the repair practice This last section shows how other takes the e-turn that is subsequent to the TS e-turn in order to do other-completed repair The first set of extracts show the practice of immediate other-completed repair that is similar to exposed correction However. while there is neither self-initiated repair nor other-initiated repair Jim's e-turn 9 functions as immediate other-completed repair which changes Joe into a knowing state This is evident in e-turn 11. 1984) and responds to the new correct fact Recall that an oh token is usually used by those in conversations when they know a new fact.

1) selfmitiated repair and distanced other-completed repair. 4) other-completed repair performed over two consecutive e-turns. repair-initiation. the TS. 3) other-completed repair performed in one eturn.produced by se//in the first e-turn The uptake by se//acknowledges the alternative given by other Summary This chapter has presented five variations of other-completed repair identified in synchronous CMC involving non-native speakers. due to the frequent occurrence and unique patterns of other-completed repair. othercompleted repair can run differently from repair found by pioneering CA researchers That is. the next chapter is devoted to the discussion of these phenomena . and 5) immediate other-completed repair These variations result from the turn-taking system managed by chat programs Chat programs also expand the practice of repair whose components (1 e. as presented under immediate other-completed repair. 2) other-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair. namely. and repair-completion) are not physically adjacent to one another In addition. the repair-initiation component is missing The next chapter will explore the sequential relationship between the components of othercompleted repair in detail Also.

starts off with the research questions and possible answers to them In the next section. I present general observations on the sequence and organization of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC The last section is the conclusion Research Questions Question 1: How Other Initiates and Completes Repair The first research question is aimed to explore how other initiates and completes repair in synchronous CMC Five variations of other-completed repair were introduced and explored in Chapter 4 The analysis in Chapter 4 is based on the location of repair-initiation and of other-completed repair This section further investigates the sequential organization and e-turn construction of other-completed repair This section starts off with the five variations of other-completed repair that were found in Chapter 4 In addition to the five variations. there is another variation of other-completed repair found in this study that will be introduced here .129 CHAPTER 5 SEQUENCE ORGANIZATION OF OTHER-COMPLETED REPAIR IN SYNCHRONOUS CMC In the previous chapter. the data were analyzed and presented A systematic observation was made about how the trouble source and repair are made and where they are located. based on the previous one. I also discussed who identifies and executes the repair in relation to the TS e-turn These findings will be summarized in the next section This chapter.

and repair-completion is taken into account in the analysis in Chapter 4. other-completed repair in synchronous CMC is performed similarly and differently from that in ordinary talk They are similar in that. resulting infivevariations of other-completed repair observed in synchronous CMC 1 Self-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair (Variation A) 2 Other-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair (Variation B) 3 Other-completed repair performed in one e-turn (Variation C) 4 Other-completed repair performed in two consecutive e-turns (Variation D) 5 Immediate other-completed repair (Variation E) General observations are made according to these five variations of othercompleted repair First. and not earlier than that Inserted e-turns mark distinctions between the two Second. repair-initiation. with particular attention to other-completed repair. self-imtiated other-completion and other-initiated other-completion The location of the TS. the electronic medium plays an important role in repair Two-way transmission and public presence of the production of e-turns reflect technological constraints on social interaction All of these lead to unique variations of other- . both represent the two configurations mentioned above Another similarity is that other-initiated repair at the earliest occurs on the second turn to the TS.Types and positions of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC. for instance. Other-completed repair typically follows either self-imtiated repair or othermitiated repair There are then two configurations.

other-completed repair seems to be more pervasive and frequent in synchronous CMC than in face-to-face conversation (this is discussed in Chapter 6) Simultaneously-completed repair The findings show that. both parties sometimes complete repair roughly at the same time This results in self-completed repair and other-completed repair The self-completion e-turn and the othercompletion e-turn are placed in the dialog box in the order in which they are received by the chat program Simultaneously-completed repair (hereafter Variation F) in synchronous CMC is illustrated below Extract 24: T-UC (2009) Sue TS Sue Sam 01 Sam Sam SC OC Sue Sam He take one course with me yesterday And today we met in UCEN and UCEN 7 good for you hope u meet all nice friends University Center university center . there are two intriguing facts to be revealed here First.131 completed repair found in synchronous CMC In addition to the five variations of other-completed repair introduced in Chapter 4 and above. after a repairable is identified. I found one additional type of other-completed repair in the data I call it simultaneously-completed repair and describe it below Secondly.

or their e-turns may arrive at the chat server at roughly the same time. around 3 and wrap up the presentation The fact that both participants complete repair roughly at the same time means that. if identified in everyday talk. although both may start typing at the same time or may press the ENTER key. the talk becomes unintelligible. and thus in need of a repair of the turn-taking system However.132 Sue Sam Sam © good guess ® again slower than u one step Extract 25: MK-Chat (2009-6/45) TS 01 OC SC Carol I might stay up 'til morning later. in synchronous CMC. eturns that are simultaneously composed do not interrupt each other and do not become unintelligible. although they are not identical Technically speaking. so I might see you again Ryan Won't sleep7 Ryan Oh IC See you ® Carol no I'll probably sleep right now and wake up early in the morning. might end up appearing similar to overlap. this phenomenon in synchronous CMC has different interactional result from overlaps Overlaps tend to be brief as one party has to withdraw If overlapped utterances continue. and thus overlap is not a relevant issue in synchronous CMC . their e-turns which function as repair-completion may be placed adjacent to each other in the dialog box This variation.

repairmitiation. and repair-completion) of each variant First. placed next to the TS e-turn at the earliest . simultaneously-completed repair is included under other-completed repair This section has begun to answer the research question how does other initiate and complete repair in synchronous CMC. Earlier. and therefore. for the purpose of further discussion. I listed five variations of other-completed repair and I introduced one new variation It is necessary to devote one section to summarizing the overall sequential and organizational relationships between components (1 e. and the rest of the answer can be found in the rest of this chapter and the next one The next subsection aims to detail the sequence and organization of other-completed repair and presents a figure of each variation of synchronous CMC Sequence organization of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC. in synchronous CMC. which is the earliest such a turn can be placed In contrast. an other-initiation e-turn can be composed once the TS e-turn is displayed in the dialog box. other-initiated repair is never produced earlier than the TS or than the TS e-turn In everyday talk. repair is often initiated by other Other-initiated repair is considered the most immediate when it is placed in the e-turn subsequent to the TS e-turn or the second e-turn (Figures 5 1 and 5 2) That is.133 Although simultaneously-completed repair results in other-completed repair. other can begin projecting an other-initiated repair turn right next to the repairable. TS. it is not entirely accurate to group this practice of repair only under othercompleted repair because it also consists of self-completed repair However.

when the TS is positioned at the end of the prior e-turn and when other-initiated repair is placed at the beginning of the immediately following e-turn (Figure 5 3) Self Other xxxxxxxxxxxx Trouble source Repair-initiation xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (e-turn n) (e-turn n+1) Figure 5 3 Possible sequence of the TS and other-initiated repair Third. repair can be completed by other Othercompleted repair can be placed in an e-turn that immediately follows the TS e-turn (Figure 5 4) In this case.134 Self Other Trouble source Repair-initiation (e-turn n] (e-turn n+1) Figure 51 Possible sequence of other-initiated repair Self Other Trouble source Repair-initiation and repair-completion (e-turn n) (e-turn n+1) Figure 5 2 Possible sequence of other-completed repair on the same e-turn Second. while the second most immediate place to other-initiated repair (as well as self-initiated repair) that other-completed repair can occur is when it is placed in the e-turn subsequent to the other-initiation e-turn (as well as to self-initiated repair) (Figure . making it the most immediate one Other-completed repair is most immediate to other-initiated repair when they are both placed next to each other in the same e-turn (Figures 5 2 and 5 5). in synchronous CMC. other-initiated repair can be considered contiguous with the TS. repair-initiation is skipped.

when the TS occurs at the end of the prior e-turn and when other-completed repair is positioned at the beginning of the e-turn (Figure 5 8) If this occurs.135 5 6) Other-completed repair is considered furthest from the other-initiated repair when it is placed several e-turns away (Figure 5 7) Self Other/Self Trouble source Repair-completion (e-turn n) (e-turn n+1) Figure 5 4 Possible sequence of repair-completion Self Other Trouble source (There may be e-turns here) Repair-initiation and repair-completion Figure 5 5 Possible sequence of self-imtiated other-completion Self Other/Self Other Trouble source (There may be e-turns here] Repair-initiation Repair-completion (e-turn n] (e-turn n+1) Figure 5 6 Possible sequence of repair initiation and other-completed repair Self Other/Self Other Trouble source Repair-initiation (There are several e-turns here] Repair-completion Figure 5 7 Possible sequence of other-completed repair and inserted e-turns Fourth. other-completed repair can be contiguous with the TS. there is no other-initiated repair between them .

2 Sarah ur datastructure course is going smooth 7 Oh Mel you mean 7 Sarah you have an online course rite 7 Sarah a bridge course 7 SCi Sarah how is tht easy 7 Mel Mel yes this semester is C++ (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Sarah ook Sarah u takin 4 subjects this semestr 7 OC2 Mel datastructure will be on the next semester . or repair-completion Extract 26 below reveals that the inserted e-turns are topically relevant to an other-completed repair Extract 26: Other-completed repair (NP:2009-2/68) TSi. or between repair-initiation and repair-completion (Figure 5 7) These interpolated e-turns are sometimes topically relevant to the TS.136 Self Other xxxxxxxxxxxx Trouble source Repair-completion xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (e-turn n] (e-turn n+1) Figure 5 8 Possible sequence of the TS and other-completed repair Fifth. repair-initiation. there can be one e-turn or more e-turns interpolated between the TS eturn and repair-initiation (Figures 5 5 and 5 6).

the three components are placed relatively physically adjacent to one other Heritage's (1984) concept of "doubly contextual" (p 242) relationships between participants in face-to-face talk is exercised in a more loose way in synchronous CMC. Mel completes other-completion in e-turn 10 The repair components and e-turns inserted throughout the repair are topically relevant I have suggested that there are a total of six variations of other-completed repair The last variation (l e. while. Variation F) added to the list consists of simultaneous self-completed repair and other-completed repair That is. in face-to-face talk. repair-initiation. repair-initiation precedes other-completed repair The differences include the presence of interpolated e-turn (s) between the three components of othercompleted repair (I e. other-completed repair found in faceto-face talks and in synchronous CMC typically consists of the following trajectories repair-initiation (self. the TS. self-completed repair) that makes it clear to Mel that Sarah's initial understanding of Mel's class is incorrect Then.137 In Extract 26. TSi (e-turn 1) leads to other-imitation (e-turn 2) Sarah then completes the repair (I e. and other-completed repair) in synchronous CMC. self-completed repair) in e-turn 5 It is Sarah's repair-completion (l e. allowing e-turn(s) to be unaccountably interpolated between the three components .or other-initiated repair) and other-completed repair Second. both participants feel the need for repair-completion The sequence and organization of these six variations were presented by the eleven figures above The eleven figures also suggest the different ways that participants can be involved in the practice of repair It can be observed in this section that some other-completion phenomena are similar to those found in everyday talk First.

they transfer over interactional skills they have mastered in everyday talk. leading to unique social processes that operate electronically The next section will deal with the second research question Question 2: Functions of Other-Initiated Repair and Other-Completed Repair I found that the locations where other initiates and completes repair significantly differ from each other in that many participants do it immediately. and there are also different strategies. and adapt to technology limitations in order to socially interact with each other.138 Another difference is that sometimes repair-initiation is not performed in other-completed repair in synchronous CMC as we can see in immediate othercompleted repair (1 e. while some participants do it later in the chat. Variation E) These two differences lead to the six variations of other-completed repair as introduced in Chapter 4 and earlier in this chapter Participants in online chats make use of available technical properties of web chats. which is discussed next . and in some cases. etc (these are discussed and exemplified later in this chapter) How other-completed repair is performed and how participants can engage in other-completed repair may have social and interactional consequences which can lead to the answer to the second research question what are the functions of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair7 One conversational organization that can help explain the functions of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair is preference organization. such as the use of emoticon. tokens. prefaces.

p 60)). p 68)) The answers to an invitation and to an offer can then be either an acceptance or a rejection. grantings. an offer (e g. however. interrogatives have many functions. the latter includes . for instance. and formulated by participants to maintain their social bonds In talk-in-progress. the first pair part can be produced as a statement (e g. explain the conditionally relevant relationship between the first and second pair parts. 2007. an assessment (e g. This section deals with the social functions and turn design of othercompleted repair It first briefly introduces preference organization and later relates it to the practice of other-completed repair Preference organization is elucidated by CA researchers to present how turns are designed. Why don't you come and see me some time7 (Heritage. 1984.139 Preference organization of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC. agreements. acceptances. 1984. an interrogative turn can be heard as a question. as introduced in Chapter 2. p 285)). an invitation (e g. for example. and the like These second pair parts are considered "preferred" (Pomerantz. etc) that needs a conditionally relevant response from the second speaker Sacks (1987) broadly divides second pair parts into two categories "yes-like responses" and "no-like responses" (p 57) The former includes. Don't chu want me tih come dow n getchu7 (Schegloff. where the first pair part makes it conditionally relevant for the next speaker to respond with an appropriate second pair part In addition to being heard as a question. complaints. p 64) In contrast. while either an agreement or a disagreement is responsive to an assessment The responses to these questions are considered conditionally relevant Adjacency pairs. isn't he cute7 (Pomerantz. accedings. 1984. packaged. announcements.

disagreements. p 314) Such asymmetrical alternativeness implies not only that conversational actions are either preferred or dispreferred but also that each can be achieved in a different way That is. 1973. CA researchers claim that a default second pair part is direct. usual. they in fact explain "a social/interactional feature of sequences and of orientations to them. 285) B A Why don't you come and see me some time ll would like to . 2007.140 rejections. in nature. in general. p 61) Preference is essentially social and interactional. denials. immediate. which can be seen in the turn construction of preferred and dispreferred responses Even though second pair parts are considered conditionally relevant to their first pair part within the same pair-type. 1984. those seconds are not "symmetrical" (Schegloff & Sacks. and unremarkable This is demonstrated below Example 28: Preferred next action (Heritage. while the refusal in contrast is a dispreferred one Although the terms preferred and dispreferred may first appear to explain a psychological feature of talk. not a psychological one It is not a matter of the motives or desires or likings of the participants Preferred or dispreferred rather refer to a structural relationship of sequence parts" (Schegloff. participants perform the preferred and dispreferred second pair part differently However. and the like These responses are "dispreferred" (p 64) Invitation. dechmngs. not psychological. as a first pair part is designed to prompt the recipient either to accept or refuse Acceptance to the invitation is a preferred action. for instance. p.

Lerner (1996b) argued dispreferred actions result in face threat to the recipient As a result. Heritage (1984). no prefaces. the dispreferred ones are not performed in the same way as the preferred ones Heritage (1984) believes that the reason for this is that dispreferred ones are disruptive and destructive of social solidarity and thus socially disaffihative In fact. or to delay or even avoid performing dispreferred actions at all Sacks (1987) ties the concept of preference to the "contiguity" (p 54) of the adjacency pair The preference of contiguity holds that the first pair part and second pair part should be placed immediately next to each other That is. especially when the second pair parts are dispreferred This is explained as follows One characteristic of preference organization is that preferred second actions are produced with no delay. this is not always the case. a speaker who needs to produce a dispreferred second pair part. many scholars. he needs to do extra conversational work. p 248) A B T's-tsuh beautiful day out isn't it7 Yeh it's just gorgeous Examples 28 and 29 present the features of preferred second pair parts which are simple acceptances and are typically performed without delay and without explanation However. Holtgraves (1992). 2006. no accounts.141 Example 29: Preferred next action (Pomerantz. participants do not produce extra action or irrelevant action between the two pair parts However. or no declination component . may need to perform it in a different way in order to minimize social disaffiliation That is. normally. such as Brown and Levinson (1987).

whereas contiguity is disrupted when the second pair part is dispreferred This section introduced the concept of preference organization. the first pair part is contiguous with the second pair part In contrast. Another related concept to preference organization is "face" (Goffman. self can correct himself as in same-turn repair or transitionspace repair because. or hedges This means that the contiguity between the first pair part and the dispreferred second pair part is broken In other words. palliatives. delays. p 213) Goffman (1967) defines face as "the positive social value a person effectively claims for himself (p 5) There are two types of face that participants maintain during the course of interaction positive face and negative face Positive FTA's are defined by Brown and Levinson (1987) as actions that threatens one's "positive consistent self-image or personality including the desire that this self-image be appreciated and approved of. while negative FTA's are described as actions that . CA researchers claim that it is rare in everyday talk possibly because. there is an inherent structural bias in the turntaking system That is. as explained earlier. which explains how dispreferred second pair parts are designed In the case of other-completed repair. 1955. as a current speaker. he still holds the floor Another explanation is that repair. involves a face-threatening act The next subsection presents the concept of face and face-threatening acts Face and face-threatening acts.142 (Levinson. the consistent contiguity of first and second pair parts is found when the second pair part is preferred. dispreferred second pair parts are accompanied by accounts. a dispreferred action. 1983) That is. as will be discussed next.

participants perform certain actions to minimize the degree of social disaffiliation The notion of face and face maintenance is found to relate to the preference organization (Brown & Levinson 1987. requests (1 e. other in the second turn replaces what he thinks is incorrect with what he believes is correct As a result. other-completed repair is dispreferred To lessen the degree of dispreferredness. etc Schegloff et al (1977) support that the practice of other-initiated othercompletion implies an expression of disagreement That is. because. other thinks that se//is wrong that his prior turn in problematic).threaten one's "territories. Lerner 1996b) in that certain actions should be performed or avoided in talk-in-interaction to minimize FTA's and therefore social disaffiliation. to freedom of action and freedom from imposition" (p 61) Other-completed repair can potentially threaten selfs positive and negative face because it involves suggestions (1 e. other wants se//to stop talking to solve a problem). disagreement (1 e. Heritage 1984. p 265) argues "the organization of talk is generally favorable to the maintenance of bonds of solidarity" Goffman (1967) argues that people when encountering others are unavoidably engaged in face-threatening acts In synchronous CMC. 1 e. the participants in this study were found to design particular contributions to the ongoing online chats in order to build mutual understanding The current study . and rights to non-distraction. expressions of disapproval (1 e. too. Holtgraves 1992. personal preserves. as Heritage (1984. other suggests that se//correct what other believes is problematic in selfs prior turn and that selfsolve it). other believes there is something wrong or problematic in selfs prior turn).

as in face-to-face talk. as explicated by CA researchers. they have to do some extra work to maintain the social bonds with others The next section introduces the sequential organization of other-completed repair and how it maintains face Sequence organization of distanced other-completed repair. according to where other-completed repair is carried out in relation to repair-initiation. while the first type does not However. or as outlined in Figures 5 3 and 5 5). and suggests that. other-initiated repair. in everyday talk. What Variations A and B have in common is that both consist of an othercompletion e-turn that is placed later after the repair-initiation point As outlined in the earlier figures.however focuses on how participants design their e-turns during the practice of other-completed repair. while the most distanced type can be exemplified when othercompleted repair is placed several e-turns away from the other-initiation e-turn (as in Variation A. or as outlined in Figure 5 7) The second type allows self-completed repair to be produced by self. allows se//to undertake repair in the next e-turn because it makes it known to se//that there is trouble in . distanced other-completed repair gives self a chance to act first Generally. there are two main types of other-completed repair 1) immediate and 2) distanced The most immediate type occurs when other-completed repair immediately follows other-initiated repair in the same e-turn (as in Variation C. other-completed repair is performed In other words. and Variation B. at some time later when self-completed repair does not occur.

nice camera 7 your pic oh © Extract 28: Confirmation check (UP PEGGY-2009-16/20) Jane Jane TS 01 SC Jane Tim Jane to bad that back in my parent's teenage year people went for dark tall and handsome guys my dad was talllbut not dark does darm mean skin7 yea Extract 29: Alternative question (BBT:2009-9/23) TS Mark I got another SWOT for YAHOO company Mark if you want to 01 Mike you mean you did it.145 understanding the ongoing talk and that some conditionally relevant conversational actions are needed The following extracts from synchronous CMC show how othermitiated repair results in self-completed repair Extract 27: Question (BBT:2009-x/23) TS 01 SC Jim Tina Jim Tina Tina btw. or you just find it online7 Mark http //www scribd com/doc/65298/Yahoo-Case-Analysis .

once the TS is identified by other. This subsection deals first with Variation C and then Variation D The former is frequently identified in the data when both other-initiated repair and othercompleted repair are performed in the same e-turn One of its characteristics is that it does not involve se//in the process of repair This is because the process of repair is not observed by self. self takes the next e-turn to complete a repair (1 e self-completed repair) However. permits other to complete the repair (1 e. while other keeps typing and. intentionally or unintentionally. there are occasions when. performs . othercompleted repair) (see Variation B) In the same vein. expectedly. later. other-completed repair can be brought about by self-initiated repair if self-completed repair is not carried out or is not performed successfully (see Variation A) This subsection has explored the mechanism of distanced other-completed repair other-completed repair that is placed several e-turns away from the repairmitiation The inserted e-turns reflect the opportunity for self-completed repair to operate before other actually completes the repair This opportunity ranges from one to several e-turns The next subsection explores the mechanism of othermitiated other-completion that operates either in one e-turn or two-e-turns Sequence organization of other-completed repair in one or two e-turns.146 SC Mark I found it online Extracts 27-29 show that other uses different strategies to give self an opportunity to do self-repair Then. self. while doing so. it does not perform selfcompleted repair This.

self may agree or disagree The other-initiated repair component found in Variation C is performed to show self'how other understands the prior e-turn before he responds to it later in the same e-turn To display an understanding of the prior e-turn (by self). We have Suki for dinner It's so delicious"""'"'Q which book 7 1 have many books l finished small ones by naowarat pongpaiboon Jess Jess Don um the one u send to me math short stories l have read many chapters but a few more to read Jess © (10) (11) (7) (8) (9) (2) (3) (4) (5) rgj (1) . other does not allow an opportunity for self to complete a repair. other either repeats or paraphrases it. demonstrates this practice Extract 13: T-UC (2009-26/177) TS Jess I had finished the book ka DCL TS Jess Don Jess Jess Jess OR Don How about you 7 hello Did u finish it 7 Today. repeated below. but after other-completed repair is performed. which can be perceived as an other-initiated repair Extract 13.147 other-completed repair in the same e-turn That is.

e-turn 7) by other appears to function as other-initiated repair which is followed by a response in the same e-turn Othermitiated repair functions as an interactional token which helps self process the response and on which other bases his response The second possible function of other-initiated repair found in Variation C is to bring closer the first pair part by self to the second pair part by other It is necessary to bring the two pair parts together because the chat programs cause separation Once the two pair parts are brought together. it would be recognized as a dispreferred action When other-initiated repair occurs . or action in a prior e-turn the current response is given to In this case. self) can come to understanding which sentence.Jess Don I went to your blog reading many books at the same times two books by tantai and one by nn (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Jess Don Jess There is a new group blog by win me but not any blog in it This repeated or paraphrased e-turn (l e. co-participants (l e. othermitiated repair functions as an interactional token that connects the first pair part and second pair part and thus maintains the contiguity between the two The last possible function that other-initiated repair identified in Variation C performs is to defer the other-completed repair Other-initiated repair is inserted between the TS and other-completed repair to break the contiguity between the TS and other-completed repair If other-completed repair occurred closer to the TS. again. turn.

the next conditionally relevant action However. and suggested that other-completed repair can be placed in different eturns The production of each e-turn plays an important part in creating several variations of other-completed repair on other's part and interpretation on selfs part Whatever variations other creates and interpretations se//makes are displayed in the dialog box.numbers of interpolated e-turns) between two e-turns is less than the gap between the other-initiation e-turn and other-completion e-turns of Variation B. other-completed repair is one e-turn away Briefly. making other-completed repair non-contiguous with the TS Variation D is also frequently identified in synchronous CMC Other-initiated repair is found in one e-turn and is immediately followed by an e-turn in which other-completed repair is performed Although the gap (1 e. once other presses the ENTER key. this subsection addressed possible functions of Variation C and Variation D. time allocation and electronic space . in Variation D. but also delays other-completed repair This function is similar to the one discussed in the previous paragraph with regard to Variation C in that it is used to defer other-completed repair. in this case. if he wants. and perceived and understood by co-participants While . it makes no interactional difference In other words. self can observe the initiation and. while other in Variation C can push other-completed repair toward the end of the same e-turn. complete the repair This means that se//is given a chance to correct himself in the following e-turn The purpose of performing other-completed repair on the next following e-turn is that it not only provides an opportunity for self to correct his own trouble. the difference is that.149 before other-completed repair. it pushes other-completed repair toward the end of the current e-turn.

the practice of immediate other-completed repair practice is organized systematically . immediate other-completed repair has interactional import Because it is placed immediately at the beginning of the very next e-turn. immediate other-completed repair ends the repair sequence without involving se//in the process of repair. is performed by other in the e-turn that immediately follows the TS e-turn It should be remarked that there are only two e-turns in this type of repair The TS by se//is in the first e-turn. Variation E or the practice of immediate other-completed repair. as a result. to perform self-completed repair Once performed. I define immediate other-completed repair as other-completion that is placed in the e-turn that immediately follows the TS e-turn. it gives no opportunity for self to observe possible trouble in the interaction and.150 contributing each e-turn. though self may confirm or disconfirm later This action by other is a face-threatening disaffihative move not only in face-to-face talk but also synchronous CMC Although the extracts presented in Chapter 4 and Figure 7 show that othercompleted repair is placed in an e-turn that immediately follows the TS e-turn. their understanding of prior e-turns is revealed The next subsection examines the mechanism of immediate other-completed repair identified in synchronous CMC Sequence organization of immediate other-completed repair. other-completed repair can be found at different positions within that immediately following e-turn As demonstrated earlier. as its name implies. in which other completes the repair Certainly. which is immediately followed by another e-turn.

or it is accompanied by emoticons Turn-initial position.151 There are three gross observations about the sequential organization of immediate other-completed repair either it occurs at a turn-initial position or it occurs somewhere other than a turn-initial position. to deal with the repairable as immediately as possible Below are two previously presented examples of immediate other-completed repair Extract 20. with other-completed repair. and the repair-completion e-turn is contiguous with the TS e-turn An other-completion e-turn should be understood as designed by other especially for the purpose of repair. FI-AR-UP (2009-25/29) Mike umm l think u feel that you need to be upset at me but u cant' cuz u jus can't Sara TS OC Sara not upset (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) but hate u for being so tricky and win all the time Mike ur supposed to say smooth Mike not tricky Mike tricky sounds bad c) Sara Sara ok smooth but the part that l canr is true . It is found that other-completed repair is often performed at the beginning of the e-turn In other words. other begins his or her turn. that is. the turn subsequent to the TS e-turn.

no matDr which kind. please Dll me — This practice of immediate other-completed repair can be considered the most immediate and unmitigated one The whole second e-turn is specially designed first for this purpose What the second participant believes to be the sources of misunderstanding or to be incorrect in the first e-turn is straightforwardly and immediately replaced in the second e-turn The contiguity is not broken between these two e-turns Elsewhere other than turn-initial position m the same e-turn. it is at the beginning of the e-turn. see you then Sean supper Sean © c} Rick ThanK you~If u find any errors in English. it comes later in the e-turn In the latter case. cant (e-turn 9) is what Sara intends to type.152 Sara cant*5 (9) Extract 23: YNR (2009-2/3) TS OC Rick I am going for super. there is some extra conversational work that is placed before other-completed repair When these other actions are placed at an e-turn initial position. while the misspelled one is canr which is in e-turn 8 . in others. In some cases where other-completed repair occurs in one e-turn. other- 5 An asterisk is attached by a participant to a correctly spelled word that follows the misspelled one In this case.

hedges (Extract 31).153 completed repair occurs later toward the end of the same e-turn. or at least it is pushed past the initial position This subsection explores that extra conversational work that defers othercompleted repair A close analysis found that turn-initial space is devoted to activities other than other-completed repair These activities that precede othercompleted repair include anecdotal stories (Extract 2. or available options (Extract 19) Extract 2: MK-Chat (2009-25/48) Alice I feel sorry to see you alone in office hours © Alice no one coming TS OC Paula @ So I can do other stuffs Alice Did you know what Jane's teacher just told us that there is no such thing as stuffs Alice stuff is already noun plural Paula I don't think there will be costomers since there is no assignment/HW Alice Jane made mistake in her writing and the teacher showed is to us Paula OK I can't do other stuff(good to know ©) (7) (8) (6) (4) (5) (1) (2) (3) In Extract 2. repeated below). Alice prefaces her correction with a story . there is an ungrammatical use of stuffs in e-turn 3 Instead of correcting it immediately at the next e-turn initial.

about her daughter s ungrammatical use of stuffs that was corrected by her teacher This anecdotal story does not involve the two participants directly and does not claim straightforwardly that Paula just made a mistake. what his name Owen Jen 7 Matt Owen ok . and more importantly. as in the following extract Extract 31: RP-CHAT (2009-27/68) Jen I went there last week (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Owen u and ur room mate. it defers the other-completed repair toward the end of the e-turn The second type of activity is the use of a hedge to defer other-completed repair. ok good Owen time square7 have u been there 7 Jen actually once 0 Owen wherE7 Jen because before l live here. l lived in manhattan for a month Owen oh where r u putting up now same friends or new room mates7 Jen same (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) Owen oh that guy from ur home country Jen yes Owen good.

TS OC Jen no another thai in ur university (15) (16) (17) (18) Owen ur 1 think our uniersity Jen is there anything interested in queens7 Owen lemmme think Extract 31 shows that there is a TS in e-turn 15 when Jen uses ur (I e. because it is also the university where Jen attends He then replaced ur with our Another possible cause of this other-completed repair is that ur is interpreted as a typo because it is spelled similar to our The dots Owen uses suggest pauses or hedges between the incorrect word and what he believes is more appropriate "/ think" is also an appropriate preface for the dispreferred actions (Sidnell. 2010) In Extract 19. repeated below. your) to refer to the university that both attend It seems to Owen that ur is not the right word. thus allowing se//to correct himself Extract 19: PNSI (2009-1/1) Jill u can track your package online na DCL Jill Mike Jill it said that it shipped or not7 not when did you order7 (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (1) Mike yesterday Jill com'on . other not only locates an error but also shows how to correct it.

curious) but with the word in a new sentence The other option keeps Mike's original sentence (I e. it's just my ) but changes the word curious to curiosity These options allow Mike to correct himself later (e-turn 14) I have shown how online participants do extra conversational work to defer other-completed repair Although other-completed repair is in the e-turn . she uses Mike's original sentence and changes curious to curiosity Jill initiates a repair. I'm just curious. makes use of Mike's original words and sentence. completes a repair. repeats Mike's original word (i e.Jill just order ysterday (7) (8) (9) (10 (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Mike © Jill Jill TS OC Mike Jill 1 think the latest u will get is either thurs of Friday otherwise monday It just a curious © I'm just curious or it's just my curiosity Mike oops d) Mike cunousity Jill Jill ya I don't think curious can be used as a noun na DCL •^ Mike I should chat with you more to practice my language skill © (17) Extract 19 shows that Mike's use of curious is incorrect (e-turn 11) Jill then repairs it by using Mike's curious in a correct sentence (e-turn 12) Also. e-turn 12) One option. and provides options [I'm just curious or it's just my curiosity.

he types © © is . illustrates such use of emoticons Extract 23: Variation E and emoticon (YNR: 2009-2/3) TS OC c) Rick I am going for super. see you then (1) (2) (3) Sean supper Sean © Rick ThanK you~If u find any errors in English. repeated below. no matDr which kind. Sean does immediate other-completed repair in e-turn 2 when he replaces super misspelled by Rick.157 immediately following the TS e-turn. other-completed repair is not contiguous with the TS Another remark is that practice of other-completed repair performed elsewhere as illustrated here is not as immediate and unmitigated as immediate other-completed repair performed at a turn-initial position While all of the conversational work presented here precedes other-completed repair. please Dll me — (4) In Extract 23. with supper In the third e-turn. It is found that other-completed repair is sometimes followed by extra conversational work Such extra conversational work consists of the use of emoticons and disclaimers Emoticons have been used throughout the online chats Extract 23. there is other conversational work that follows other-completed repair This is demonstrated in the next section Accompanying conversational work.

C (Extract 12. an emoticon accompanies Variation B (Extract 31). repeated below). and F (Extract 25) which are illustrated below Extract 31: Variation B and emoticon (YFT: 2009-5/14) TS SC c} OC Jack Jack now I am sending potoes via MSN to my mum—hahaha potos Kate © Kate photo photos yerpp SC/OC Jack Kate Extract 12: Variation C and emoticons (T-UC: 2009-1/177) Sam how r u7 Katie I'm fine Sam TS Sam just got back from the teaching must be careful not going home alone Katie Why7 Sam Sam the guys might u questions © better go with friends OCc) Katie Oh'You mean me7 Thanks © Sam how's the food made by u7 .placed in the e-turn that immediately follows the immediate other-completed repair e-turn In addition to Variation E as in Extract 23. D (Extract 32).

show how emotions are used during the practice of other-completed repair The only type of emoticons used by the participants is smiley In addition to the use of emoticons. around 3 and wrap up the presentation These above extracts. online chatters were found to use disclaimers after completing immediate other-completed repair This is presented in the following extract .Katie 555 Sam lmeanu yes Extract 32: Variation D and emoticons (MK-Chat: 2009-35/48) TS Amy it start shiny now is there any other place she wants to go7 Mel Mel 01 Disney world © I promise that I bring her when she turn 6 Amy oo I see Florida right7 OCc) Amy that is not a weekend schedule G P Mel (rofl) Extract 25: Variation F and emoticon (MK-Chat: 2009-6/45) TS 01 Carol I might stay up 'til morning later. so I might see you again Ryan Won't sleep7 OCc) Ryan Oh IC See you ® SC Carol no I'll probably sleep right now and wake up early in the morning. repeated above.

Schegloff (2007) states. he does the immediate other-completed repair by proposing works in e-turn 6. what is worth investigating is how . the turn that immediately follows the TS e-turn After the other-completion e-turn.Extract 33: CHATS FROM NP (2009-66/68) Sam Jess Sam Sam TS OC DIS Jess Sam Sam Jess why don't you go home early7 what do u mean7 It is very dangerous for another I have a lot of work works I think yes I guess (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) In Extract 33. he produces a disclaimer / think in e-turn 7 This technique. Sam and Jess talk about safety He recommends that Jess come home earlier Jess's excuse is that she has work to complete It was work in e-turn 6 that is the TS Because Sam believes that it is ungrammatical. elaborates dispreferred actions Summary This chapter presented the process of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC While it is undoubted that other-completed repair is needed once a serious problem is detected in either face-to-face talk or online communication on which this study focused.

other-completed repair threatens coparticipant's face As a result. from a sociohnguistic perspective. other-completed repair is dispreferred because of the interactional nature of the turn-taking system Also. which is the last chapter of this dissertation . the use of emoticons This chapter revealed that e-turns in which other-completed repair was found were either specially delayed or designed The purpose and social function of specially positioned and marked e-turns in which other-completed repair was found will be discussed in detail in Chapter 6. where participants in this study used several strategies to minimize the degree of other-completed repair's dispreferredness Some strategies were transferred from face-to-face talk. for instance. preference organization reveals that other-completed repair is performed by participants differently than preferred actions This is also true in synchronous CMC.161 participants perform other-completed repair In face-to-face talk. while some were supported by the chat programs.

and examined the environment in which emoticons occur during other-completed repair Chapters 4 and 5 revealed that other-completed repair often occurs in synchronous CMC and that it does so in a variety of sequential organizations These six variations consist of either self-initiated repair or other-initiated repair.162 CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION The electronic data that were analyzed in Chapter 4 showed how repair located by either self or other was then accomplished by other Five variations of other-completed repair. namely. simultaneously-completed repair a repair that is completed by both se//and other I then further investigated other-completed repair according to its sequential organization. while in Variation E. while. as claimed by pioneering CA researchers. otherrepair performed over two consecutive e-turns (Variation D). self-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair (Variation A). in face-to-face talk. repair that involves other either in repair-initiation or repair-completion is rare. there is no initiation As touched upon in Chapters 1 and 2. presented in Chapter 4 were then given further analysis and interpretation in Chapter 5 In addition. Chapter 5 revealed one additional variation of repair. namely. and Immediate othercompleted repair (Variation E). repair that consists of other-initiated repair and othercompleted repair (also known as other-repair) is the rarest among the different . other-initiated repair and distanced other-completed repair (Variation B). other-completed repair performed in one e-turn (Variation C). and other-completed repair.

and on the other hand is specially performed to minimize its social disaffiliation The last section suggests some of the implications of this study the findings that can be applied in sociohnguistic. this study finds that there can be e-turns inserted between the three components These findings add new positions and variations to what has been found in face-to-face encounters by CA researchers This research can also potentially provide some explanations because. conversation analytic.types of repair The analysis of the chat script revealed that both other-initiated repair and other-completed repair made up almost all variations of other-repair found in this study (1 e. research on face-to-face interactions predates the development of others both "phylogenetically" as in the life of society and "ontogenetically" (p 394) as in the life of the individual This chapter starts off with an introduction to the goal of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC This is followed by the discussion of the findings that show that. this study finds that it occurs relatively often in synchronous CMC Other-initiated other-completion is found by CA researchers to consist of three components the TS. and other-completed repair However. other-completed repair. frequently occurs in synchronous online chats. and F) While other-initiated othercompletion does not usually occur in face-to-face encounters. as Heritage (1995) speculates. C. Variations B. and CMC research Included in this section are suggestions for further research . the analysis revealed that the second component can be missing in synchronous CMC (1 e. and D. other-initiated repair. a socially disaffihative action. in immediate other-completed repair) Moreover. on the one hand.

the opportunity for self-initiated repair over other-initiated repair. by definition. Schegloff.164 Other-Completed Repair as Social Action in Synchronous CMC This section aims to discuss the nature of turn-taking systems in relation to the display of mutual understandings and the purpose of repair I begin the discussion with Heritage's (1984) claim that "the organization of talk is generally favorable to the maintenance of bonds of solidarity" (p 265) His claim appears convincing as demonstrated by the turn design and preference organization used by participants to produce their contribution to talk-in-progress The appropriate design of dispreferred next actions. this does not mean that talk is without problems Problems in talk-in-mteraction can be identified moment-by-moment when talk emerges When taking the next turn. or both self-initiated repair and . though in order to do so. is a socially disaffihative action for many reasons Because of the structural bias of turn-taking systems. participants reveal how each understands their so far collaboratively-generated talk and each other's messages Once trouble in understanding is detected. 2007) The appropriate design of dispreferred next actions reveals how other wants to maintain a positive relationship with self. other has to go through more conversational work Although Schegloff (1987) argues. they need what CA researchers term repair. "talk in interaction is built for understanding and on the whole effortless understanding" (p 202). 2007. as demonstrated by CA researchers. the participants need a mechanism that deals with it That is. is essentially social and interactional by nature (Liddicoat. which helps to reestablish intersubjectivity Other-completed repair.

Brown & Levinson. 1997. 1987. Lerner 1996b. 2006. contextual cues. needs to be performed differently from . 1977) From a sociohnguistic point of view. 1983) The question raised in regard to the idea that other-repair is face-threatening is How can other do repair while maintaining social bonds with self or saving selfs positive face7 The threat to face becomes stronger in some media (see Chapter 2) because they limit and filter out the social cues. Variation E that occurs at a turn-initial position) Other-Completed Repair: Evidence of Social Disaffiliation Recognized by CA researchers as a dispreferred action. like many other dispreferred actions. Heritage.other-initiated repair result in self-completed repair (Drew. other-completed repair. Levinson. othercompleted repair threatens positive face. and social presence on which participants rely when interacting with each other Several CMC researchers have argued that CMC was in fact not designed for social interaction and relational communication but for information storage and retrieval Thus synchronous CMC may not be an effective communicative device participants can use to maintain social bonds The following section presents evidence from the analysis of electronic data that supports the claim that when communicating electronically via typed text. Schegloff et al. or a consistent positive self-image or personality including the desire that the self-image be appreciated and approved of (Brown & Levinson. 1984. participants pay less attention to the maintenance of social solidarity This is exemplified by the occurrence of unmitigated immediate other-completed repair (I e.

or later-type of other-completed repair The now-type was presented in Chapters 4 and 5 as immediate other-completed repair (Variation E). elaborates this practice Extract 2: Turns and dialog in synchronous CMC (MK-Chat: 2009-28/45) Alice I feel sorry to see you alone in office hours ® Alice no one coming Paula ©So I can do other stuffs (1) (2) (3) . but only those that are performed at the beginning of the e-turn (see the discussion on page 151) The analysis of the data shows that immediate other-completed repair is a socially disaffihative action Extract 2. and Schegloff (2007). 1984) Unmitigated or "still dispreferred" other-completed repair. unmitigated. because it is performed in an immediately following e-turn However. it can be considered immediate. not all practices under immediate other-completed repair are considered unmitigated. to maintain social bonds. as argued by Heritage (1984). In this study. are produced straightforwardly with no delay and no accounts They are produced immediately in order not to break the contiguity with the first pair part When other-completed repair is performed in the same way that preferred actions are. the speaker cannot perform dispreferred actions in the same ways they perform preferred actions Preferred actions. Sacks (1987).preferred actions That is. bold. repeated below. other-completed repair is found to be performed in two primary ways either now. Pomerantz (1984. or even conflict-provoking (Heritage. 2006).

she does extra conversational work in and after e-turn 4 The extra work referred to here is the use of a story which has two interactional imports First. I learn a lot from my kids © Alice okay. I'll finish my dinner l can't eat after midnight for the glucosa test so I have to fill up my ummy by now © (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) In Extract 2. I'H talk to you later. Alice acknowledges Paula's use of the incorrect word (l e. she uses an anecdotal story to initiate an other-completed repair (e-turns 4 and 7) This strategy does not directly involve Paula as someone who creates the problematic talk Second. at the end of e-turn 2. although Alice's e-turn 2 performs immediate other-completed repair. stuffs) by repeating the wrong word but changing its . that story also functions as a deferral of other-completed repair It pushes other-completed repair toward the end of the e-turn 4 or even to e-turn 5 It also functions as a preface which breaks the contiguity between the TS and othercompleted repair Third.167 Alice Did you know what Jane's teacher just told us that there (4) (5) is no such thing as stuffs Alice stuff is already noun plural Paula I don't think there will be costomers since there is no assignment/HW Alice Jane made mistake in her writing and the teacher showed is to us Paula OK I can't do other stufffgood to know©) Alice yes.

though her e-turn 2 is other-completed repair Fifth. she draws Paula's attention to stuffs Alice assumes her e-turn 2 is clear as. therefore. she engages Paula in the practice of repair This confirms that other-completed repair by nature is socially disaffihative and explains why the practice of other-completed repair is designed specifically to minimize the degree of disaffiliation When othercompleted repair is not mitigated and. in general.environment (1 e. rather. remains disaffihative. she does not do other-completed repair straightforwardly. while some are already plural without adding -s added Fourth. Paula does self-repair She reveals the uptake Extract 2 demonstrates that other-completed repair is a socially disaffihative action because of the extra work Alice goes through As explained above. which can be observed in the following extracts Extract 34: Chats-from-OW (2009-66/68) TS 01 l=D Beth what do u want to talk with me7 Betsy what about7 Beth my English is not good Betsy don't be serious Betsy everything can improve (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) . a noun may be plurahzed (e g. there is no such thing as stuffs) All but stuffs in Paula s original eturn is changed by Alice By doing that. book versus books). Alice locates specifically little by little the trouble source (e-turn 3). it can cause disaffiliation or argument. because of the above strategies.

in e-turns 4 and 5. the TS is located in e-turn 1 The question Beth asks is ungrammatical It is ungrammatical because the preposition about. what) and suggests about Repair by Betsy upsets Beth because it can be seen that there is an argument about the cause of TS. I mean they cost as much as Chnique (in Thailand) Sue got it ka DCL Sue isn't chnique cheap too (11) (9) (10) . e-turn 3) is perceived by Betsy as such Therefore. which is Beth's language proficiency Beth's immediate negative response (I e. do they have it in department store (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Laura some people at work said my complexion looks nice Laura yep. is missing Betsy in e-turn 2 repeats part of the TS e-turn (i e. Central Sue l never stopped by around there Laura l emailed u the list this morning Sue 'coz I didn't bring 'ya dom' when I went like u suggested Laura but it's overpriced. it can be observed that Betsy soothed and comforted Beth Another extract below demonstrates how immediate other-completed repair can lead to an argument Extract 35: Chat-from-OW (2009-2/3) Laura I spent on Etude last weekend Laura but it works Sue wow.169 In Extract 34.

is around $25 na ka DCL Laura i'm talking about prices in thailand. I don't think u don't have to spend much on gas as u live close to ur office Sue (28) and there's no other big spending so u can spend on cosmetics (29) (30) Laura got to save for retirement ka DCL . it costs onlt half Sue but I remember like Chnique blush.compared w / ur salary. I c . prices are almost double Sue yeah. $25 is 750 only oh. not the p in $ Laura and etude prices in korea is only half Laura hurr. how can l afford shiseido Sue Sue lc common. but 765 baht is not much higher than $25 (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) Laura it's still expensive for me Laura with my salary Sue Sue I mean. the one that's made as flower on it.Laura here 7 Laura 1 don't think so Laura a blusher costs 765 Sue TS 01 so now u found ur new favorite brand (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Laura l checked prices in US dollar. if u use 30baht/$. not in the us ka DCL Laura like other brands.

2006) claims that everyone involved in social encounters with others has to. but also that it is often found in synchronous CMC The analysis reveals that when other-completed repair is done online.Extract 35 reveals how Laura and Sue argue about the cost of cosmetics sold in Thailand and the USA Their argument is built around the currency exchange rate. and Levinson (1983) have outlined potential face-threatening acts and possible interactional strategies one can employ to save other's face and therefore one's own. Sacks. preface. hesitation. deliberately or not. 1978. it can be done with or without delay. while CA researchers (notably Pomerantz. participate in face maintenance and facethreatening acts This means that issues of face are impossible to avoid not only face-to-face talks but also electronic encounters Brown and Levinson (1987.2006. or account Immediate and unmitigated other-completed repair can result in argument and disaffiliation The next section discusses the practice of other-completed repair as an indicator of social affiliation in synchronous CMC Other-Completed Repair: Evidence of Maintenance of Social Bonds Goffman (1955. 1978) have argued that turn design is important in face considerations . whether or not Chnique is cheaper in US dollars or Thai baht and where to get a better deal It can be seen that Sue in e-turn 17 immediately corrects Laura's previous e-turn (e-turn 16) The other-completed repair leads to an argument which lasts for 13 e-turns This section pointed out not only that other-completed repair by nature is socially disaffihative and dispreferred. 2006).

repeated below. or when self-completed repair is not successful This is shown in Extract 6. the online participants were found to perform other-completed repair with the following functions Opportunity given for self-completed repair. C and D) E-turn(s) interpolated between repairmitiation and other-completed repair reflects an available opportunity for selfcompleted repair to operate (see Figures 5 5. or the talk cannot continue The talk has to be discontinued so that participants can collaboratively deal with trouble and the talk can continue To maintain social solidarity or the positive face of others. 5 6. and 5 7) before other performs other-completed repair at a later point Variation A indicates that other-completed repair is performed later after the self-initiated repair point That is. a few turns. Chapters 4 and 5 demonstrated that other-completed repair is sometimes performed one e-turn. B. where other-completed repair is interpolated by several e-turns Extract 6: EA (2009-4/5) Tony You want me to buy for you or you can go to amazon and do that Tony it's up to you © (1) (2) . other-completed is performed after it passes due for self-completed repair.172 As elaborated above. Variation A. other-completed repair is a face-threatening act that has to be dealt with. or several e-turns away from where repair is initiated (l e.

consisting of distanced other-completed repair. eturn 4). e-turn 6) Two e-turns after that. and asks for help in another e-turn (l e. gives self an opportunity to do the repair. Tony [self) misspells their mutual friend's name (I e. Xiaochen. to show how distanced other-completed repair in Variation B may potentially lead to self-completed repair Extract 10: FI-AR-UP (2009-x/29) Gale Tom Gale so we gonna meet on tuesday and fnday. Xiaocheng. he tries to spell the name in the next e-turn (l e. / dont know how to spell ©. e-turn 3) After the TS e-turn. so does Variation B I use Extract 10. Saturday too 7 yep wow (1) (2) (3) . Dan [other) does other-completed repair (e-turn 8) Variation A. repeated below.173 TS SI Tony I brought one for Xiaocheng Tony Xiaochen Dan Ok. I want one too (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Tony I dont know how to spell © Tony You want me to buy for you 7 OC Dan Xiao Shan Tony oh Tony Ok c) Tony Xiao Shan© In Extract 6.

Gale does other-completed repair (l e. Gale [other) does not know whether or not the word too much (e-turn 8) has a bad connotation She then keeps asking Tom [self) about this word (l e. e-turn 10) Several e-turns later since Tom does not do selfcompleted repair.174 Tom Tom Gale Gale TS Tom Gale 01 Gale Tom Tom OC Gale Tom Tom Gale Gale Gale Tom Tom u ok with that 7 u did say u wanted more of me yep the more the better waht if u get too much of me. l need to ask 7 those questions r for u to decide not me lol but u never answered (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) In Extract 10. and won't let me go 7 haha is that call "too much" waht if ginger or darcy try to get more of me 7 what if dr house wants more of me 7 l thought "too much" means u dont want it anymore these are qs u need to ask lol well. e-turn 13) . is that call "too much". / thought "too much" means u dont want it anymore.

other completes the repair later in the same e-turn The other-initiated repair of Variation C may be understood by self as an opportunity for self-completed repair but does not actually lead to other-initiated self-completion. but to other-initiated other-completion that may or may not be followed by self-completed repair in a subsequent e-turn This can be observed in Extract 12. although other invites se//to do a repair by designing other-initiated repair at the beginning of the e-turn. while the difference is that in Variation D the other-initiation e-turn is immediately followed by the other-completion e-turn This probably implies that other does not give an opportunity for se//to do the repair This issue is touched upon in the next subsection In the case of Variation C. where other-initiated repair and other-completed repair are in the same e-turn Extract 12: T-UC (2009-1/177) Sam how r u 7 fine (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) Katie I'm Sam TS Sam just got back from the teaching must be careful not going home alone Katie Why7 Sam Sam OC the guys might u questions © better go with friends Katie Oh'You mean me7 Thanks © . repeated below.175 Variation D is similar to Variation B in that both consist of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair.

though consisting of other-initiated repair do not permit self-completed repair to occur before other-completed repair Variations C and D are discussed again in this subsection. while Variations C and D. C. or other-completed repair performed in one e-turns At first glance. if performed. but self-initiated repair. Sam's [self) answer to Katie's [other) question reveals to her that she has misunderstood the prior e-turns Sam's answer leads her to initiate and complete a repair later both of which are in the same e-turn A few e-turns after that. and D consist of other-initiated repair which is supposed to result in self-completed repair However. B. only Variations A and B allow the possible chance that self-completed repair will actually occur. Sam responds to her repair-initiation. is placed after other-completed repair Briefly. which presents another type of mitigated other-completed repair which maintains social bonds Other-initiated repair as a display of understanding of the TS. Variations A. This subsection discusses the occurrence of Variation C. resulting in other-initiated othercompletion and self-completed repair It can be said that other-initiated repair can result in self-completed repair. this practice is similar to Variation B because they all consist of other-initiated repair and other-completed repair If .176 Sam how's the food made by u7 (9) (10) (11) Katie 555 Sam lmeanu yes In Extract 12.

if it were done verbally. what appears to be other-initiated repair is in fact a method of displaying other's understanding of the prior e-turn before other responds to it To display an understanding of the prior e-turn. other either repeats or paraphrases what other is expected to respond to It is accurate to point out that this type of other-completed repair is borrowed from face-to-face conversation without modification Whatever other repeats or paraphrases is followed by his response placed in the same e-turn Other-initiated repair as a method of displaying others' understanding functions as other-initiated repair in the sense that. I use Extract 13. repeated below Extract 13: T-UC (2009-26/177) TS TS Jess Jess I had finished the book ka How about you7 (1) (2) . when other-initiated repair and othercompleted repair are in the same e-turn. other-initiated repair can possibly end up with self-completed repair There is even a chance that the self-completion e-turn would be contiguous with the other-initiation e-turn However. which are discussed below One possible function of other-initiated repair in Variation C is to show the owner of the TS how other understands the prior e-turn before other responds (1 e. it would invite self-completed repair.other-initiated repair and other-completed repair are placed in different e-turns (as in Variation B). other-completed repair) to it later in the same e-turn In this case. which may be immediately relevantly next To demonstrate other-completed repair as a method of displaying other's understanding. other-initiated repair may have different functions.

which book71 have many books) If this was heard by Jess as in face-to-face talk. there would be self-completed repair In the same e-turn. Don continues typing . We have Suki for dinner It's so delicious"""""© which book71 have many books I finished small ones (3) (4) (5) (6) by naowarat pongpaiboon Jess SC/TS Jess OR Don um the one u send to me math short stories I have read many chapters but a few more to read Jess Jess Don © I went to your blog reading many books at the same times two books by tantai andonebynn Jess Don Jess There is a new group blog by win me but not any blog in it (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) Jess asks Don if he has finished reading the book (e-turns 1 and 2) It is the book that is the repairable because Don does not know which book Jess is talking about Many e-turns later (e-turn 7). he begins his e-turn with a self-initiation e-turn (I e.Don Jess Jess Jess OI-OR Don hello Did u finish it7 Today.

ifinishedsmall ones by naowarat pongpaiboon) Other-initiated repair of Variation C can be said to function similarly to that of Variation D. As I have presented above. smiley (1 e. while there is no chance for selfcompleted repair to occur before other-completed repair in Variation D The next section presents how the smiley is used in faceless communication Smiley as a reminder of face. illustrates this practice . there is a chance for self-completed repair to occur before other-completed repair in Variation C. repeated below. self-completed repair) That is. ©) appears to be a better term for this discussion because smiley was the only emotional symbol the participants used during the practice of othercompleted repair in the data There are different locations and possible social functions of smiley to be discussed here The very first place smiley is found in the practice of othercompleted repair is an e-turn prior to the other-completion e-turn Extract 32. though the latter can potentially allow se//to complete the repair (1 e. although elsewhere the term emoticon was used. other-completed repair which is recognized as a socially disaffihative action requires other to do extra conversational work The use of emoticons is one of several conversational strategies online participants use in order to decrease the degree of social disaffiliation The data reveals that smileys were found accompanying other-completed repair (see Chapters 4 and 5) It is important to point out here that.which later appears to be other-completed repair (1 e.

a single-smiley e-turn functions as a warning. letting se//know that there is trouble and that it can be found in prior e-turns. repeated below Extract 32: MK-Chat (2009-35/48) TS 01 Amy Mel Mel it start shiny now Disney world © I promise that I bring her when she turn 6 is there any other place she wants to go 7 . a single-smiley e-turn pushes the other-completion e-turn at least one e-turn away The second position where a single-smiley e-turn can be found is right after the practice of other-completed repair in the same e-turn This is illustrated in Extract 31. a single-smiley e-turn warns that there is a problem in the prior eturn As Extract 33 shows. and thus should be dealt with That is. a single-smiley e-turn also warns self of the upcoming dispreferred action.180 Extract 31: YFT (2009-5/14) TS Jack Jack c) Kate OC Jack Kate now I am sending potoes via MSN to my mum'—hahaha potos © Kate photos yerpp photo In Extract 31. l e. other-completed repair Another function of a single-smiley e-turn is that it can delay an other-completion e-turn That is.

1 discussed the pragmatic function of emoticons In this case. please Dll me — (4) In Extract 23.181 Amy oo I see Florida right7 OC Amy that is not a weekend schedule @ Mel (rofl) Extract 32 shows how other places a smiley right after she produces othercompleted repair In Chapter 2. he types a smiley in the next e-turn The function of this smiley is the same as that found in Extract 32 presented above . see you then (1) (2) (3) Sean supper Sean © Rick ThanK you~If u find any errors in English. after Sean does other-completed repair. a smiley can be placed in the e-turn that immediately follows the othercompletion e-turn This is presented in Extract 23. other feels the need to minimize the degree of disaffiliation Closing other-completed repair with a smiley is one of several strategies In other words. no matDr which kind. repeated below Extract 23: YNR (2009-2/3) TS OC c) Rick I am going for super. because other-completed repair implies disaffiliation. a smiley reduces the degree of a face-threatening act In addition to being placed at the end of the other-completion e-turn.

and "interactional" (language for creating harmonious interactions) points of view (p 1) These two terms will be used below to support the argument I make in regard to other-completed repair I have discussed so far the function of other-completed repair. some are supported by technologies for communication (e g. I have called attention to the fact that other uses several strategies to minimize the presence of other-completed repair in synchronous CMC and to involve se//in the process of repair Some of the strategies are transferred from everyday encounters.182 Briefly. though they adopt two terms to describe the major functions of language "transactional" (language for communicating information). the incompleted turn-taking system) These online participants employed whatever possible strategies that they know and that are provided by chat programs in order to maintain their social relationships with their co-participants The next section discusses other-completed repair as a transitional and interactional function of language Other-Completed Repair: Transactional and Interactional Functions First of all. I need to define two terms on which I base this section Brown and Yule (1983) believe that language is used to fulfill several functions. repair is needed Repair helps online chatters continue their chats smoothly. which is performed to reestablish mutual understandings before participants can resume chatting When trouble in understanding occurs. grasp what others say. and correct misunderstandings This emphasizes the fact that repair functions as a tool that may help achieve transactional goals Brown and Yule (1983) consider . the use of emoticons.

repair helps participants maintain good social relationships with their co-participants This dissertation is not aimed to prove whether repair is needed or not In fact. this dissertation explores how online participants do other-completed repair. immediate other-completed repair that is placed at an e-turn initial position. which occurs often in synchronous text-based online communication The findings of Variation E. language is "message-oriented" (p 1) Another function of other-completed repair that I have demonstrated is to help participants "establish and maintain social relationships" (p 3) The use of other-completed repair to help participants save one another's face is considered an interactional function In such faceless communication as synchronous CMC.183 "transactional" use of language to be when it is used to serve the "expression of content" (p 1) and "transmit information" (p 2) From this transactional point of view. politeness theory. repair is unavoidably needed Instead. suggest that the relation between intersubjectivity and contiguity found by sociologists and CA researchers may not hold in this environment Questions the findings raise for sociohnguistics concern the concepts of face. a dispreferred action. and how they make use of their social interactional skills transferred from face-to-face talk or develop new strategies provided by chat programs when doing other-completed repair The findings provide an insightful explanation about other-completed repair. if trouble is detected and perceived to cause a serious communication breakdown. and electronic communication. which are explored next .

a dispreferred action. preface. through composing their e-turn. in an e-turn initial position without delay. is performed in synchronous CMC This study is beneficial to the area of intercultural communication. reveal their understandings of each . it presents the actual intercultural communication in which several variations of other-completed repair could be found Future research should be conducted to see if any given particular types of TS or repair correlate with participants' native culture and to discourse organization specific to that culture Based on preference organization. which explores the phenomenon of communication that occurs between participants who do not share the same language or culture As described in Chapter 3. the analysis reveals that there are several variations of other-completed repair The most immediate and unmitigated repair points out that the degree of tolerance of face-threatening acts in online chats functions differently than that in face-to-face encounters The evidence supporting this claim is that other-completed repair is relatively frequent and that immediate other-completed repair (1 e.184 Conclusion and Future Research This study explored how other-completed repair. account. all participants in this study were non-native speakers of English who ordinarily chatted with those with whom they shared the language or culture Although this study did not examine the impact of linguistic or cultural differences that resulted in misunderstandings. or smiley) also occurs The intersubjectivity that is explicated by sociologists as a concept which signifies participants' mutual understandings in their talk also exists in web chats Online chatters.

Sacks 1987. repair is done first (Schegloff et al. Sacks & Schegloff.185 other and the chats However. the preference for contiguity as explicated by Sacks (1987) is affected by the medium This is demonstrated when other-initiated repair is performed several e-turns before other-completed repair (1 e. 1977) However. Lerner. noncontiguity. broken contiguity between first pair parts and second pair parts often occurs when the second pair part is perceived not to present the preferred response (I e. agreement with the first one) This practice can be found in the web chats That is demonstrated in the study where other-completed repair was found to be performed in an e-turn that is far from the TS e-turn or from the repair-initiation e-turn The concept of preference organization has been found to be related to the concept of face (Heritage. 1996b. this is not what was found in this study It was often found in the data that the contiguity between other-initiated repair and other-completed repair was broken by inserted e-turn(s). 1984. 1978) because both concern social relationships between speakers and others The concept of face first discussed by Goffman (1955) focuses on how participants take into consideration co-participants' feelings and needs during ordinary social . Variation B) In the CA literature on repair. intersubjectivity is different in web chats than in face-to-face talk In the same vein. intersubjectivity in web chats must be maintained in different ways because the turn-taking system of chat programs is so loosely structured This is exemplified when a relevant next action can be located several eturns away That is. in the case of trouble. which suggests that the medium allows the practice of repair to be done later This shows that there is a connection between the medium. and preference organization As revealed by sociologists.

186 encounters It is important to understand that the concept of face is socially and interactionally constructed. is intimately connected with the physical co-presence of participants Interacting with others allows a participant to display. maintained. as discussed in Chapter 5. the concept of face is less taken into account by participants In ordinary conversation. not static. the concept of face as explained and tied to Politeness Theory by Brown and Levinson (1987) focuses only on the interaction between speaker and hearer in face-to-face talk where participants are physically co-present (as opposed to electronically in online chat) and interact verbally (as opposed to textually in online chat) Their assumption or findings about the concept of face in everyday contacts may not apply to electronic encounters or may be different from that in electronic interaction This study suggests that dispreferred actions are performed and interpreted differently by participants depending on whether the interaction takes place face-to-face or electronically Face as understood as an interface between identity. that are presented. and exercise the positive social value he wants to claim for himself When interacting face-to-face. or needs. maintain. as demonstrated by Lerner (1996b) The fact that other-completed repair and immediate other-completed repair (only those that occur in the e-turn initial position) often occurred in the data suggests that. which can be socially and interactionally constructed through talk and actions. one expects his . negotiated. personality. etc. valued. the concept of face was defined as personal desires. appreciated. wants. and desire. or approved of during social interaction with respect to physical co-presence That is. in faceless communication like web chats.

though the maintenance of social bonds between online participants can be frequently witnessed . and this is made transparent by one's physical presence If physical presence is not available. disagreeing. can be more easily performed by a letter. etc. etc). than when done face-to-face This is not because of the degree of interactiveness of the interaction. in web chats. though it is important to point out that other-completed repair does occur rarely in face-to-face contexts That is. these aspects of face are filtered out This therefore leads to the frequent occurrence of face-threatening acts in online chats Another claim is that. which can threaten others' face. face is not effectively perceived or regarded by other participants These claims can explain why face-threatening actions (e g. rejecting. cancelling. requesting. respected. postponing. but it is the physical co-presence of others I am suggesting that participants are more sensitive to their co-participants when performing dispreferred actions face-to-face than electronically The physical co-presence of others affects how other-completed repair and other dispreferred actions are organized and sequenced The physical co-presence of others also affects the frequency of other-completed repair. face is socially and interactionally constructed through talk and actions. and saved by others with caution The findings of previous studies claim that not only one's face but also his physical presence should be well regarded by others When one communicates online. ordering. on the phone. when one is involved in ordinary talk with physically copresent participants. reacted to. with intermediaries.187 face to be interpreted. the electronic co-presence of others reduces other's sense of self as an individual. via email.

sociologists speculate. threaten either positive or negative face. though their findings concern only everyday talk Following their framework not only can provide further evidence for the claim this study makes. etc. in the course of electronic interaction . but also provide insightful findings for studies of social interaction Further studies should focus on other dispreferred actions that. such as requests. in natural online settings After that. the findings should be compared to those in ordinary talk. which have been thoroughly documented by CA researchers and sociologists This study has revealed how people do things. complaints. compliments.188 Additional conversation analytic studies should be conducted to strengthen or weaken this claim regarding the relationship between the concept of face and copresence (physical or electronic) of participants in mundane interaction Brown and Levinson's studies and Goffman's studies of face can be significant. criticisms. threats. consciously or unconsciously.

M. 403-413 Baron. 42-46 Bellamy. 66(6). R A. & Hamdan. and democratizing communication access Information Society. N S (2009) Are digital media changing language7 Educational Leadership. 24[A). N S (2002b) The Myth of impoverished signal Dispelling the spoken language fallacy for emoticons in online communication In J Vincent & L Fortunati (Eds). Rethinking communicative interaction [no 273-293) Amsterdam John Benjamins Baron. 40(4). 409-424 Avgennakou. Electronic emotion The mediation of emotion via information and communication technologies (pp 107-136) London.189 References Adenzato. M (2008) Recognition of mistakes and deceits in communicative interactions Journal of Pragmatics. & Bucciarelh. coping strategies. N S (2005) Instant messaging and the future of language Communications of the ACM. A. The Stanford handbook for language engineers (pp 59-127) Stanford. N S (1986) Computer languages A guide for the perplexed New York. C (1999) Social psychological dimensions . 18[S). UK Peter Lang Baron. NY Doubleday Baron. 46[7). 30-31 Baron. A (2003) "Flaming" in computer-mediated interactions In C Grant {Ed). N S (2002a) Who sets e-mail style7 Prescnptivism. N S (2003) Language of the internet In A Farghah (Ed). CA CSLI Publications Baron. & Hanewicz. J M (2005) "Synchronous online chat" English Computermediated communication World Englishes. 608-629 Al-Sa'di.

of electronic communication Journal of Sociology. 62(2). S. W (1981) Speakers and writers do different things fforum. E (1987) Indirectness and politeness in requests Same or different7 Journal of Pragmatics. & Levinson. S C (2006) Politeness Some universals in language use In A Jaworski & N Coupland (Eds). 4(1) Retrieved from http //www icaap org/iuicode7100 4 1 2 Biber. P. 384-414 Blum-Kulka. G (1983) Discourse analysis Cambridge. & Yule. UK Cambridge University Press Brown. 3(1). 11(2). The discourse reader (pp 311-323) New York. & Levinson. D (1986) Spoken and written textual dimensions in English Resolving the contradictory findings Language. Spoken and written language Exploring orahty and literacy (pp 35-53) Norwood. UK Cambridge University Press Brown. & Weizman. 5-6 Chafe. S C (1987) Politeness Some universals m language usage Cambridge. 383-407 . and oral literature In D Tannen (Ed). W (1982) Integration and involvement in speaking. 271283 Brown. G (1978) Understanding spoken language TESOL Quarterly. NY Routledge Bussmann. P. W. G. 131-146 Brown. D (1987) The relation between written and spoken language Annual Review ofAnthropology. H (1996) Routledge dictionary of language and linguistics London. & Tannen. UK Routledge Chafe. 16. 12(3). NJ Ablex Chafe. writing.

UK Cambridge University Press Culman. P. & Robinson. UK Oxford University Press Chester. D. Neuman. E. 753-762 Derks. 307-336 Drew. K Roberts. M L (1987) Information technologies In F Jabhn. UK Palgrave Macmilhan Dascal. & Gwynne G (1998) Online teaching Encouraging collaboration through anonymity Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 4(2) Retrieved from http //jcmc Indiana edu/vol4/issue2/chester html Clark. W R. & von Grumbkow. L Putnam. P (1997) 'Open' class repair initiators in response to sequential sources of trouble in conversation Journal of Pragmatics. UK Cambridge University Press Crystal. J P (2001) Social implications of the internet Annual Review of Sociology. 31[6). J (2007) Vague language explored Basingstoke. Handbook of organizational communication An interdisciplinary perspective [pp 420-443) Newbury Park. 26(3). D (2001) Language and the internet Cambridge. 27.191 Channell. 28[1). M (1999) Introduction Some questions about misunderstanding Journal of Pragmatics. & L Porter (Eds). Hargittai. A E R. J (2008) Emoticons and online message interpretation Social Science Computer Review. 69-101 . Bos. J (1994) Vague language Oxford. 379-388 DiMaggio. CA Sage Cutting. UK Cambridge University Press Crystal. M J. D (1997) The Cambridge encyclopedia of language Cambridge. H H (1996) Using language Cambridge. A. & Markus.

& R Hiltunen (Eds).& Jacobs J B (1999) Eyes of the beholder Understanding the turntaking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication Research on Language and Social Interaction. S K Tanskanen. R B (1998) Internet and face communication Not functional alternatives Communication Quarterly. L M. C E. Pearce. A C . 337-369 Garfinkel. 19(2). 301-328 Ford. J A (1995) The impact of electronic networks on scholarly communication Avenues for research Discourse Processes. J (2006) Introduction In Conversation Analysis (Volume 1) (xxi-xxxvii) By Drew and Heritage London SAGE DuBartell. UK Unity . P. EA Schegloff. Organization in discourse (pp 231-239) Turku University of Turku Duranti. 205-227 Flaherty. 7(1). and pragmatic resources for the projection of turn completion In E Ochs.Drew. 46(3). S A (1996) Interactional units in conversation Syntactic. D (1995) Discourse features of computer-mediated communication "Spoken-like" and "wntten-hke" In B Warvik. H (1991) Studies m ethnomethodology Social and political theory Cambridge. 63-97 Edge. 10(2). 32[4). 250-268 Foertsch. UK Cambridge University Press Garcia. & S A Thompson (Eds). J (2006) Computer-mediated cooperative development Non-judgmental discourse in online environments Language Teaching Research. A (1997) Universal and culture-specific properties of greetings Journal of Linguistic Anthropology. K J. & Thompson. and Heritage. intonational. & Rubin. Interaction and grammar [pp 135184) Cambridge.

293-322 Goodwin. W (1986) Burning chrome New York. 18(3). C (1982) Conversational organization Interaction between speakers and hearers. and the second language learner Mahwah. 19(1). E (1967) Interaction ritual Essays on face-to-face behavior Garden City. UK Cambridge University Press Goodwin. 283-307 . S M (1997) Input. pauses. NY Irvington Publishers Goodwin. Everyday language Studies m ethnomethodology (pp 97-121) New York.& Talegham-Nikazm. E (1955) On face-work An analysis of ritual elements in social interaction Psychiatry Journal of Interpersonal Relations. 257-313 Golato. Structures of social action Studies m conversation analysis (pp 225-246) Cambridge. 5(3).Gass. C (1984) Notes on story structure and the organization of participation In J M Atkinson & J Heritage (Eds). J (1990) Conversation analysis Annual Review of Anthropology. C (2006) The negotiation of face in chats Multilingual25(3). A . 272-302 Goodwin. interaction. 213-231 Goffman. NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Gibson. C (1979) The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation In G Psathas (Ed). NY Ace Books Goffman. C .& Heritage. NY Anchor Goffman. and the achievement of mutual gaze at turnbeginning Sociological Inquiry 50(3-4). E (1976) Replies and responses Language in Society. C (1980) Restarts. NY Academic Press Goodwin. New York.

J (1989) Current developments in conversation analysis In D Roger & P Bull (Eds). J. P J (2001) Language use in computer-mediated communication The role of coordination devices Discourse Processes. UK Cambridge University Press Heritage. 3(2). J (1984) A Change of state token and aspects of its sequential placement In J M Atkinson & J Heritage (Eds). J (1985) Recent developments in conversation analysis Sociohnguistics. 31[1). 1-19 Heritage. UK Multilingual Matters Heritage. Meaning. R (1985) Language.& Dunham. J (1995) Conversation analysis Methodological aspects In U M Quasthoff (Ed). J T . DC Georgetown University Press Gumperz. M A K. 45-54 Hancock. form. Conversation An interdisciplinary perspective (pp 21-47) Avon. J (2002) Culture. J (1984) Communicative competence revisited In D Schiffnn (Ed). communicative practice and miscommumcation Logos and Language Journal of General Linguistics and Language Theory. Aspects oforal communication (pp 391-418) Berlin De Gruyter . Structures of social action (pp 299-345) Cambridge. UK Cambridge University Press Heritage. J (1991) Garfinkel and ethnomethodology Cambridge. & Cook-Gumperz. and use m context Linguistic applications (pp 278-289) Washington.Gumperz. context and text A social semiotic perspective (2nd ed) London. UK Oxford University Press Heritage. 91110 Halhday. 15(1). & Hasan.

SC (2004b) Slouching toward the ordinary Current trends in computermediated communication New Media and Society. 153-168 Herring. 15-38 Herring. The new Blackwell companion to social theory (pp 300-320) Oxford. S C (1996) Linguistic and critical research on computer-mediated communication Some ethical and scholarly considerations The Information Society. 4(4) Retrieved from http //jcmc Indiana edu/voI4/issue4/hernng html Herring. & H Hamilton (Eds). S C (1999) Interactional coherence in CMC Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. NY Cambridge University Press Herring. 36. The handbook of discourse analysis (pp 612-634) Oxford. G (2005) The terms of agreement Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in talk-in-interaction Social Psychology Quarterly 68(1). S C (2001) Computer-mediated discourse In D Schiffnn. Designing for virtual communities m the service of learning (pp 338-376) New York. S C (2004a) Computer-mediated discourse analysis An approach to researching online behavior In S A Barab. UK Blackwell Heritage. J (2008) Conversation analysis as social theory In B S Turner (Ed). S C (2002) Computer-mediated communication on the internet Annual Review of Information Science and Technology.Heritage. 6(1). J . & J H Gray (Eds). UK Blackwell Herring. D Tannen. R Khng. 26-36 .& Raymond. 12 (2).109-168 Herring.

S. 55(2). Zubrow. (1985) Affect in computer-mediated communication An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion Human-Computer Interaction. & Geller. 141-159 Hutchby. Siegel. 1737-1769 Kalman. S (2007. T (2003) Interactive aspects of vagueness in conversation Journal of Pragmatics. Moses. 35(12). R (2008) Conversation analysis (2nd ed) Cambridge.Holtgraves. A H. Smith. S W. Y. & Ludge. G (1987) On exposed and embedded correction in conversation In G Button & J RE Lee (Eds). May) Modulating synchromcity in computer-mediated communication Annual meeting of the international communication association. UK Polity Internet Society (2010) Internet usage statistics Retrieved from http //www internetworldstats com/stats htm Jefferson. 1(1). A M. CA Kiesler. S. 39(10). T W (1984) Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication American Psychologist. V. 77-104 . 1123-1134 Kiesler. T (1992) Linguistic realization of face management Implications for language production and comprehension. UK Multilingual Matters Jucker. I (2001) Conversation and technology From the telephone to the internet Cambridge. San Francisco. person perception. UK Unity Hutchby. & Wooffitt. & McGuire. & Rafaeh. J. I. D. and cross-cultural communication Social Psychology Quarterly. Talk and social organization (pp 86-100) Clevedon.

2006(177). A VA (2002) Electronic-discourse (e-discourse) Spoken. GH (1991) On the syntax of sentences in progress Language m Society. G H (1996b) 'Finding face' in the preference structures of talk-inmteraction Social Psychology Quarterly 59(4).Krohn. 34(4). UK Continuum Lippi-Green. UK Routledge and Kegan Paul Mumandy. A J (2007) Introduction to conversation analysis London. A (2006) Signaling and preventing misunderstanding in English as lingua franca communication International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 321328 Lerner. ideology. 20(3). R (1997) English with an accent Language. G H (1996a) On the place of linguistic resources in the organization of talkin interaction "Second person" reference in multi-party conversation Pragmatics. 441-458 Lerner. written or a new hybrid7 Prospect An Australian Journal ofTESOL. 177-201 Levinson. 6(3). G H (2003) Selecting next speaker The context-sensitive operation of a context-free organization Language in Society. 303-321 Lerner. 45-68 . and discrimination m the United States New York. 281-294 Lerner. UK Cambridge University Press Liddicoat. S C (1983) Pragmatics Cambridge. 123-150 McLuhan. 32(2). NY Routledge Mauranen. F B (2004) A generational approach to using emoticons as nonverbal communication Journal of Technical Writing and Communication. 17(3). M (1962) The Gutenberg galaxy The making of the typographic man London.

125141 Perakyla. facilitation. 17(3). 3-18 Murray. 35-55 Murray. S C (2007) Interaction. Studies m the organization of conversational interaction (pp 79-112) New York. 5(1). A J (2003) Reconceptuahzing "flaming" and other problematic communication New Media and Society. D E (1990) CmC English Today. DE (2000) Protean communication The language of computer-mediated communication TESOL Quarterly. 7(1). A (1984) Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes In J M Atkinson & J Heritage (Eds). 69-94 Osman. A (1997) Reliability and validity in research based on transcripts In D Silvermann (Ed). method and practice (pp 201220) London. . 351-373 Murray. G. D E (1991) Computer conversation Adapting the composing process to conversation Written Communication. P B. UK Sage Pomerantz. 6(3). 397-423 O'Sulhvan. & Herring. A (1978) Compliment responses Notes on the co-operation of multiple constraints In J Schenkein (Ed).Murray. and deep learning in cross-cultural chat A case study The Internet and Higher Education. & Flanagm. 8(1). NY Academic Press Pomerantz. D E (1988b) The context of oral and written language A framework for mode and medium switching Language m Society. D E (1988a) Computer-mediated communication Implications for ESP English for Specific Purposes. Qualitative research Theory. 10(2). 34(3). 42-46 Murray.

Schegloff. UK Multilingual Matters Sacks. A (2006) Preference in conversation Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments In A Jaworski & N Coupland (Eds). Studies in social interaction (pp 31-74) New York. NY Free Press Sacks. & Mandell. R J. H (1972) An initial investigation of the usability of conversational data for doing sociology In D N Sudnow (Ed). H (1987) On the preferences for agreement and contiguity in sequences in conversation In G Button & J R Lee (Eds). UK Cambridge University Press Pomerantz. 26(3). H (1993) The virtual community Homesteadmg on the electronic frontier Reading. 73-86 . D L (2007) Emotional expression online emoticons punctuate website text messages Journal of Language and Social Psychology. NY Routledge Provine. Spencer. 299-307 Rheingold. H. 696-735 Santoro. Talk and social organisation (pp 5469) Clevedon. R R. The discourse readers (2nd ed) (pp 246-261) New York. 43(2). H (1992) Lectures on conversation In G Jefferson (Ed) with an introduction by Emanuel A Schegloff Oxford. UK Basil Blackwell Sacks. MA Addison Wesley Sacks. G M (1994) The internet An overview Communication Education.Structures of social action Studies in conversation analysis (pp 57-101) Cambridge. E A. 50(4). & Jefferson G (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation Language.

IL National Council of Teachers of English Schegloff. & S D Teasley (Eds). J M Levine. UK Cambridge University Press . E A (1979) The relevance of repair to syntax-for-conversation In T Givon (Ed). & S Thompson (Eds). 25(1). E A (1968) Sequencing in conversational openings American Anthropologist. E A (1992) Repair after next turn The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation American Journal of Sociology. Exploring speakmg-writmg relationships Connections and contrast (pp 1-31) Urbana. UK Cambridge University Press Schegloff. Studies m social interaction (pp 75-119) New York Free Press Schegloff. 70(6). NY Academic Press Schegloff. E A (1984) On some gestures' relations to talk In J M Atkinson & J Heritage (Eds). Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp 150-171) Washington. J (1981) The linguistic analysis of spoken and written texts InB Kroll&R Vann (Eds). Interaction and grammar (pp 52-133) Cambridge. E A (1972) Notes on a conversational practice Formulating place In D N Sudnow (Ed ). E A (1987) Some sources of misunderstanding in talk-in-interaction Linguistics. 1075-1095 Schegloff. Structures of social action Studies m conversation analysis (pp 266-298) Cambridge. DC American Psychological Association Schegloff. Syntax and semantics (pp 261-286) New York.Schafer. 97(5). 12951345 Schegloff. E A (1996) Turn organization One intersection of grammar and interaction In E Ochs. E A (1991) Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition In LB Resnick. 201-218 Schegloff. E A Schegloff.

and the arena in which culture is enacted In N J Enfield & S C Levinson (Eds). UK Cambridge University Press Schegloff. MA Blackwell Seedhouse. Jacoby. Cognition and Interaction (pp 70-96) Oxford. J. E A. E A (2006) Interaction The infrastructure for social institutions. the natural ecological niche for language. & Sacks H (1977) The preference for self correction in the organization of repair in conversation Language. P (2005) Conversation analysis as research methodology In K Richards & P Seedhouse (Eds). E A. & Olsher. Jefferson. G. S. 361-382 Schegloff. Roots of human society Culture.Schegloff. I. E A (2000) When 'others' initiate repair Applied Linguistics. Towards a social science of language Papers m honor of William Labov (pp 31-40) Amsterdam John Benjamins Schegloff. E A (2007) Sequence organization m interaction A primer in conversation analysis Cambridge. Applying conversation analysis (pp 251-266) London. D (2002) Conversation analysis and applied linguistics Annual Review ofApplied Linguistics. 36(3). & J Baugh (Eds). E A & Sacks H (1973) Opening up closings Semiotica. 22(1). E A (1997) Third turn repair In G R Guy. 8(4). 289-327 Schonfeldt. A (2003) Repair in chats A conversation analytic approach Research on Language and Social Interaction. P (2004) The interactional architecture of the language classroom A conversation analysis perspective Maiden. 241-284 Seedhouse. 53(2). Koshik. UK Palgrave Macmillan . 205243 Schegloff. 21(2). & Golato. D Schiffnn. C Feagin. UK Berg Schegloff. 3-31 Schegloff.

M H (2006) Negotiation of meaning and noticing in textbased online chat The Modern Language Journal.202 Seltmg. NJ Ablex Tannen. 5(3). S. P (2007) Doing conversation analysis (2 nd ed) London. 37(2). & Kiesler. D (1986) That's not what I meant' How conversational style makes or break relations with others New York. J (2010) Conversation analysis An introduction Maiden. NY William Morrow Tanskanen. M.143-156 ten Have. S (1986) Reducing social context cues Electronic mail in organizational communication Management Science. 32(11). J. 477-517 Shekary. Dubrovsky. 557-573 Sidnell. L. 1492-1512 Tannen. MA WileyBlackwell Siegel. T W (1986) Group processes in computer-mediated communication Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. NJ Ablex Tannen. & Tahnnan. D (1983) The pragmatics of cross-cultural communication Applied Linguistics. 90(4). M (2000) The construction of units in conversational talk Language m Society. D (1982) Spoken and written language Exploring orahty and literacy Norwood. S-K (1998) Discourse in cyberspace Studying computer-mediated communication Anghcana Turkuensia. V. 16. 157-187 Sproull. 29(4). & McGuire. D (1984) Conversational style Analyzing talk among friends Norwood. 189-195 Tannen. UK Sage . Kiesler.

13(1) Retrieved from http //jcmc Indiana edu/voll3/issuel/turnage html Walther. 14(5). 553 Turnage.& D'Addano. S J (1996) Oral and written linguistic aspects of computer conferencing A corpus-based study In S C Herring (Ed). L. 384-396 Walther. J B (1996) Computer-mediated communication Impersonal. 143 Walther. 1-4 Trevmo. 323-345. 56-78 Wilson. K (1999) Research on language and social interaction in 1999 An introduction Research on Language and Social Interaction. and hyperpersonal interaction Communication Research. A (2007) Email flaming behaviors and organizational conflict Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 19(3). 23(2). 23(4). & Daft. interpersonal.Tracy. H (1991) Computer talk Long-distance conversations by computer Written Communication. 389-398 Yates. Computer-mediated communication . media richness. and media choice in organizations Communication Research. K P (2001) The impacts of emoticons on message interpretation in computer-mediated communication Social Science Computer Review. Wardhaugh. 23(1). 8(1). R L (1987) Media symbolism. 32(11). R (1985) How conversation works Oxford. Lengel. A (1993) Pragmatic device in electronic communication California Linguistic Notes. J B . R H. J B (2004) Language and communication technology Introduction to the special issue Journal of Language and Social Psychology. UK Blackwell Wilkins.

M . 983-1021 . 42(5).Linguistic. social and cross-cultural perspectives [pp 29-46) Amsterdam John Benjamins Zitzen. D (2004) Chat and conversation A case of transmedial stability Linguistics.& Stem.

Thailand . Georgia State University. May 2004 Major Applied Linguistics and TESOL Dissertation Title A Conversation Analysis of Other-Completed Repair in Synchronous Computer-Mediated Communication Academic Positions 2011-Present 2OO9-2011 2001-2002 1996-1999 Assistant Professor. Rajabhat Institute Phetchabun. King Mongkut's University of Technology. LaGuardia Community College-CUNY Lecturer.205 CURRICULUM VITAE Phalangchok Wanphet Born June 17. September 2001 Major Applied Linguistics (English for Science and Technology) Thesis Title Developing Teaching through Comparison of Teacher's and Learners' Perceptions of Learning M A. LaGuardia Community College-CUNY Lecturer. Thailand Education B Ed. KMUTT. Thonbun. Thailand Primary School Teacher.1975 Place of Birth Phichit. March 1996 Major Elementary Education M A.

206 University Service 2011-Present 2010-2011 2010-2011 2010-2011 Humanities Chair of Curriculum Committee Curriculum Committee Member Communication Studies Mentor Media and Promotion Committee Member Invited Editorial Reviewer. 2009 International Journal of Applied Linguistics Major Professor Date .