Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T02:26:02.086Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Action and Accountability in Interaction

from Part III - Revisiting Action Ascription

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2022

By
N. J. Enfield  and
Jack Sidnell
Edited by
Arnulf Deppermann  and
Michael Haugh
Arnulf Deppermann
Affiliation:
Universität Mannheim, Germany
Michael Haugh
Affiliation:
University of Queensland
Get access

Summary

What is the relation between words and action? How does a person decide, based on what someone is saying, what an appropriate response would be? We argue: (1) Every move combines independent semiotic features, to be interpreted under an assumption that social behaviour is goal-directed; (2) Responding to actions is not equivalent to describing them; (3) Describing actions invokes rights and duties for which people are explicitly accountable. We conclude that interaction does not involve a binning procedure in which the stream of conduct is sorted into discrete action types. Our argument is grounded in data from recordings of talk-in-interaction.

Keywords

actionaccountabilityspeech actsphilosophy of languagesocial practiceconversation analysis
Type
Chapter
Information
Action Ascription in Interaction , pp. 279 - 296
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Clark, H. (1996). Using Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. & Fox Tree, J. (2002). Using uh and um in spontaneous speaking. Cognition, 84, 73–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. (2014). What does grammar tell us about action? Pragmatics, 24(3), 623–47.Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, E. & Selting, M. (2018). Interactional Linguistics: An Introduction to Language in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Curl, T. & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41, 129–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dingemanse, M. & Floyd, S. (2014). Conversation across cultures. In Enfield, N., Kockelman, P. & Sidnell, J., eds., Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 447–80.Google Scholar
Dingemanse, M., Roberts, S. G., Baranova, J. et al. (2015). Universal principles in the repair of communication problems. PLOS ONE 10(9), e013610.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dingemanse, M., Rossi, G. & Floyd, S. (2017). Place reference in story beginnings: A cross-linguistic study of narrative and interactional affordances. Language in Society, 46(2), 129–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J. (2013). Relationship Thinking: Agency, Enchrony, and Human Sociality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J. (2017). How We Talk: The Inner Workings of Conversation, New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Enfield, N. J. & Kockelman, P., eds. (2017). Distributed Agency. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enfield, N. J. & Sidnell, J. (2017). The Concept of Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Floyd, S., Rossi, G. & Enfield, N. J., eds. (2020). Getting Others to Do Things: A Pragmatic Typology of Recruitments. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Garfinkel, H. (1952). The Perception of the Other: A Study in Social Order. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, M. (1992). On Social Facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. (1979). The interactive construction of a sentence in natural conversation. In Psathas, G., ed., Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York, NY: Irvington Publishers, pp. 97–121.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (1984). Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Heritage, J. (2012). Epistemics in action: Action formation and territories of knowledge. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 45(1), 1–29.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. ([1957]1971). Shifters, verbals categories, and the Russian verb. In Jakobson, R., ed., Selected Writings II: Word and Language. The Hague: Mouton, pp. 130–47.Google Scholar
Jefferson, G. (1978). Sequential aspects of storytelling in conversation. In Schenkein, J., ed., Studies in the Organization of Conversational Interaction. New York, NY: Academic Press, pp. 219–48.Google Scholar
Kockelman, P. (2005). The semiotic stance. Semiotica, 157(1–4), 233–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krebs, J. & Dawkins, R. (1984). Animal signals: Mind-reading and manipulation. In Krebs, J. and Davies, N., eds., Behavioural Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach, 2nd ed. London: Blackwell, pp. 380–405.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In Sidnell, J. & Stivers, T., eds., Handbook of Conversation Analysis. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 103–30.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (2017). Speech acts. In Huang, Y., ed., The Oxford Handbook of Pragmatics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, pp. 199–216.Google Scholar
Raymond, G. (2004). Prompting action: The stand-alone “so” in sequences of talk-in-interaction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 37(2), 185–218.Google Scholar
Robinson, J. D. (2016). Accountability in social interaction. In Robinson, J. D., ed., Accountability in Social Interaction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossano, F. (2012). Gaze behaviour in face-to-face interaction. Dissertation, Radboud University, Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Rumsey, A. (1990). Wording, meaning, and linguistic ideology. American Anthropologist, 92(2), 346–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H. (1995). Lectures on Conversation, Volume 1. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacks, H. & Schegloff, E. A. (1979). Two preferences in the organization of reference to persons and their interaction. In Psathas, G., ed., Everyday Language: Studies in Ethnomethodology. New York, NY: Irvington, pp. 15–21.Google Scholar
Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1982). Discourse as an interactional achievement: Some uses of “uh huh” and other things that come between sentences. In Tannen, D., ed., Analysing Discourse: Text and Talk. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, pp. 71–93.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1988). Description in the social sciences I: Talk-in-interaction. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics, 2(1–2), 1–24.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1996). Confirming allusions: Toward an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology, 102(1), 161–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (1997). Practices and actions: Boundary cases of other-initiated repair. Discourse Processes, 23(3), 499–545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2006). Interaction: The infrastructure for social institutions, the natural ecological niche for language, and the arena in which culture is enacted. In Enfield, N. J. & Levinson, S. C., eds., Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Interaction. Oxford: Berg, pp. 70–96.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2009). Prolegomena to the analysis of action(s) in talk-in-interaction. Paper presented at LISO, University of California Santa Barbara.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. (2010). Some other u(h)ms. Discourse Processes, 47(2), 130–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schegloff, E. A. & Sacks, H. (1973). Opening up closings. Semiotica, 8(4), 289–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality: An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J. (2010). Making the Social World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sidnell, J. (2009). Comparative perspectives in conversation analysis. In Sidnell, J., ed., Conversation Analysis: Comparative Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–33.Google Scholar
Sidnell, J. (2010). Conversation Analysis: An Introduction. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sidnell, J. (2017). Action in interaction is conduct under a description. Language in Society, 46(3), 313–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidnell, J. & Enfield, N. J. (2012). Language diversity and social action: a third locus of linguistic relativity. Current Anthropology, 53(3), 302–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Clyne, P., Hanks, W. & Hofbauer, C., eds., The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society, pp. 193–247.Google Scholar
Stivers, T. (2008). Stance, alignment, and affiliation during storytelling: When nodding is a token of affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(1), 31–57.Google Scholar
Stivers, T. & Rossano, F. (2010). Mobilizing response. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 43(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomasello, M. (2008). Origins of Human Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Walker, G. (2012). Coordination and interpretation of vocal and visible resources: ‘Trail-off’ conjunctions. Language and Speech, 55(1), 141–63.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×